<p>hss, good point and that's something that should be done by anybody and everybody considering ED. Having said that, determing the EFC at any particular school can quickly become more of an art than a science, particlularly for people who are self-employed, raise goats :) or have anything other than a "typical" salaried job. </p>
<p>And good luck as you apply this year.</p>
<p>again "committed" is in the eye of the beholder, and the consequences seem to be relevant to the top tier schools</p>
<p>"committed"- its like an engagement- lots of promises, some threats, but not legally binding, as no contract has been made, a moral one, yes of course, but no legal one</p>
<p>If you think an engagement is not a contract, you haven't seen The Marriage of Figaro recently. It IS a contract, often (and explicitly so in many religious law systems), just not one that civil courts will enforce by specific performance.</p>
<p>BethieVT, you are right that many have no idea how it works...whether it be financial aid or even various aspects of college admissions. They have to arm themselves with information. </p>
<p>For instance, does VSAC come to your HS to do a presentation about financial aid? I imagine they do because they come to ours. The process of financial aid is discussed as well as there are booklets handed out. Need based aid doesn't equate to grants or scholarships, but grants can be part of a FA package but low interest loans make up part of that package as well. Parent Plus loans is another piece that parents can do to augment to aid the school provides. But if people equate aid with grants/free, they are mistaken. My children get financial aid. They get a chunk in scholarships and grants, then the student loans, and we deny the work study portion. We also have Parent Plus loans. People going into this process need to truly read about these things and educate themselves at at least a basic level so as to how it works.</p>
<p>JHS,</p>
<p>Is your post a joke? Marriage of Figaro? religious law systems? (Has GWB done more than we lay people know?) Specific performance? You gotta be kidding.</p>
<p>citygirlsmom....whether the ED agreement is legally binding or not is not really the issue, if you ask me. I think anyone entering into such an agreement should do so expecting that it IS a binding commitment, rather than starting from the get go with the thought, "if it doesn't work out for me for some reason, I don't have to do it." I think it ought to be treated as thoroughly binding. IF something unforeseen should arise, I suppose in talking with the college, if they agree, that is another thing. But I would expect that to be a rare exception, not an expectation. Entering into an ED process expecting anything BUT a 100% commitment, is a risky venture. Just like people who do not abide by other rules, laws, policies and what not, people must enter into such a venture doing what's right to them. There are all types of people who make all sorts of choices and takes all sorts of risks and break all sorts of rules. Often there are consequences. There is a chance it can all work out. That's a risk, however. For the purposes of those contemplating ED, it is best to go by the rules, rather than X or Y anecdote of an exception that was made. Unforeseen problems happen and if they should, then deal with it. But one should enter the process with intentions to comply through and through, rather than "if this, than that".</p>
<p>Citygirlsmom, Soozievt's post really gets to the crux of what the ED contract is about. However, the possible consequences are real. The ED college does not "blackball" the student directly. Many times the ED college does not know where else the student is applying and unless the case attracts some particular attention, they are not individually going to investigate the situation. There is a list that exists where colleges post all the students accepted ED. It's been around for a while. If you read Michelle Hernandez's "A is for Admission", she does refer to this list, in terms of how ivy league colleges do NOT discuss candidates for admissions and compare notes EXCEPT for ED acceptances. So this is NOT an urban legend. There are schools that do not bother to cross check this list, but the more select schools do. The reason is that too many kids do not bother to notify their other schools that they are accepted ED, and these selective schools have so precious few spots that they do not what to duplicate acceptances. So if a student does show up on that list--ZAP, they are dropped for RD consideration from schools that check.<br>
Yes, there is that possibility that mistakes occur. It is difficult to check if that has occurred, however. I have known a few kids who have gotten postcards informing them or their highschool counselor that the student has been dropped from the RD process due to acceptance ED at another school. I know of a situation where one student a few years ago had to withdraw an ED acceptance due to medical situation, and I remember that the family and school made sure that the local RD schools were notified about what had happened so that they did not drop the student out of consideration, even though the ED school did release the student from ED. The guidance counselor was concerned because the student was accepted ED and knew that this could cause problems even though the ED school released the student from the binding contract.</p>
