<p>I seriously doubt I will be applying EA. Given retakes, I have 3 SAT IIs and perhaps the SAT I to retake this fall. I have awesome ecs. Is it worth applying Regular if I think my SATs and SAT IIs will be much better??</p>
<p>hmm... I suppose that might depend on how much better you score... but did you ever think of applying EA anyway but still sending the scores of your retakes in case you are deferred to RD?</p>
<p>oh wait we can still send scores after being deferred??</p>
<p>I should think so. as long as you make the deadline for RD, i don't THINK it would be a problem. I would call the admissions office for more info.</p>
<p>thank you candlize :) But I will contact admissions just to be sure</p>
<p>I would wait for RD. Deferral in Harvard is virtually equal to rejection. Of all ppl on CC there were only two who got admitted after being deferred.</p>
<p>A deferral is basically a very polite rejection unless the admissions committee truly believes you had something to contribute to the class but did not have documentation to support its claim. You could see it as your class valedictorian being waitlisted by many top colleges to prevent backlash from the school's PTA, college office, guidance office, etc.</p>
<p>That doesn't correspond with the facts. Historically, EA deferreds at Harvard have been admitted later at a rate virtually equal to those applying RD for the first time.</p>
<p>And at Yale last year, EA deferreds were admitted later at a rate twice that reported for the "regular" RD applicants.</p>
<p>There were dozens deferred students here on CC. None of them reported to be admitted in RD but two. There was also a thread "Any deferrees admitted in RD?". Same two ppl confirmed their admittance there. In contrast, on Yale board we have numerous applicants who were deferred and later admitted. I think CC is a representative sample enough to conclude that this year Harvard admittance rate for deferred applicants was close to zero. I also know a few people from our area who were deferred, and none were admitted. Perhaps the record number of applications left the adcom no time to browse through the same applications again.</p>
<p>So people please advise me...should I try to aim for EA or RD?</p>
<p>We'll know in September, obviously. Last year, there were 139 EA deferreds admitted; the year before, the number was higher.</p>
<p>Personally, I don't think that the EA deferred admit rate will be much below the RD admit rate. </p>
<p>If the deferreds are given short shrift, that will hurt the important message that applying early will not disadvantage an applicant.</p>
<p>I doubt that Harvard will make a political error of this sort.</p>
<hr>
<p>Hyper2400: its no contest. Apply early if you want a reasonable shot at admission.</p>
<p>Also the fact that Harvard very rarely rejects people in EA (only a few cases on CC) makes it hard to believe that they can maintain the same rate of admission among those deferred as among those applying RD. Think about it: the deferred pool is missing the best applicants who were accepted but still has weeker students who were not rejected. Naturally, this makes the average level of those deferred lower than the average RD level. I know there is an argument about EA applicants being much stronger, but I don't think it is that stronger. </p>
<p>Again, if you compare with Yale, it rejected a lot of applicants in EA, so the deferred pool would be statistically the same if not stronger in RD.</p>
<p>The fact is that, historically, the EA deferred admit rate at Harvard IS, as I have stated, roughly equal to the RD admit rate. Presumably this has something to do with the relative strength of the two groups.</p>
<p>Also, since it has moved to SCEA, Yale has deferred a fairly generous fraction of the early applicants who were not admitted. </p>
<p>In each case, the phenomenon has to do with both the size of the early pool and its fraction of the total applicant pool.</p>
<p>To some extent, schools easing applications to the early pool do so by "cannabalizing" their own RD pool. This is particularly obvious at Stanford, where virtually all growth in the last 10 years has been in the size of the early pool.</p>
<p>Well, let's see what this year's statistics will be. </p>
<p>Regardless, I would avise the OP not to apply early if he thinks his application can be much better for RD. I have a strong reason to believe I would have been admitted to Harvard had I not applied early. My application was much stronger in December than in October, but I have a feeling the committee never looked back at my application despite the additional materials I sent.</p>
<p>For Harvard, you are playing a gamble. If you apply early, the chances of admittance are 20%+. However, when you are deferred, and you implement Byerly's stance that deferrees are admitted at the same rate as regular action students, your chances drop to 5%+. </p>
<p>If we separate the early action deferred applicants and the regular action applicants and say that for each pool, the chances of admittance is 5%+, then it is without doubt you would want to be in the early action deferred pool in which there are fewer applicants.</p>
<p>In the end, applying early highly increases your chances of admission to the particular college you wish to attend.</p>
<p>xjayz:</p>
<p>Your logic would be correct if it was a gamble. However among RD applicants 60% can be those who applied on a whim. A lot of people I know applied to Harvard just for the heck of it. This raises chances for real candidates up to 13% in RD as you are only gambling against good applicants. Now, the question is if deferrees go to the RD pool and their applications are revisited from scratch or if they are competing only with other deferrees. If the latter is true, than we have 5% chance for deferrees (if Bayerly's statistics holds this and next year) vs ~13% chance in RD. Add to it the fact that the OP's application will presumably be stronger for RD..</p>
<p>I do not believe that people apply to Harvard "just for the heck of it." I believe they apply to Harvard because they know that they have worked hard throughout their lives to become the wonderful people that they are and see if what society considers the "golden standard of education," or Harvard, thinks if the students are good enough for them.</p>
<p>Honestly, you could have said I applied "just for the heck of it." However, after being deferred and gotten in regular, I can see how all applicants - and students - who really know that they have tried hard in high school want to see how what society believes is the best thinks of them.</p>
<p>Ppl I know applied to Harvard with SAT ~1400. Not that they were week applicants, but not nearly strong for Harvard. I am sure more people apply to Harvard "just for the heck of it" than to any other top school. Otherwise how would you explain the record number of applications? </p>
<p>Congrats on your acceptance - I now see you are one of those two deferred and then accepted.</p>
<p>I'm going to be truly doomed if I have to repeat the SAT I am taking on June 4th....I hope and pray I do well on it -> I have always loved to read...it's just silly stuff in CR (lack of concentration resulting in very careless errors)</p>
<p>Conwoman: It is easily explained when you take into account that the SAT score is not an end-all, particularly for schools that want to meet diversity goals and want to assure that campus life won't be dead.</p>