ED doesn't really improve chances

Chance Me / Match Me!
61

<p>Um...snuffles, right back at you. </p>

<p>"Because enthusiasm for Cornell is considered a plus, early-decision applicants stand a better chance of gaining admission" - from the cornell website.</p>

<p><a href="http://admissions.cornell.edu/apply/firstyear_edp.cfm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://admissions.cornell.edu/apply/firstyear_edp.cfm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

62

<p>I think it's in A is for Admissions.</p>

63

<p><a href="http://dpb.cornell.edu/irp/undergrad.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://dpb.cornell.edu/irp/undergrad.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>great site for cornell's admission stats. Check that out.</p>

64

<p>Also this, The Common Data Set:</p>

<p><a href="http://dpb.cornell.edu/irp/pdf/CDS/cds_2003-04.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://dpb.cornell.edu/irp/pdf/CDS/cds_2003-04.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>31% of RD apps were accepted, while 41% were accepted ED. Just to clarify, further.</p>

65

<p>I think ED is b.s because only people who can afford the college can apply ED.</p>

66

<p>Cd:</p>

<p>That is why wealth applicants tend to apply ED/SCEA when possible...it increases the odds of admissions.</p>

67

<p>I thought a lot of times applying ED gave the people accepted better financial aid options. I think that is the case at some schools. So I would think at some schools it would be a lot of talented but lower income students applying ED, and usually when you refer to the wealthy applicants it is probably in the ivy's, or other really top schools. Also those wealthy students aren't getting in b/c they are wealthy, but because they have the stats that the college wants.</p>

68

<p>Yup Blaineko, and wealthy applicants have higher stats. FACT. And they tend to have gone to feeder schools--the best school's in the Country that prepare students for success in the ivy league. And they interview well in all of their sophistication. There is an amazing correlation between family income and SAT scores. So combine the wealthy, legacies, athletes and URMs from strategic programs, and you begin to see who the ED pool is and why they are accepted at a much greater rate.</p>

69

<p>i am actually SO poor that i dont need to worry about college packages and stuff - because wherever I go I'd get a full ride. thats one of the reasons i applied ED.</p>

70

<p>And that puts you in a category that also gets a tikt factor, the economicallt disadvantaged. See how this shapes up? ED is the round in which to admit all the special interests. At ivies, in the RD round, it's all the smart, high scoring, middle class competeing for the open spaces.</p>

71

<p>Canuck:</p>

<p>Just like you were a special interest admit, although it is harder for the International pool to get in. See them apples. And, at the Ivies, as well as other top colleges, a lot of people get defered--even minorities. And, most URM with need tend to apply during the RD round. Have you read any magazine articles about this (ie. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Change, Time, Newsweek, The Atlantic Monthly, etd...)</p>

<p>Canuck...your manufacturing of wives tales is astounding. Wow, you misinformation parade goes on...</p>

72

<p>Blaineko, your logic is troublesome. Make sure to get lots of help with your essay.</p>

73

<p>ok couldn't be bothered to read all of it..
so what's the general consensus... ED good or not?
EA good or not??</p>

<p>And especially Columbia ED = advantage or not?</p>

<p>cheers :)</p>

74

<p>ED=good.
EA=tiny advantage. </p>

<p>Depends on the school. If you are applying to Penn (me), then the Dean of Admissions has flat out said: "ED applicants WILL no doubt have an edge, we encourage all kids to apply ED, cuz we like them alot."</p>

<p>I can't stress it enough, READ "THE EARLY ADMISSIONS GAME" if you really wanna see what ED/EA can do. And a large portion of the book's studies exclude the minorities, the athletes, the legacies, blah blah blah...and it's a fairly new publication by three Harvard professors. So, read it. ED=good.</p>

75

<p>I've applied Columbia ED... Hopeee I GET IN.... No not just hope.. i Want, NEED .. to get in! lol :)</p>