<p>"Deciding to apply ED while also planning to submit RD aps is risky. "</p>
<p>I think this probably simply clarifies what you meant.</p>
<p>There's nothing wrong with applying ED while submitting RD applications or planning to submit RD applications as long as one plans to submit RD applications if one was not accepted ED or as long as one plans to withdraw upon ED acceptance any RD applications that were submitted before one's ED acceptance comes in.</p>
<p>THe problem is when people game the system by not withdrawing their RD applications after they get an ED acceptance, and by submitting RD applications after getting an ED acceptance.Whether their reason is to load up on trophy admissions or to be able to compare offers and then drop ED if they get better offers, both are violations of the ED contract, and also are unethical since when applying ED, the student signed a statement that said they wouldn't do those things.</p>
<p>" jst read the Harvard site and it says, we will rescind you even if you apply EA or ED anywhere else, bu nothing about telling others if you back out</p>
<p>that seems pretty dishonest to me...if they are going to report your decision to back out of ED, then they should warn you that they will notify other schools...., seems only right, don't you think?"</p>
<p>Actually, no, it doesn't seem dishonest. Harvard is under no obligation to state any consequences. Frankly, if anyone does something unethical, their reputation is at risk. This, to me, is common sense. Whether or not there's any formal notification made, people's reputations get around. If one lies, backs out of contracts, etc., there's a chance that the person or institution that one stung will pass on the word to others even if that's simply because the world is small, and conincidences are more common than people may imagine.</p>
<p>"But wouldn't it be nice if colleges were more open about what "demonstrated need" really means? "</p>
<p>Yes, but that would be impossible because each person's situation is different.</p>
<p>Colleges have flexibility in how they calculate financial need, and what financial aid packages constitute. Consequently, if financial aid is a factor, one shouldn't apply ED, but should maximize their financial options by being able to compare financical aid offers from various colleges.</p>
<p>The colleges that promise to meet 100% of demonstrated financial need are meeting this need from the perspective of what the college, not the family, thinks the student needs.</p>
<p>Binding Early Decision is a contract, a bargained for exchange - the college gives you the benefit of an early decision (including increased odds of acceptance - though colleges often deny this) - and if accepted via ED, you agree to actually enroll in the school and withdraw any other applications</p>
<p>However since it is in the nature of a personal service, the college cannot in effect make you attend. Of course in practical terms, if you don't pay the deposit or the tuition balance - you are not attending anyways.</p>
<p>The actual law here is very unclear and for this reason among others (e.g bad publicity for the college) I believe most disputes are settled behind closed doors. Since the college effectively would need to act in unision to prevent the student from gaining admission at certain other colleges, there appears to be potential anti-trust issues. </p>
<p>Any student that applies to binding ED and for non-good faith reasons (e.g. a better school accepts them) I believe lacks an ethical compass - and probably shouldn't be going to college in the first place </p>
<p>The student that applies to binding ED in good faith, obtains an ED acceptance and for reasons out of their control and cannot complete their obligation to enroll -needs to work it out with the college</p>
<p>Better financial aid offers (alone) I believe should not let a student (ethicially at least) withdraw from the previously agreed contract, for example in cases where the the financial aid difference between 2 competing schools - is not a make or break decision.</p>
<p>Most things are not regulated by law in life. There are enough silly, detail laws on the books as it is, and making something a law, then invites even more trivial lawsuits than there are.</p>
<p>The entire college application process along with many, many other processes in life has a certain set of instructions, that are not LAW. If you don't do certain things the way the instructions tell you, there is a risk that it will be held against you. No guarantee that it will be, but you do run that risk. Early Action, early decision just have more instructions. When you apply early decision, if you are accepted, you are committed to going there. If you have applied to other schools, you are obliged to to withdraw those appllications. I don't see why anyone would have a problem with those rules. They are there, have been there, and there is no obligation to apply early or to apply at all. But if you do, those are the conditions. There are a number of other conditions as well. You need to get certain things to the college by a deadline if you want to be considered. Not say that there are not exceptions to any of the conditions, and sometimes a college will ignore a breach of its rules. But if you are caught, and if the college chooses to act up on the breach, there can be adverse consequences to you.
