<p>By now we all know that Harvard is ending SCEA and for the class of 2012, they will all apply RD. Same holds true for Princeton eliminating ED. We can speculate on how it will affect applicants, acceptance rate, yield, et cetera, a year from now. I wonder how it is going to affect admissions this year for the class of 2011. Many schools, including HYPS, take about half their class from early admissions. Will HYPS and other top colleges be more conservative this year and deffer more boarderline early applicants who may have gotten in last year or will this change have no affect on admission rates for the class of 2011?</p>
<p>a very good question. I too was wondering the same thing. I believe they will proabably defer more just becuase next year they're not going to have it at all. That's my opinion at least</p>
<p>Just wait and see. No one can guess how things will turn out because all this is unprecedented.</p>
<p>so do you mean that for the class of 2011 applicants it will be harder to get in through ED fro some schools?</p>
<p>I think H+P wi'll underadmit so next year they can overadmit to compensate for their lower yield rates. That way they can claim that eliminating early deadlines had no effect on their class size. Or they'll overadmit this year to increase their admissions rate because they'll have to increase it again next year. Err, one of those.</p>
<p>I think it will be easier to get into Harvard SCEA and Princeton ED this year (though in the scheme of things, still astronomically difficult). Just the fact that you guys are fretting over it is a strong indicator of this: I think that their early applicant pool is going to decrease in strength. I imagine that many of the realistic HYPS hopefuls will practice risk containment and apply early to Yale or Stanford instead. On top of that, Princeton's new dorm opens next year and they will need a slightly larger class than usually for the kick-off. There's a silver lining to HP's decision.</p>
<p>morsvenit - an interesting comment. It seems unlikely that Harvard would change its admit rate now for its SCEAers. If they really are going to reduce the number of kids they admit, they would have just applied the new rule to class of 2011, right??</p>
<p>They've always deferred borderline applicants. Top colleges will probably will take fewer early overall this year if only because of the new bestselling book and Bok coming out to talk about how ED/EA benefit those who already have advantages. </p>
<p>This is just going to be a killer year at ivies period as numbers continue to go up and the schools dig deeper for diversity, read low income.</p>
<p>ED/EA has always been for athletes, legacies, development candidates and of late URMs. The average candidate has really never had much of an advantage applying ED/EA to an ivy as is now coming to light.</p>
<p>Harvard has shied away from EA this past year (Class of 2010), taking less students (800 compared to my year, Class of 2009's 880). I don't see that trend dying down this coming fall, and I definitely think suze is correct.</p>
<p>So let's talk pragmatically: does it make sense for Harvard hopefuls to apply EA this year?</p>
<p>I wanted to ask what people's predictions and opinion's would be for admit rates at top schools like the ivys would be now that H and P had decided to get rid of early admissions starting next year. Regular admissions is a crap shoot because the pool is huge and outrageously competitive at top schools. Early to me seemed like the best way to get in to some top school for applicants without perfect stats (this including grades, sat, and ecs). Now that Harvard says that early admissions hurts poor people, will they cut this year's early acceptances to almost only legacies, URMs, athletes, and very hooked applicants? Is it even worth it to apply to a huge reach early because it seems likely that they will deffer and deffered candidates at most schools are later rejected in the RD round.</p>
<p>Randon thought: there was a story on NBC (I think at least) that taked about how the ivies accepted over 40 PERCENT legacies, athletes etc. who DIDN'T have the stats to get in normally. Talk about unfair. Cough Bush. Cough Kerry.</p>
<p>Haha...money and political power...that's what Harvard's knon for isn't it?</p>
<p>Eh...this fits in perfectly with me, I was trying to decide to go EA with either Harvard or CIT/MIT...so I guess this'll make my decision easier....</p>
<p>I'm lower borderline..so I'm pretty sure they'll defer me along with all the rest of the borderline apps just to prep for next year...which means unless you have the connections or won an olympic medal, EA won't make much sense.</p>
<p>Well, I got numerous state awards in three separate areas, and one top finish in a national philosophy competition open to people all ages, all vocations.</p>
<p>Make sense to do EA?</p>
<p>How can you possibly believe Harvard ever let in anyone borderline EA? Also fhimas, I think you didn't hear quite right. Ivies take 40% of legacies. Legacies are one of the most highly qualified applicant groups. The majority go to good private schools and have strong stats.</p>
<p>Okay. So my stereotypical image of a legacy being just rich kids with parents that contribute a lot of money to 'x' school is only part true, not at all true? Please explain.</p>
<p>Most legacies are probably upper middle class and above, but the accepted ones are qualified if they're not truly rich which is a small percent.</p>
<p>By "boarderline" I meant more kids who apply to places with ED early and get in in the ED round, but may not get in the RD round. I dont think that places with EA would admit these sort of applicants early because it is not binding, but some schools admit these kids to guarantee that a high percentage of students marticulate.</p>
<p>It's no easier to get into an ivy ED save perhaps Cornell and non Wharton Penn where you might get a slight boost. It just looks like it is because that's when they take all the recruited athlete, legacies and development candidates. ED does help at lower ranked schools that are worried about yield.</p>
<p>Okay, so let's APPLY these thoughts - should qualified students (great scores, gpa, ECs, etc) apply early or not?</p>