Give it to me straight, CC. Can I get into Stanford?

[Data10]

<p>

@Data10</p>

<p>I clearly just need to make sure that my
E[πA(v,y)|v = AE, y ≥ Y] = E[πA(v,y)|v = AR,y ∈ [0,Y)]
and I’ll get into Stanford easily.</p>

<p>Thanks for the info, though. I would apply RD but my other top choices all have restrictive ED policies and there’s no way I’d risk not being able to go to Stanford if I’m accepted.

I didn’t read all of the game theory discussion. While interesting, I don’t think it is useful for most since most students don’t have an accurate estimate of their chance of being accepted.</p>

<p>Nevertheless, it does bring up some considerations. For example, many students have very little chance being accepted to their dream school. If they have little chance of getting in, SCEA vs RD is unlikely to make difference. However, if there is a 2nd choice college where that is just a low reach for them, then applying SCEA is far more likely to have an impact. They can only apply SCEA at one school, so do they choose the low reach and risk missing out on the unlikely event of being accepted to their dream school, or do they choose their first choice and possibly miss out on the SCEA boost getting them into their low reach?</p>

<p>

@data10 great source. thanks.</p>

<p>I am not sure I understand the methodology.</p>

<p>How did they control for the acceptances of highly hooked people in the EA round (especially sports) that tend to apply more in EA?</p>

<p>Or does it not matter because they looked at individual results as opposed to group results?

They mentioned including a dummy variable for athletic recruits, as well as for race and whether the student was a legacy.</p>