Harvard considering bringing back Early Action Admission

Parents Forum
1

<p>With all the discussion about early admissions programs on this forum, I thought some of you may find this interesting.</p>

<p>Harvard is considering bringing back Early Action. They'll make a formal announcement in the next few months.</p>

<p>If you remember, Harvard was the first to let go of an early admissions program. They said it disproportionally benefited wealthy students or students who had support systems in place that enabled them to apply earlier in the cycle.</p>

<p>Now they're re-evaluating their decision.</p>

<p>You can read more in the Crimson: <a href="http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/2/10/early-admissions-harvard-students/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/2/10/early-admissions-harvard-students/&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p>

2

<p>Huge difference between non-binding EA and binding ED.</p>

3

<p>In the article, Havard admissions dean refused to speculate about whether Harvard is considering returning to a binding or non-binding early admissions program. That leads me to think that both options are on the table.</p>

4

<p>Interesting implications for the SCEA schools. </p>

<p>Harvard’s original argument against ED might be somewhat mitigated by their FA program. </p>

<p>I loved this quote from the story:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not “poor” or “middle class” students, “less wealthy students”.</p>

5

<p>^ They didn’t want to use those terms so they wouldn’t anyone’s feelings.</p>

6

<p>I agree that there’s a huge difference from ED and EA. Yale does Early Action and seems to do very well with it at that. EA wouldnt affect any kind of Financial Aid decisions, and IMO is far more fair to the “less wealthy.” (Which is kind of a joke considering that phrase applies to the majority are less wealthy than some. It’s relative.</p>

7

<p>Interesting. I guess that even with 35,000 applications and the highest yield around, Harvard Admissions still feels they’re losing too many candidates they want to peer schools that have early action programs. Yale does a fabulous job of courting its EA admits. I imagine Stanford does, too.</p>

8

<p>As I said in the other thread on this, I think it’s more that this was Derek Bok’s personal idee fixe and what he saw as moral leadership, and there was never any factual predicate for it. Early Action does not harm “less wealthy” applicants, and it’s very popular with applicants, less and more wealthy alike. No one left around at Harvard has any commitment to the philosophical principle of no early admissions, and five years is long enough to honor Bok.</p>

9

<p>I think it’s high time, and I’d rather see regular EA than single choice EA.</p>

10

<p>I hope this change might mitigate the incredible increase in apps across the selective schools. Perhaps Princeton will follow? 35,000+ apps is just crazy.</p>

11

<p>I can’t imagine Harvard will go back to regular EA. They did that once before, as I recall, and with no restrictions on applicants’ ability to apply freely to other schools and a relatively easy supplemental application, they were inundated with applications.</p>

<p>I think if Harvard does resume an early program, Princeton will follow suit. I think they’ve taken a pretty significant hit in their yield since they eliminated their early program.</p>

12

<p>It would be environmentally responsible for Harvard to reinstate EA. It will reduce the significant annual waste in natural resources and human capital that is spent when the 800 or so EA admits no longer need to submit an additional 10 applications to other colleges where they must reviewed for no reason and disposed of.</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, I hear that a pixel shortage is almost upon us.</p>

14

<p>^ Love that response JHS. :)</p>

15

<p>I have no inside info about this decision, but I do know that both the admissions office and the alumni interviewing groups have been stretched to the breaking point giving 35,000 applications a full evaluation in just three months. It would not surprise me if a change back to EA, if it comes, were motivated in part by the need to spread out the work over a longer period of time.</p>

16

<p>There are some very compelling reasons for colleges to try and curb this trend toward more and more and more applications. There is zero compelling reason to add staff when most of these colleges are not on a mission to expand campuses and infrastructure. I’ve been wondering what moves would be made in the coming years from colleges and high schools to curb this. Because it’s such a small fraction or schools and such a small fraction of college bound kids it seems these particular colleges can made strides toward that goal.</p>

17

<p>If they bring it back I hope it is open EA and not SCEA or ED. Simply because I hate to witness the way kids get crushed by unfavorable results in SCEA and ED. It’s far less of a problem in RD or open EA because applicants usually have acceptances from some schools they can focus on to lessen the sting of falling short at others. </p>

<p>When all you have staring you in the face on Dec 15th is failure, it makes for a long, cold, lonely winter.</p>

18

<p>

</p>

<p>I didn’t think Harvard’s reason for taking away early action made any sense either. I guess I wasn’t alone.</p>

19

<p>By the way, was Derek Bok the same guy that was worried that Harvard would become like University of Chicago?</p>

20

<p>

</p>

<p>Isn’t one of the reasons why restrictive EA programs exist is to prevent loading up on early apps and gaming the system (and this would probably happen at a place like Harvard if they had open EA)?</p>