<p>Is the applicant pool for Early Decision/Early Action suggested for extremely stellar students and super competitive? If you don't have an extremely high-achieved profile, is it not recommended to apply EA/ED for your #1 school?</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>Well for ED it usually helps your chances, but you’d be bound to the school, even if you have better options or bad financial aid. And for EA what everyone says is that its no different from RD. That being said, you get to know earlier and if you get deferred, you get a second shot. Bottom line, if you love love love the school, apply away.</p>
<p>Actually, at many schools it is a little easier to get in during the early rounds. For that reason, many students apply early to a reach school. </p>
<p>Whisper12 is correct pointing out the concern about finances for binding early decision applicants. There is no opportunity to compare financial aid packages and that can be a significant deterrent to applying ED for students needing aid.</p>
<p>
It’s very possible that if you’re unrealistic, you’re throwing away your ED chance. If you’re a 3.4 GPA student and your top two ED choices are a local small college and Columbia, one can argue you’re wasting an app to Columbia whereas your local school would LOVE your ED application.</p>
<p>Applying to “selective” schools is, by definition, extremely difficult. What schools are you targeting? For the very selective schools, there is no discernable advantage to eventual admissions whatsoever. The very selective schools clearly state that those admitted in EA/ED are kids that would have been admitted during RD – they aren’t lowering the standards. So YES, it’s extremely competitive.</p>
<p>For the next tier down, extremely strong applicants are favored as those schools don’t want to risk losing you to a better offer later in the RD round.</p>
<p>It all depends on what schools are in your conversation. Is it Princeton or is it Emerson.</p>
<p>For ED and SCEA, applicants who are at or above average credential would have a slightly better chance than RD. For just EA, there may or may not be any advantage. If you are below the admission average, you better improve your GPA or score before applying RD for the schools that have high rejection rate in the early round.</p>
<p>^ Bill’s 2nd point is excellent. In general, students who can boost their GPA in a rigorous 1st semester Senior schedule are much better waiting to apply RD than a lesser EA/ED application.</p>
<p>EA is a different creature, but as far as ED goes, here are the guidelines I recommend. Take them with a grain of salt.</p>
<p>Only apply ED if all of the following are true:</p>
<ol>
<li>You really, really want to go somewhere.</li>
<li>You are certain that the school is a good “fit.”</li>
<li>You have a reasonable chance of being admitted.</li>
<li>You can afford to attend the school (for all four, five or six years).</li>
</ol>
<p>As always, YMMV.</p>
<p>“4. You can afford to attend the school (for all four, five or six years).”</p>
<p>If you ask for financial aid, there’s no way to know for sure (though the Net Price Calculator gives an estimate) until you apply ED and, if admitted, get the financial aid offer. If the offer is insufficient, you say thanks but no thanks, and apply elsewhere RD.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And wasted the one ED app.
As you say, the NPC gives a pretty good estimate.
Plus, Financial Aid offices will give a “pre read.”</p>
<p>Everyone has their own opinion but I’ll stick by my four simple rules.</p>
<p>Some want to maximize their chance of admission to their number one favorite school. ;)</p>
<p>^^^^</p>
<p>It is open to question whether or not applying ED actually increases one’s chances or not. I am somewhat firmly on the side of the fence that says it does not.</p>
<p>The perceived increase in the admission percentage during ED is caused by several factors.</p>
<p>The genuine and tangible effect on any one particular student is IMHO non-existent and illogical. One is either qualified for admission (by whatever standards are being used) or is not qualified.</p>
<p>One’s individual application does not somehow appear rosier because it is sent in September rather than being sent in December.</p>
<p>Here is a simple analogy.
Let’s say I’m an OK basketball player.
The team I want to play for has two tryouts. The first tryout, in September, is attended by the best basketball players around because their regular season has started yet and so they’re available to come and apply. And the second tryout is in December.</p>
<p>The percentage of accepted players is naturally higher in September because the talent pool of gifted players is higher.
