Just Announced-Harvard to eliminate early action effective Fall 2007

<p>There is free internet service (mostly dial-up) in some areas, but as of yet there are no free computers for personal use, unless you count the public liberary, which in my area limits usage to 45 minutes, unless there is no one waiting. There are always people waiting. And the library's hours are limited, especially at night and weekends.</p>

<p>I'm definately glad that I own a cumputer and have cable internet service 1.5M vs. 56-kbps....talk about a bottle neck.</p>

<p>:)</p>

<p>PS--EA is okay, except that some schools limit the ability to apply to other schools with non-binding EA programs. EA is still a way for the well informed, and often well-off applicant to get a boost in admissions. Does not solve the problem.</p>

<p>I think that Harvard is assuming that other colleges -- many of which have ED rather than SCEA -- will follow its lead. ED is unquestionably disadvantageous to low-income applicants.</p>

<p>Oh dear, now I'm posting on both threads on this topic. I wish there were some way to combine the two.</p>

<p>Anyway, some there have made some good points I didn't realize. Harvard is being swamped with SCEA applications. It is hard to cope, and actually the stats of those admitted early are apparently below those who make it in the RD round. Also, it USED to have regular EA, but switched to SCEA, because it had too many applications.</p>

<p>In other words, administratively and in terms of the quality of the classes it was getting, SCEA wasn't meeting the needs of Harvard it seems. But it seems to be so much nicer to dress this decision up as helping the poor and the stressed.</p>

<p>OK, I'm cynical.</p>

<p>Now I WILL stop posting on this topic today and will do something constructive! If I publicly state this, it may actually happen :)</p>

<p>DianeR=Diane Ravitch?</p>

<p>People on this thread are using EA (early action) to mean the same thing as ED (early decision.) The only similarity is that you apply early. For EA there's no binding committment and you are free to apply to any all all schools, and wait for financial aid information before you make your decision. There is no obligation to go to the EA school if accepted. This is the policy in place at Carolina. With ED you apply early; hear early; and if accepted you are expected to go there. </p>

<p>From the UNC link cited above: </p>

<p>
[quote]
Carolina's early decision plan -- one of three admissions deadlines open to freshman applicants -- allowed students to apply by Oct. 15 and be notified about their status by Dec. 3. Under the program, students applying early were required to enroll at Carolina if they were offered admission.</p>

<p>The University will keep its early-action program, under which students apply by Nov. 15 and are notified in late January, and its regular schedule, with applications due by Jan. 15 and notifications in late March. Neither program requires that admitted students enroll at Carolina, and both allow applications to other schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is exactly the point. Sure there are some out there who figure out the system and can work around it, but there is a mass of students who don't have a clue. Their schools don't care and more importantly their parents have so many issues that college isn't even on the radar. My wife knows this stuff from talking and interacting with students and their parents. My daughter has started at Harvard this year. She had the benefit of educated parents who now how to play the game and a school system that encourages students to continue on to college. Many inner city students don't have a clue that there is a game. As has been pointed out, you need to know what you don't know to even ask the right questions.</p>

<p>EA (SCEA) does in practice mean the same thing as ED in the sense that well informed kids understand that it gives them a boost in admissions, while less affluent applicants take schools and authority figures at their word when they say it does not affect admissions decision and that it is about fit.</p>

<p>For the less affluent, access to information with respect to ED and EA programs are lacking, or like many I've encountered, find out too late about the early options and figure they have no chance during the regular rounds (since with a little digging, you can find the ED or EA rates in print media).</p>

<p>Also, EA schools outside the top ones do not often gurentee to meet need, so if you apply to a binding EA program (SCEA) and don't get in, you've closed the door on other EA applications that do not limit college choice and, unfortunately, any gurentee of financial aid being met--since preferencial packaging seems to have become more of a marketing tool as of late. There are different permutations of EA programs, while the ED program is more clearcut.</p>

<p>There are two EA programs (non-binding/unlimited applications, and non-binding/single choice) and 1 ED program. Outside the top schools' SCEA programs, there are only a handful of others (UNC included) that use EA and can meet financial need. Effectively, the SCEA program limits low-income kids who do not know how to play the admissions game, while making financial resources more difficult to get from schools that do not gurentee to meet need. Although kids are encouraged to contact each school for specific policies about early admissions (SCEA/EA/ED) programs available to them, few parents and kids can keep it all straight unless they are plugged in to the admissions process by speaking with private counselors, other parents, or adcoms. Thus, it is less likely for a first-generation, lower-income, college bound kid to get the info, tech issues not withstanding.</p>

