Not many Midd slots left!

<p>I am curious about the close-to-40% admit rate of Midd ED1 applicants. With 2350 students I assume that means 650 or so in an incoming class. Midd has a huge number of those already admitted in ED1, and probably a smaller number in ED2. By definition of ED these slots are now filled for the class of '13. That leaves what - 300 or fewer slots for RD? Then you figure athletes/legacies/donors/UWC for half of those - so everyone else is competing for 150 slots! I realize my math is "fuzzy" but the general point seems accurate. </p>

<p>Also, how does Midd - which portrays itself as uber-competitive in admissions - admit 40% of its ED1 applicants? Other schools with which Midd compares itself in competitiveness are taking small fractions of that. Stanford was 12%, Georgetown was 18%, Yale in mid teens.</p>

<p>I think other schools like Williams or Amherst take almost 40% of their ED applicants as well.. I suspect it's probably because most legacies/recruits apply early, and most ED applicants are usually very well qualified and know what they are doing.</p>

<p>ED is essentially an invention of the little ivies used to compete against the greater name recognition of the Big Ivies. There's an article on it here (go to p. 3):
The</a> Early-Decision Racket - The Atlantic (September 2001)</p>

<p>I hope they don't get too stingy on ED II applicants. :-)</p>

<p>Ughhhh, now I really don't think I'll get in...my odds seemed low enough back when ALL the slots in the class were empty. :( Miracle, hopefully? erebus, I really really hope you're right...</p>

<p>I495, does your name refer to MA Interstate 495 at all?</p>

<p>It refers to Washington, DC's "Beltway" that connects Virginia and Maryland. [Interstate</a> 495 (Capital Beltway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_495_(Capital_Beltway%5DInterstate"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_495_(Capital_Beltway))&lt;/p>

<p>i think they filled most of ED I up with recruited athletes. for edII and regular decision im sure it will mostly be based on academic achievement rather than athletes.</p>

<p>That's a big generalization Plat21. I also might take a slight exception to the inference that athletes don't have equal academic achievement to others who EC's don't include athletics. I'm sure you meant nothing inherently mean or condescending, but ....</p>

<p>As an aside, I know two students accepted ED and neither one is a recruited athlete.</p>

<p>Modadunn, he said that they filled up the majority of ED I with athletes, not ALL of the slots with athletes, nevertheless, I do agree with plat21 - over 50% of the ED 1 applicants were athletes - I don't know the correct stats off the top of my head, but supposedly, out of the 250 something kids that were selected, more than half of them were team captains...</p>

<p>hmm.. where can I find that press release or whatever they're calling it? A link perhaps?</p>

<p>Thanks so much.</p>

<p>Modadunn...Welcome</a> to Middlebury
that is the link to the stats (Look at the bottom of the page and wait for everything to scroll through)</p>

<p>The number is 125 team captains out of 263 ED1 acceptances. Not all of those team captains will be recruited athletes. In the pyramid of the sports hierarchy, there are a WHOLE lot more high school team captains than there are spots on college teams' rosters.</p>

<p>But the vast majority of that 125 probably are recruited athletes due to the acceleration of the recruiting process. The Div. I Ivies and Patriot League teams try to get the jump on the high-academic major colleges (Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, etc.), and the top academic Div. III teams try to get the jump on the Ivies/Patriot League.</p>

<p>Athletes obviously get a significant admissions advantage (as do artists, musicians, URMs, legacies, developmental admits, etc.). But the fact that recruits have to elect, by Nov. 15th of their senior year, binding Early Decision or risk losing their offer is not generally considered to be one of those advantages. My son has gotten half a dozen offers, including a couple of Ivies, since Nov. 15th. Luckily for him Middlebury is and has always been his first choice (and he got in).</p>

<p>But keep in mind that there were always going to be some set number of acceptances used for athletes to fill out Middlebury's teams, whether they went in ED1, ED2 or RD. My guess, backed by anecdotal information, is that the trend toward an accelerated recruiting timetable led to an unusually large percentage of those slots getting filled this year by ED1. That simply means, however, that far fewer of the ED2 and RD slots will go to athletes, to the benefit of those who apply ED2 and RD, and the waitlisted ED1 applicants.</p>

<p>Thank you lake.. and when put in that context, I fully agree with Rick10 about them not all being recruited athletes. I believe this statistic only points out leadership qualities, much like editor in chief.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, how does Midd - which portrays itself as uber-competitive in admissions - admit 40% of its ED1 applicants? Other schools with which Midd compares itself in competitiveness are taking small fractions of that. Stanford was 12%, Georgetown was 18%, Yale in mid teens.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You think Midd's bad? Check out Williams! They accepted 223 ED applicants and their expected class size is 538. That's 41% of the first year class filled ED.</p>

<p>Williams</a> College :: News & Events - Press Releases</p>

<p>
[quote]
You think Midd's bad? Check out Williams! They accepted 223 ED applicants and their expected class size is 538. That's 41% of the first year class filled ED.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Still lower than the 43% of Middlebury's class that were comprised of ED applicants last year. Not to mention that the vast majority of ED applicants are not aiming for Feb admission, so for normal Sept matriculants the ratio is most likely even higher.</p>

<p>I think that applying ED to any school with reasonable qualifications should be a major hook. IMO, Williams & Middlebury are doing the right thing.</p>

<p>Gellino, OK, we get it, you hate Midd (we just don't understand why yet - Bowdoin is really THAT jealous of Midd?) You can't compare apples and oranges (or different years) and I'm still struggling to understand the relevance of the Feb Admission comment. Feb admits are no less qualified than September admits. They're just starting at a different time. So there's as much point to splitting Feb and Sept admits as there is in splitting green-eyed and blue-eyed admits.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Gellino, OK, we get it, you hate Midd (we just don't understand why yet - Bowdoin is really THAT jealous of Midd?) You can't compare apples and oranges (or different years) and I'm still struggling to understand the relevance of the Feb Admission comment. Feb admits are no less qualified than September admits. They're just starting at a different time. So there's as much point to splitting Feb and Sept admits as there is in splitting green-eyed and blue-eyed admits.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You have it wrong. He's a Colgate alum, and sometimes I think he gets upset that Midd has taken off in the rankings and is considered slightly more prestigious and selective than his alma mater. But in the end, both are great schools that appeal to different types of students, so there's nothing to get upset about.</p>

<p>Well, it makes sense that they would try to admit as much as applicants from binding ED POol. It increases their yield. And they don't have to be all stressed out about, "is this applicant gonna come here? Or is she gonna choose Harvard over us?" Something like that...</p>

<p>I also wonder if the economic downturn may have an impact on ED decisions this year. Generally people who apply ED don't require as much aid as those who apply RD (there's no shopping around for the best aid package). Many colleges (including Midd) may be admitting more ED applicants to ensure there's enough fin aid money for everyone despite dwindling endowments.</p>