Impact of Harvard and Princeton Early Program?

<p>^ I too have read the book cottonmather referenced, and he is absolutely correct - while ED programs provide a larger admissions bonus then EA programs, there is still a substantial advantage. If I remember correctly, the EA bonus equaled around 200 points on the SAT for schools like Yale, and the dataset used was provided by the admissions office (so no bias in the sample).</p>

<p>Schools like to admit SCEA students (particularly those meeting institutional priorities like, at Yale, engineering) because they yield at a very high rate.</p>

<p>With all due respect, Brenzel (and other admissions directors) could easily demonstrate that early applicants are not advantaged by setting out supporting SAT and admissions rate stats relative to the early pool and the regular pool - both for applicants and for admits. They do not do so because the numbers would give the lie to their protestations.</p>

<p>As “The Early Admissions Game” amply demonstrates, any applicant with X, Y or Z SAT score or grade point average is vastly more likely to be admitted from the early pool than his regular pool counterpart with the same SAT/gradepoint average.</p>

<p>The often used circumlocution that “nobody is admitted in December who we are not certain would be admitted in April” is simply an effort to avoid disclosing the facts. Sure, a 750-750-750 scorer admitted in December may stand up well vs. the median for all admits - including regular admits. But that is beside the point. Rather, that 750-750-750 early applicant is up to 3 or 4 times as likely to be admitted as a similarly qualified applicant in the regular pool.</p>

<p>Put another way, as the previous commenter notes, the admit rate for the typical early applicant is equal to the admit rate for “regular” applicants with an SAT score up to 200 points lower. Guidance officers know this, and savvy, well-advised applicants know this. Any guidance officer who doesn’t tell his advisees to apply early … SOMEPLACE … ANYPLACE … should be sued for educational malpractice!</p>

<p>One reason similarly-qualified applicants are far more likely to be admitted early is that admissions folk are well aware the yield rate for the early admits may be 80-90%, while the yield rate for similarly-qualified regular admits may not greatly exceed 50%. It is not just the “prestige” of a high yield rate they seek, but the efficiency of putting together the “diverse” class they want without wasting potential slots on admits less likely to enroll.</p>

<p>By the way, I think you will almost universally find that initially deferred early applicants are later admitted at a rate markedly higher than “ordinary” regular pool applicants with similar credentials. Why? because statistics show that these deferees - who have already shown their interest in the school by applying early, will matriculate at a higher rate than “ordinary” admits from the regular pool.</p>

<p>If you are a SCEA applicant, who attends a private school with a decent/strong relationship with Ivies (for example sent about five kids, three were unhooked, to Princeton last year), who is at the top of his/her class at the school, has test scores at or around the 75th percentile for HYP (like 2300+, 750+ SAT IIs, numerous 5s on APs), as well as strong extracurriculars, essays, recommendations, and attended a state-funded and state-selected summer program where numerous kids go to Ivies (say 25% go to Princeton, and another 25% go to Yale/Harvard, another 25% go to Columbia/Penn, and another 10% go to MIT), thus indicating that the applicant is not only at the top of his/her prestigious school but also his/her competitive state, would this make up for any absence of hook and help tip him/her into the admit pile for SCEA? Or would a deferral still be more likely?</p>

<p>And also I would like to hope that applying early against roughly 3000-4000 overall more competitive applicants would be more favorable than applying regular against 25,000 less self-selected but also intense applicants… don’t you think?</p>

<p>Applying early is always better for a strong applicant </p>

<p>But even though you will have a better chance applying early, that does not automatically mean you will be a “likely” admit. If the early admit rate is, say, 15%, that still means 85% of the applicants will be rejected.</p>

<p>On the other hand, there will, likely as not, be 2 or 3 times as many people with similar qualifications in the regular pool, where the admit rate may be 5-6%.</p>

<p>The problem with comparative statistics is that the SCEA pool is really two pools: One pool has an admission rate of close to 100%, and stats that average far lower than the overall average for accepted students. That pool consists of athletic recruits, developmental candidates, and other, similar types (e.g., famous musicians or actors). The other pool has an admission rate much closer to the RD admission rate than seems to be the case from outside, and better than average stats. If you combine the two, it looks like there’s a meaningful EA advantage. If you separate them, not so much. Maybe a small advantage, but not out of line with what everyone acknowledges is the greater maturity and focus of the EA pool.</p>

<p>The “Early Admissions Game” study reached its conclusions about the large admit edge for early applicants AFTER accounting for jocks and legacies.</p>

<p>The early application numbers for class of 2015 were</p>

<p>S: 5950
Y: 5257
M: 6405</p>

<p>Total: 17612. </p>

<p>If this number is about constant for class of 2016, then the average number among HYPSM should be 3522. P is right on target for the average number: 3547. This could be the number for the rest of HYPSM. Any numbers that larger than 17612 means there are more HYPSM wannabes this year. My speculation is that the total number should not be too far away from 17612, maybe a little larger.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That would seem accurate, except it assumes that only previous Yale, Stanford, and MIT applicants would shift gears and apply to Princeton or Harvard. I didn’t think “3500” across the board would be an accurate estimate and, as recent numbers have shown, it’s not.</p>

<p>Princeton: 3,547
Stanford: 5,880 (down 49 applications from previous year)
MIT: 6,102 (down 302 applications from previous year)</p>

