<p>Hello,
I am applying ED to Dartmouth because I LOVE it. LOVE LOVE LOVE. I can't truly express my love in words. I am a "strong" student with SAT scores on the lower side, but by no means out of the score ranges. I have extracurriculars, leadership positions, etc.... yet I am struck by how competitive admissions are, and I am hoping, praying, desiring that Early Decision boosts one's chances. Do you have any more insight as to the 9% vs. 25% ED admissions rate? Is that a skewed number? Am I more likely to get in ED than regular? Thank you.</p>
<p>i went to a dartmouth info session at a nearby high school a few weeks ago and the admissions officer said when you factor out all of the recruited athletes, the ED rate is around 12% which is only a few points higher than the overall rate, but considering how competitive things are getting, it’s probably nothing to scoff at</p>
<p>^Exactly what the above said…I was at that info session and everyone was pretty shocked about that. Sucks, but I’m still doing ED too.</p>
<p>And did they say what it is when you factor out all of the legacies, too?</p>
<p>Add to that the number of developmental admits, siblings and facbrats.</p>
<p>The quantity and quality of application for the class of 2015 forced admissions to rethink what it means to be admitted during RD. The 12% ED number mentioned seems to be in line with the increase in applications. It’s definitely getting tougher.</p>
<p>It has seemed to me in recent years that applying ED may actually be a bad idea for unhooked kids, especially those who are not at the very top of the pool. Given the ED applicants we’ve seen rejected outright here.</p>
<p>Not sure I agree. I haven’t really studied the data available but RD is just a tougher read. ED has it’s hooked apps, athletes, urms, developmental admits and some legacy to be sure but 12% is almost 50% better odds than the RD crowd. And I know when my oldest was apply they gave the same speech. The numbers didn’t really hold up.</p>
<p>how is 12% 50% better than the rd group?</p>
<p>12% ED is after removing only the recruited athletes from the ED pool. Since legacy only counts if you apply ED, you have to assume that there are a substantial number of ED legacy admits, too. Take them out, and I would not be in the least surprised if the odds are down to worse than the RD pool for the unhooked. (That’s not even getting into accounting for the other hooked kids in the ED pool.)</p>
<p>None of us really knows the answer to this but IMO, ED allows a more careful reading of your application. Since there are far fewer at that time, special attributes will stand out more than in the masses of RD. It seems clear that Dartmouth really values the whole person when they are deciding and it can only help if the admissions people get a bit more time to look over your application. Plus the advantage of clearly expressing that D is your 1st choice by applying ED.</p>
<p>Consolation, not sure why you say legacy only counts if you apply ED.</p>
<p>I don’t remember where I first heard it. Some schools, such as Yale, explicitly state that legacy status is only considered if one applies SCEA. D does state somewhere what their legacy policy is; for example, that they only count legacy as having a parent who graduated, not a grandparent or other relative, and that “double legacy” doesn’t matter. But I can’t find it.</p>
<p>U Penn also explicitly states that the legacy boost occurs in ED round. Never heard Dartmouth say it and know several legacy admits from RD round.</p>
<p>You may be correct. </p>
<p>On the other hand, I know a double legacy–stretching back to a classmate of Daniel Webster on one side :)–who was accepted at two of HYP and waitlisted at D applying RD. The “conventional wisdom” seems to have been that legacy does the kid the most good–at least–if the kid applies ED.</p>
<p>Sybbie would probably know best.</p>