<p>So I've heard a lot of discrepancies about the difference between the regular decision pool and the early decision...</p>
<p>Which one is more competitive/ which one has students with the most stellar apps?</p>
<p>I would say ED applicants are stronger and more committed in a sense that they are willing to be binded to a single school and also applicants with the most amazing stats would apply for Harvard and the very top schools as their first choice.</p>
<p>haha good, then that leaves some chance for me! =) any other ideas?</p>
<p>RD is most DEFINITELY a MUCH more competitive pool. the same goes for Pton, Yale, et cetera. Think about it...those who apply early, yes are committed, which is good and that's why like 30-40% of the class is composed of ED kids (or more sometimes). HOWEVER they apply early because they want to increase their chances of getting in as well. So, those who are unsure about their status apply early to get an edge. Someone who applies RD is usually going to have higher stats because they can "afford" in a sense to apply regular decision. Again, same for any school. Plus factor in athletes and legacies, who are very well qualified but still applying ED for an edge and may not be as qualified as the 2400 crazy genius applying regular. AND..little thought about idea: a school needs to fill it's ENTIRE class, the top, middle and bottom. Most schools choose the "bottom" of their class from ED because regardless of how qualified people are. Those who apply ED are wayyyy more enthusiastic abt the school and it has been proven that more enthusiasm in the class makes for (after a lot of different things happening) a higher ranking for the school.</p>
<p>ED is more competitive on average. RD will have some more competitive applicants, but the overall competitiveness will be less because there will also be many uncompetitive applicants.</p>
<p>ugh i just wrote this HUGE post and it got ERASED. let me try to replicate it:</p>
<p>i understand your point about the uncompetitive applicants but i feel that they are present in both pools (i.e. those who apply to Cornell "just for the heck of it"). thus they are almost irrelevant. these are weeded out ED (rejected outright). deferred candidates are those who seem to be qualified (according to AOs at Cornell) and are then compared to candidates in the RD pool, hence increasing the number of competitive applicants RD automatically. </p>
<p>my other point was that, although Cornell is obviously awesome, Pton & Yale, for example, have higher SAT ranges. this may lead a 2400 kid to apply early to Yale or something and RD to Cornell, hence increasing the competitiveness of the RD pool. of course, you could have a 2400 6.0 GPA Nobel prize winner apply ED to Cornell, there are exceptions.</p>
<p>basically, i think that you just have three types of people, unqualified, qualified, and over-qualified. ED gets all three, however unqualifieds are eliminated. and it is predominantly "qualified" because they want the edge of ED. so over-qualifieds are admitted, some qualifieds are admitted, and some qualifieds move onto RD. now RD includes many over-qualifieds because they feel that they can afford to apply to Cornell RD due to their amazing stats (this goes for any school of course). the unqualified constitute a small number and the qualified constitute the rest.</p>
<p>i know that i sound like an idiot who can't speak english but it was because i got angry that my post was erased and i rewrote it quickly. i hope that this post made SOME sense.</p>
<p>no it definitely made sense
thanks so much for answering my question</p>