<p>about 10-12 people from my school applied Penn ED..</p>

76

<br>


<br>

<p>Actually, I did get help with my essays, even from people with SAT scores <1450, and who were minorities. Like I said before, for someone who supposedly works in the Yale admissions office in a college work-study position, you sure are uninformed. Even Yale would disagree with you. Or are you offened because national origin is sometimes a tip factor? Or, do you think that because you got into Yale as a transfer, that it was due to scores and grades? Or, was it perhaps, that after seeing how you did at another college, you showed more promise than you did as a first-year applicant? As I recall, you said you got into Swat and Williams. </p>

<p>As for help on my essays, yes I got proof read help, and I thank them for taking the time to check my spelling, etc...You might disagree that it was of help, though. Some of my proof readers scored below 1450 on their SATs, and some of them were URMs. Since you believe that only people that score >1450 get it, I'm sure you think I shot myself in the foot.</p>

<p>Also, you are making assumptions about my socioeconomic class, based on my ED application to Amherst. Let me say that I did my research, as to which colleges do not 'punish' ED/SCEA applicants with respect to financial aid as compared to RD candidates. Secondly, Becuase there is statistically a better chance at many ED schools, ED does help strong scorers and those with high gpas without stellar ECs. It also helps wealthy applicants, who tend to be white.</p>

<p>My reasoning is based on personal information, articles in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Newsweek, Time, Change, The Atlantic Monthly, write-ups in college guides (ie. The Gatekeepers, How to Make It Into A Top College, Student Advanced Guide to College Admissions, Looking Beyond the Ivy League, Colleges That Change Lives, A IS For Admissions, The Unofficial Biased Guide To The 320 Most Interesting Colleges, The Big Test, etc...), college websites, The Common Data Set for numerous colleges and universities, personal interviews with admissions officers, meetings with college representatives at student receptions, alumni interviews, phone calls to the schools, and advice from relatives and friends who have attended or are attending Ivies and top LACs.</p>

<p>It appears that you have done little, except to have become bitter after being waitlisted or negged at the Ivies you were interested in. Thus, you assert that ED does not help (assuming that you applied ED/SCEA and got negged--which is rare, except for those that CLEARLY did not meet the adcoms requirements what ever they may have been--instead of waitlisted), and that the ONLY <1450 SAT scorers that get in are URMs. Remember, I got negged by UPenn, wait-listed by Carleton, and got in at two Ivies. I understand that they look at different things, why don't you? </p>

<p>What you sound like is the high scorer, high gpa kid with fewer ECs than is typical who did not get in the first time, because YOU believed that all that was required were good grades and scores. Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder, or feel inferior to those who made it in the first-time. Thus, you discourage people with less than a 1450 SAT score, because you do not want them to even PERSUE the possibility, so that YOU can feel better about being at Yale. Sounds like a personal issue, rather than selfless advice.</p>

77

<p>Blaineko, you just babble. You don't get it. Getting rejected by HYPS didn't make me bitter, it made me busy. I figured out what I had done wrong and spent 2 years getting the game right. It is, simply, a game. I was like so many naive posters here who thought a 1500, straight As at a good school and good recs from high school teachers would get me in. So I faced rejection and took a hard look at who did get in. I understood what they were looking for and sought to differentiate myself as among the exceptional. Once I got it Blaineko, which you are a long way from, I knew what to do and did it. I wanted a HYP os S degree and figured out once you have stats in the running how you get it. No huge mystery.</p>

78

<p>Ummm. Excuse me? Remember, I did get into a couple of great schools the first time around. I knew what to do then, and I know what to do now. No huge mystery, if you do your homework. Wow.</p>

<p>But, wait. What was your SAT score again (since I've asked many times)? My bad, I thought you got into Yale as a transfer because you worked hard and were involved at your old college or university. It was your scores and grades FROM high school--that's it. Wow. Or are you telling us that the first time around where you go negged or waitlisted you relied only on recs, essays, scores, and grades, but did not have great ECs? Wow.</p>