But, if I tryout for the team in September, it doesn’t mean that my chances have increased.</p>
<p>As always, YMMV.</p>
<p>^^Some schools, like Duke and Penn, literally admit that applying early increases your chances. They say it straight up, no caveats.</p>
<p>Applying to selective schools is extremely competitive. Period.</p>
<p>Four years ago when my son was applying Penn stated that they take approximately half of the freshman class through ED. To me, those are better odds of getting in.</p>
<p>From an academic study:
<a href=“http://www.stanford.edu/~jdlevin/Papers/EarlyAdmissions.pdf[/url]”>http://www.stanford.edu/~jdlevin/Papers/EarlyAdmissions.pdf</a></p>
<p>Applying early generally increases your likelihood of gaining acceptance. Applying early to a school demonstrates that you have significant interest in actually attending if you are accepted. In addition, the greater the restriction that their early application program has (i.e. ED is more restrictive than REA which is more restrictive than regular EA), the more interest you are demonstrating by applying there.</p>
<p>By applying Early Decision somewhere for example, the admissions committee sees that you are showing that you would attend the school if they accepted without condition. Therefore, they would be more inclined to accept you because they know that they would not be wasting an acceptance on someone who would end up attending another school. Even for Restrictive Early Action, with which you cannot apply to other private Early Action programs, you are demonstrating interest by showing them that the school you are applying to is in fact the only school that you are applying to during the early period.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, Ill play. </p>
<p>There is a difference between capturing total data numbers and then applying that to one individual. There are many varied reasons contributing to the pile of numbers that may, or may not, apply to one specific individual.</p>
<p>From the study itself that you cited:</p>
<p>*(The ED) benefit tends to be captured by students who are well off and well informed.</p>
<p>Early applicants at top schools are stronger than regular applicants.</p>
<p>Early applicants had higher SAT scores on average than regular applicants.*</p>
<p>And, I didnt see anywhere in the study that mentioned the non-numerical reasons why a larger portion of ED applicants get admitted, except this:</p>
<p>Early applicants are attractive in ways that are not captured by our numerical measures.</p>
<p>Exactly!</p>
<p>How many of the ED acceptances were athletes? How many were legacies? How many were rich and could pay the full load? How many were oboe players? How many were URM? And on and on and on.</p>
<p>I have not seen any evidence that for a specific named individual, ones chances increases significantly simply based on the one factor alone of applying ED.</p>
<p>Part II</p>
<p>And so, what the “ED = Better chance” people are saying is – if I’m a D student, with no ECs, and an 800 SAT score, I have a better chance of getting into a school if I apply ED.</p>
<p>That example, of course, was said with tongue firmly in cheek.</p>
<p>But that’s is what is being proposed. That somehow, I have a better chance of getting swept up in the fishing net with the other applicants simply because it’s ED.</p>
<p>It just makes no logical sense.</p>
<p>Or, think of it this way.
You’re a fly on the wall and can hear everything everyone in the admissions committee is saying.
They’re looking at an application folder and one of them says “Well, this student’s application is just so-so. If this was RD I wouldn’t admit this person. But, hey, it’s ED, so let’s let him in.”
See how absurd that sounds?</p>
<p>My opinion: just like the study basically said: The pool of ED applicants is “better.” The entire pool taken as a whole, not everyone in the pool.</p>
<p>If I jump into a pool of Olympic swimmers, most of the swimmers will get picked to swim in the Olympics. But my chance of getting picked is not any higher.</p>
<p>If I jump into a pool of Olympic swimmers, most of the swimmers will get picked to swim in the Olympics. But my chance of getting picked is not any higher. </p>
<p>Makes Perfect sense!! IF a particular school is your top top choice, go ahead and apply ED - but that still does not change the equation from the other side - you still have to “qualify”</p>
<p>“An early action application is associated with a 17 to 20 percentage point increase in admission probability, and an early decision application with a 31 to 37 percentage point increase” does indeed apply to the pool of those who are qualified for admission to the school, not to an individual. The problem is that an individual does not know in advance if s/he is a member of the pool; if s/he is, the increases apply. </p>
<p>The study controlled for athletes, legacies, etc.:
</p>