<p>My predictions for Yale numbers are ~5000 and Harvard numbers are ~6500.
As a Princeton SCEA applicant and a huge fan of the university, I’m not ashamed to say that, at least from what I’ve gathered, it is not coveted as a “first choice” dream school as readily Yale or Harvard is (and MIT or Stanford for that matter). It’s lower number of early applications show that.</p>

<p>Yale had 5257 SCEA applicants last year. It is highly unlikely they will have ~5000 SCEA applicants this year after the splintering of the HYP SCEA applicant pool. My guess is as good as anyones but I’m thinking the number will be closer to 4000 applicants this year. The Yale Daily News reported the application numbers on November 16th in 2010 so I suspect we’ll know the answer to this thread any day now.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Uh… 1,300 less applications would probably be an extreme red flag. Stanford lost barely 50 applications this year and MIT lost roughly 300… what makes Yale so unappealing that it’ll lose 1,300? I think losing 300-500 at the most would be a reasonable estimate. Also keep in mind plenty of people who were gunning for Princeton and Harvard RD didn’t want to bother with applying to Yale SCEA or Stanford REA for numerous reasons. I personally know that my school has less clout with Yale admissions than it does with Princeton, so prior to February 2011 I was planning on EAing to my safety/target schools… which is a common strategy nowadays. And that doesn’t mean I didn’t love Yale; it’s my second choice school… very marginally behind my preference for Princeton. I just don’t see myself as competitive in the Yale SCEA pool as I do in the Princeton SCEA pool, so I wouldn’t waste an early bid on a school I would most likely get deferred by.</p>

<p>How much did Yale’s SCEA applications spike up the year H and P stopped their early program? I would think the downward spike would be proportional to that. HY and P are much more similar to each other than any of them is to Stanford or MIT.</p>

<p>See: <a href=“http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/early-admission-2011-2/[/url]”>http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/early-admission-2011-2/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Class of 2016 Early Applications:</p>

<p>Princeton EA = 3457
MIT EA = 6404 (- 4.72%)
UChicago EA = 8,698 (+ 25%)
Stanford EA = 5880 (- 0.83%)
Brown ED = 2,900 (+ 4%)
UPenn ED = 4,510 (- 0.98%)
Dartmouth ED = 1,800 (+ 3%)
Georgetown EA = 6,750 (+ 1.4%)
Northwestern ED = 2,450 (+ 15.2%)
Duke ED = 2,716 (+ 23.06%)</p>

<p>gibby:</p>

<p>The MIT number is actually 6102. The number you cited is from last year.</p>

<p>^^. Thanks phuriku – corrected.
See: [The</a> Early Line on Early Applications for the Class of 2016 - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/early-admission-2011-2/]The”>The Early Line on Early Applications for the Class of 2016 - The New York Times)</p>

<p>Class of 2016 Early Applications:</p>

<p>Princeton EA = 3457
MIT EA = 6102 (- 4.72%)
UChicago EA = 8,698 (+ 24.97%)
Stanford EA = 5880 (- 0.83%)
Brown ED = 2,904 (+ 5.48%)
UPenn ED = 4,510 (- 0.98%)
Dartmouth ED = 1,800 (+ 3%)
Georgetown EA = 6,750 (+ 1.4%)
Northwestern ED = 2,450 (+ 15.19%)
Duke ED = 2,716 (+ 23.06%)</p>

<p>

Okay, if you insist on this, then H, Y, P would have the same number? You make cottonmather nervous now. :)</p>

<p>I wouldn’t see a 1300 application drop to Yale to be any sort of red flag. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think there are many H and P aspirants who applied Yale SCEA since that was the strongest “safety” they could obtain cutting down the need to file a dozen other applications. I agree with Hunt that the HYP pool shares more applicants than any of those schools share with Stanford and MIT. Although it won’t be a zero sum game, there has to be more defections from Yale SCEA than from Stanford REA.</p>

<p>But I have to say I was surprised to see Chicago’s number go up so much–I thought maybe some of the people who would have applied early to H and P might have decided to apply EA to Chicago and one or two others. Maybe they did, and Chicago is just more popular this year.</p>

<p>Hunt,
My sense is that UC is doing the following:

  1. continuing to do BLANKET mailings
  2. mailings do a pretty accurate job of describing what is unique about the school
  3. app is long and also communicates a specific message
    My point is that they are marketing heavily to push up applications, and then the message is quite helpful about FIT and uniqueness, so they do attract a good number who really believe that UC is more for them than HYPS etc.
  4. trying harder than ever to extinguish “where the fun goes to die” image, as well- a slightly broader appeal</p>

<p>Others more familiar with UC may have more input that I would be happy to hear!</p>

<p>In the case of Duke, they said very explicitly in their Info Session this summer that applying Early is a big advantage- not sure if they have been doing that in the past.</p>

<p>Wonder what is taking H and Y so long to report??!</p>

<p>The number of Yale SCEA applications:</p>

<p>Class of 2008 4046
Class of 2009 3926
Class of 2010 4084
Class of 2011 3594
Class of 2012 4888
Class of 2013 5551</p>

<p>The Class of 2011 was the last year before H & P stopped their early programs. </p>

<p>We’ll know any day how much a drop we will see but these numbers suggest that a +/-4000 annual number of applicants held for four years and was only significantly breached after H & P stopped their early programs.</p>

<p>What was the scea admit rate for the class of 2011?</p>