<p>Yet you assert, WITHOUT citation, that ED does not help statistcally increase a persons chances, and that ALL <1450 SAT scorers are URMs, and that Yale and other Ivies DON'T practice holistic review (never mind that they and published sources say they do). Why would you ASSUME you would get in, when acceptance rates are in the teens for most Ivies? And, if you did look hard (still waiting for sources), you'd find what most people have found: it depends on what each college looks for to create a diverse class in a particular year. Thus, by saying that people who score below 1450 on the SAT will NOT get in, you are ignoring the many other facets of each individual candidate, and are thus being less that transparent.</p>

<p>I am not worried about my chances, because I did get into some great schools the first time around (as well as 1 neg, and 1 waitlist). What makes you think that I would be less attractive to schools now? Is it because I started my own business, continued to volunteer at a homless shelter, teach dance at a college, tutor middle and high school students, and have won awards for being involved in my community that makes me less attractive than I was as a high school candidate?! Wow.</p>

<p>I don't think I'm a LONG way from that, as you say. I am comfortably near or above the 75%ile at all of my colleges, I've recieved likely letters, awesome responses to my interviews, and have outstanding recs from teachers, employers, and community service organizations. So, again, how am I out of touch with myself? How is it that you think I'm out of touch with the admissions process?</p>

<p>Again, the stats in The Common Data Set for most of the Ivies and top LACs go against you, as do the guide books, alumni, the admissions offices, college websites, and national publications--both general and college specific. Right, and I'm the one out of touch. Please.</p>

<p>BTW, be prepared to eat your shoe, when I do get accepted to a good school. I'm sure when I do, you'll say that they were easy to get into, rather than admit you were wrong. Wow.</p>

79

<p>Here' some food for thought:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.intothebest.com/guidance/decide_early.jsp%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.intothebest.com/guidance/decide_early.jsp&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.nd.edu/%7Efrswrite/issues/...llan.shtml#app1%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nd.edu/~frswrite/issues/...llan.shtml#app1&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.newyorker.com/critics/at...407crat_atlarge%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.newyorker.com/critics/at...407crat_atlarge&lt;/a>
<a href="http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i18/18a04501.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i18/18a04501.htm&lt;/a>
<a href="http://hseagle.sas.edu.sg:8068/hscounseling/College/EDEA/EDdata.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://hseagle.sas.edu.sg:8068/hscounseling/College/EDEA/EDdata.htm&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.collegeboundnews.com/02-03issues/may03.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboundnews.com/02-03issues/may03.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.collegeboundnews.com/03-04issues/may04.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboundnews.com/03-04issues/may04.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And a study about the stats:
<a href="http://www.mtholyoke.edu/%7Emirobins/monks.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~mirobins/monks.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And, commentary from a selective LAC about getting in, in general:
<a href="http://www.colby.edu/colby.mag/issues/2004/spring/print_thedecision.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.colby.edu/colby.mag/issues/2004/spring/print_thedecision.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Happy reading. It seems that ED does help.</p>

80

<p>Canuck, from one of your other posts:</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Did not know that you could get a 1539...it's probably a 1530? In anycase, my SATs were 1490 (one sitting) and 1520 (highest V +M). I made a typo in one of my other posts (I think I wrote 1540). Perhaps you were counting on your stats, more than you should have. As for the recs, did you read them (you can waive the right to see them) or are you 100% sure that they were excellent recs?</p>

<p>So let me get this straight, so I understand it, I'm less in touch, with the process, even though I got into Yale and Columbia, and other good schools, but you know better? You got into Yale & UChicago. As did I. I also got into: Northwestern, Duke, Pomona, Johns Hopkins, and a few others. And, I was negged at UPenn, and waitlisted at Carleton. How again, do I not have an inkling as to the ED/SCEA/EA and admissions process? Do I think I have a good chance or decent chance or okay chance at Williams, Amherst, Swat, Haverford, Bowdoin, Colgate, etc... I think I do. Again, I won't be surprised by admissions patterns at my Reach/Match/Safety colleges. Why were you?</p>