Harvard states clearly that you are permitted to apply EA there, only if you do not apply EA or ED elsewhere. I doubt that they have private detectives out there to make sure that this rule is enforced, and like all rules, I am sure it is broken. And I am sure that people get away with this. People also get caught, and if they do, the consequence can be that they are no longer welcome at Harvard. That is the risk of being dishonest in this situation, or unaware and breaking Harvard's EA rule. How can you get caught? Many ways. Probably more ways than you could imagine. The world of academia and college admissions is a small one. Many college adcoms and highschool gcs know each other. People talk. Coincidences happen. I could write a book on strange coincidences of how people got caught doing things when you would think that it was such a long shot. </p>
<p>I don't understand why anyone thinks that this is too hard of a rule. THere are thousands of schools in this country that do not care about EA/ED and are easy schools for admissions. If you don't want to bother with the rules of a school, don't apply there. It's not like you are stuck in a corner. </p>
<p>The college app process is an unfair on for many inherent reasons. The ED rules are just another part of the process. All of this may become a moot point with the top colleges, as they do away with ED and EA.</p>
<p>I agree one should follow through on their "commitment" I have said that</p>
<p>I am just saying that the supposed "consequences" threatend, alluded to, etc, really aren't that severe if you go out of the HSYPC realm. And the kids already have that figured out.</p>
<p>A school can make any rule it wants, the consequences are aimed at other Harvards, Yales, Princetons, but most other schools have no clue</p>
<p>I am not saying its right to not follow through, ALL I am saying is that when people say, OH, you will get in no where, nothing good will come if it, in reality that is not true, and in most cases of a person backing out, all that is needed is some iota of a valid reason</p>
<p>Please, do not attack me thinking I want kids to game the system, I do not, I am just pointing out that its a lot of bluff when it comes to most schools consequences, and that few schools, who all have agreements with each other, can "punish" the acceptees that back out</p>
<p>And isn't it interesting that we are having this debate and ED is getting dropped by these very schools....hmmmmm</p>
<p>You don't usually get caught if you shop lift at certain stores either. I do believe the monitoring is heavier at stores having more desireable merchandise , and the chances of getting caught probably are higher. It does not make it any less of a crime to steal from K-mart than from Bloomingdale's.
The top schools are not dropping ED because their ED students are cheating in the process. Their reason for dropping ED is because the data overwhelmingly shows that the programs favor the advantaged. Because ED is so beneficial to the colleges, even with the cheats that inevitably occur, it is the colleges whose yields can afford not having that ED boost that are dropping the programs. However, if you read the announcement in full, they are not committing to dropping the programs for keeps. THey are going to monitor the situation. I'll bet that the programs will be monitored if the effect on the yields are detrimental the even those top schools.</p>
<p>call me a cynic, but there are usually more reasons something is changed than what is publically announced...I do think that the reasons stated are real and the schools mean it, but, there are probablly others issues as well that just aren't publically announced</p>
<p>Did I SAY it was a good thing to do? NO I did not, I am just saying empty threats are easily spotted by those that want to play the system, that is all</p>
<p>I agree with cptofthehouse....</p>
<p>People get away with things all the time. But if one chooses to be dishonest, cheats, steals, and so forth, they run the risk of possible consquences. I do not think the consequences are empty threats. If one wants to "play the system", they run some risks. Also, the analogy of shoplifting in an upscale store vs. KMart applies. I do believe if someone doesn't play the rules at a place like Harvard and keeps other apps alive, when they were admitted ED, there is a chance that Harvard is savvy enough to have that kid's name on a list of ED admits that other competing schools will see, etc. So, people who do not honor agreements, who are dishonest in intentions, who cheat and all those things, do run a risk of being found out and of possbile consequences. With anything, there are those who slip past the rules in various situations in life. There are kids who hand in papers written by someone else, cheat on tests, lie on the applications about activities and on and on. Some get by that way, sure. Many are found out and the consequences are not always pretty. So, people can opt to play the system but by doing so, they are opting to take on a big risk.</p>