<p>So, I applaud Harvard.</p>

<p>Thought these quotes interesting:</p>

<p>President Bok: "Others who apply early and gain admission to the college of their choice have less reason to work hard at their studies during their final year of high school."</p>

<p>Dean Knowles: "These programs distort the high school experience by forcing both students and colleges to commit prematurely, based only upon the record at the end of the student's junior year. Moreover, students who are admitted early receive what often appears to be a 'free pass' for their second semester, sadly encouraging them to disengage from their academic experience."</p>

<p>I thought that EA/ED acceptances were conditional upon successful completion of their academic requirements. Isn't it the responsibility of Harvard (and other schools with such "early" options) to rescind an acceptance if the level of academic accomplishment hasn't been maintained?</p>

<p>Academic accomplishment for the most part means getting mostly Bs...maybe a C or two.</p>

<p>^^Getting two Cs without a good excuse like a dead parent will get your EA admission revoked - or at least it will at Yale. I know of a case where that's exactly what happened.</p>

<p>A couple of interesting quotes in today's Chronicle of Higher Education article:</p>

<p>Harvard U. Plans to Drop Its Early-Admissions Program, Rekindling National Debate
By ERIC HOOVER</p>

<p>Harvard University announced on Tuesday that it plans to discontinue its early-admissions program, immediately rekindling a national discussion of the controversial policies that allow some students to receive an admissions decision months before regular applicants. </p>

<p>Harvard -- the first of the nation's most selective colleges to drop early admissions altogether -- will move to a single application deadline of January 1 beginning in the fall of 2007. William R. Fitzsimmons, Harvard's dean of admissions and financial aid, said the change would allow more low-income and minority students to apply to the university. </p>

<p>"The underlying piece here is access and the perception of access," Mr. Fitzsimmons said. "Early applicants tended to be disproportionately white and affluent, and there was a growing perception that early admissions was becoming an exclusive club, to which somehow only a few were invited. That worked against the whole idea of access." </p>

<p>In recent years, critics of early-admission plans have complained about the fact that some highly competitive colleges now admit at least two-fifths of their applicants through early programs, which generally attract the savviest -- and wealthiest -- students. Yet even as praise for Harvard's unexpected decision rang throughout the nation on Tuesday, some college administrators said they doubted that the announcement would revolutionize the admissions field so much as bring the nation's oldest university some good publicity. </p>

<p>Because of Harvard's stature, the announcement carried symbolic weight, if nothing else: That the nation's oldest and most famous university had washed its hands of a popular admissions practice was a strong suggestion that a major component of the nation's admissions system was broken. And so Harvard officials had reason to hope that their announcement would prompt other elite colleges to re-evaluate their early-admissions policies -- and to discuss ways of easing the competitiveness of college admissions. </p>

<p>"It's a chance for higher education itself to take a huge collective breath," Mr. Fitzsimmons said, "not just with early admissions, but also the whole college admissions frenzy, such as all the time and resources spent on test-prep, application-prep, and expensive college consultants." </p>

<p>The decision elicited praise from many high-school counselors, who stand on the front lines of the frenzy Mr. Fitzsimmons described. Willard M. Dix, a college counselor at the University of Chicago Laboratory High School, said Harvard's announcement had given him chills, and that he hoped the move would help ease the "arms race" among elite institutions. Joanna Schultz, director of college counseling at the Ellis School, in Pittsburgh, said colleges' increasing reliance on early admissions during the last decade had increased anxiety among students and parents, causing them to think more about admissions strategies and less about finding a good fit. </p>

<p>"I'm so excited," Ms. Schultz said. "We teach high-school seniors to be examples for other students, and what Harvard has done is to set an example. It's very possible that, starting from the top down, other colleges will have to reconsider their own policies." </p>

<p>Admissions deans at several top colleges also applauded Harvard's stated reasons for making the change, yet some questioned the notion that the university had knocked down the first domino in a process that would drastically redefine the college-application process. </p>

<p>"I don't think it's going to mean the end of early admission," said Peter E. Caruso, associate director of admission at Boston College and chairman of the National Association for College Admission Counseling's Admission Practices Committee. "Other colleges and universities are not going to follow through right away. They're going to say, 'Wait a minute, how does this apply to us?'" </p>

<p>Any college that considered eliminating early admission would have to weigh practical concerns, Mr. Caruso said, including how such a move might affect the delicate logistics of the evaluation process. </p>