<p>The (always unstated) other issue - is that Harvard needs to continue its race based admissions program, basically a disguised quota program, that favors selected minorities and generally disfavors asians, and Harvard must accomplish this w/o violating existing court rulings</p>
<p>Ending early admissions will increase (certain) "disadvantaged" applicants, as Harvard has all but in effect stated: "the disadvantaged Harvard seeks to admit appear unable to figure out that Harvard early admissions is non-binding and will allow applicants accepted by Dec 15 to have until May 1st to compare financial aid offers from other schools"</p>
<p>Citygirlsmom, the schools that are changing their early policies are the ones who have the least to lose should kids cheat and doubledip. Their yields say it all. If a kid cheats and applies Harvard and BC EA, where do you think he'll go if he gets into both? I do not believe that the patrolling is the reason for dropping the early programs. There is not that much patrolling done. Just that list. They only investigate other venues if something smells fishy.<br>
There may be other motives for getting rid of early programs. I know that because it is easier to accept kids, particularly those with sterling credentials who apply to these top schools, when the class is wide open, than it is when you have few seats left and have to be stingy in doling them out, that these schools find that there are fewer spaces available for RD than they like. Putting in a quota system of sorts would level that out, but they are loath to do that though some colleges do. (ones that have equivalent early vs regular accept rates).<br>
Some schools are now insisting that you can only committ to one college at the end of the process and if they catch wind that you sent out more than one committment and deposit check, they will renege on their acceptance. And they mean it. How will they find out? I don't know. But the rigorous prep schools do take that seriously and will only permitt you to accept to one college at the end of the year, and if they find out you do otherwise they will take action. There is a group of colleges (can't remember the name of this group-includes many of the more selective ones) that insist on this rule and will share accept info, so you can get caught that way. But I doubt if they have private detectives on the job to enforce. It's just that if you get caught, just like when you get caught doing anything else that is wrong, there can be consequences that are not worth it. These threats are no more empty than those about student writing their own essays and being truthful about their ecs and other plaguerism in general It is very possible to do these things alot and never get got. But a handful of kids do get caught each year, and for those, paying the piper is a heavy price because most of those kids could have gotten into a mighty fine school honestly, and now they are starting out one of their first adult endeavors as a cheat.</p>
<p>Why do I feel like I am getting yelled at...I do...I am jsut pointing out the flaws in the system for repurcussions...</p>
<p>When I read over and over- oh, no one will let you in if you get caught, no future, etc., and its just not true, and when people see its not true, they WILL play the system</p>
<p>It is not a contract, its an agreement, one that SHOULD be honored, but all that maintains the agreement is threats and honor...period...nothing more</p>
<p>"When I read over and over- oh, no one will let you in if you get caught, no future, etc., and its just not true, and when people see its not true, they WILL play the system"</p>
<p>It is true that a student who backs out of ED for a flimsy reason can still get into colleges. THere's a good chance, however, that the student won't get into a college that's ranked as high or higher than their ED school. If a student manages to do that, their admission also may be rescinded depending on the circumstances.</p>
<p>THe example I gave of my relative was of a student who would have been ultra desireable. Even now, there simply aren't those many high stat, excellently educated, potential development cases URMs. Most students, however, wouldn't have such strong hooks that an excellent school would overlook the fact that they were so unethical as to not pull their RD applications after getting an ED admission. There also is every indication that my relative didn't get into a higher ranked college because she had already gotten an ED acceptance. I can't think of any other reason for her to be rejected particularly since those were the days in which there were far fewer highs stat URMs than there are now.</p>