<p>Officials at Yale University, one of Harvard's fiercest competitors, said they had no immediate plans to dismantle their own early-admission program. "Harvard has taken a strong action here, and we certainly share their concerns about access for low-income students," said Jeff Brenzel, Yale's dean of undergraduate admissions, "but it would be premature to anticipate what we might do." </p>

<p>In 2001, Yale's president, Richard C. Levin, urged elite colleges to abolish early-admission programs, saying the policies were increasing the anxiety many high-school students experienced during the application process. At the time, however, Mr. Levin said that because of the intense competition among elite colleges for top students, Yale could not abandon its policy unless rival institutions did the same. "No one [college] alone can tip the system back to what it used to be," Mr. Levin told The Chronicle. "It will take a critical number of colleges" (The Chronicle, January 11, 2002). </p>

<p>In response to Harvard's announcement on Tuesday, Mr. Levin suggested that he had reconsidered his stance on early-application policies. "It is not clear that eliminating early admission will result in the admission of more students from low-income families," he said in a written statement. "What is really needed is what Harvard, Yale, and others have been doing in recent years: That is making efforts to increase the pool of low-income students who apply and strengthening the financial-aid packages available to them." </p>

<p>Mr. Levin also said that recent changes to Yale's early-admission program had benefitted students. In 2002, Yale abandoned its "early decision" program, a type of early admission under which students apply early to only one college and agree to attend if admitted. The university replaced that plan with what the admissions association defines as a "restrictive early action" program, in which students may apply early to a single institution without committing to enroll but have until the spring to decide. Harvard's current early-admission policy also gives students until the spring to make their decision, so long as they do not apply early to another college.</p>

<p>"The move to early action had the effect that we desired, and significantly increased the proportion of low-income students in our early-applicant pool," said Mr. Brenzel, of Yale. "We were disappointed that more schools didn't move to an early-action program." </p>

<p>Officials at several other colleges with early-action programs said they were happy with their policies and had no intention of changing them. "On the one hand, I understand Harvard's motivation, and the argument for equality is an outstanding argument," said Charles A. Deacon, dean of undergraduate admissions at Georgetown University. "But a less drastic measure could be taken without much disruption to the whole admissions process." </p>

<p>Georgetown allows students to submit early-action applications to other colleges, though not to institutions with early-decision plans. The process gives students more freedom than restrictive plans while preserving the benefits of early admissions for colleges, according to Mr. Deacon. </p>

<p>"It's a lot easier for Harvard to do what they're doing because they get such a high yield," Mr. Deacon said, referring to the proportion of admitted students who enroll. "If other institutions were forced to eliminate early programs, they would be facing a much lower yield and find it harder to predict enrollment." </p>

<p>Robert J. Massa, vice president for enrollment management and college relations at Dickinson College, agreed that a wholesale abandonment of early-admissions plans could have unintended consequences. </p>

<p>"Some might say it would increase the college admissions frenzy," Mr. Massa said. "Down the line, in March, more students will not know where they're going. More of them will be on wait lists." </p>

<p>A common criticism of early-decision programs is that they hurt students from low-income families, who often decide to forgo an early application so they can compare financial-aid offers from multiple institutions during the regular admissions process. Yet at Dickinson, which uses early decision, the percentage of financial-aid recipients in the early-admit pool is the same as in the regular pool, according to Mr. Massa. </p>

<p>"It's all about how a college goes about recruiting its students and talking to them about financial aid," Mr. Massa said. "To assume that the elimination of early-decision programs will fix what's wrong with admissions in general is na</p>

<p>^^^^ article continued:</p>

<p>Mr. Lucido said the key in changing Chapel Hill's policy was institutional data revealing that early-decision was not serving low-income and minority students. "Part of the ability for a college to make this move is to have folks in high leadership positions know that this is the right thing to do," Mr. Lucido said, "to move away from chasing a ranking to a position that is clearly more equitable." </p>

<p>Mr. Fitzsimmons, Harvard's dean of admissions, said that dropping early-admission would allow him and his staff to travel more widely and recruit a more diverse pool of applicants, particularly those from parts of the country that lacked "a Harvard tradition." </p>

<p>Harvard stopped short of making a permanent commitment to its new admissions policy, however. In a written statement announcing the change, Harvard officials said they planned to monitor the effect of dropping early decision over the next two or three years, "to make sure that it does not have a negative impact on student quality."</p>