<p>First of all, Princeton is a superb school; certainly in the top five nationally in the minds of many, with setting, quite candidly, being the principal reason it loses cross admits to Harvard.</p>
<p>From all that I have read and heard, Rapelye et als would very much like to move to SCEA or open EA in order to enlarge the applicant pool; they are constrained, at the moment, by the relatively low RD yield rate which creates some uncertainty about whether overall yield would take an unacceptable hit if the binding ED edge were surrendered.</p>
<p>Personally, I think they should screw up their courage and go for it. Yale made the leap of faith and survived handsomely, with its overall yield rate rising 5 points in the last few years even as the overall Princeton yield rate was taking a parallel drop.</p>
<p>Princeton has many recruiting advantages, including plenty of money to spend on financial aid.</p>
<p>Byerly, I have rationalized this too concerning why ED still remains but without something concrete your analysis is only a guess. Do you have something definitive, a link or is this conjecture similar to "We went into Iraq for oil".</p>
<p>I think the answer to why Princeton is hesitating lies in the legacy of the Hargadon era - both its successes and shortcomings. Freddie brought Princeton to the top of the rankings with his emphasis on yield - using ED masterfully in his pursuit of the "Princeton Type".</p>
<p>As his successor has discovered, it is difficult to change the character and mix of the student body overnight; there must occasionally be a step backward to permit two steps forward. The $101 million will help, but a decades old image must be considerably modified to make Princeton a destination of choice for the "green-haired" people of the world.</p>
<p>I recommend THIS excellent article from the Princetonian, if you haven't seen it, to understand why changes are being made, but why it is so difficult to make them when a considerable fraction of the "electorate" liked things exactly as they were before.</p>
<p>Funny you quote from a paper who you wouldn't trust for a minute when commenting on the Bush Administration:)</p>
<p>I'll tell you this, as a parent of one of those "green haired admits"
(although mine wears Repp ties with his Doc Martens)
Many of them prefer a slow evolution from Princeton's old image.</p>
<p>Right now the student body already reflects the effort Tilghman and Rapalye
have made. Not ever student looks like William Frist III.</p>
<p>A slow transition from eating clubs to four year residential colleges is definitely in the making but it will take much time.</p>
<p>I agree the transition will take time. The question is whether ending the reliance on the ED crutch - and enlarging the early applicant pool - would hasten the transition. I believe it would.</p>
<p>ps: I would no sooner rely on the Princetonian for political advice than I would on the Harvard Crimson.</p>
<p>Just to add my 2 cents. I agree with the statistical analysis provided by Byerly and much perfer an SCEA or EA policy because it does not lock students in to a particular choice. As generous as Princeton is with financial aid I have heard from enough middle class parents that they would not apply ED because of the financial uncertainty. EA and SCEA eliminate that uncertainty because the student can opt out if the aid is better elsewhere.</p>
<p>As a parent I prefer EA because then my child/student can apply to multiple schools early. If I was an adminitrator I would opt for SCEA because I believe it would increase diversity and the number of applications while still enabling a school to know the students first choice. </p>
<p>Going through the effort this year, my son wanted to apply to a number of ED schools. I allowed him to apply to all of them RD. I know it lowers his chances for acceptance but so be it. At the end of the day he will still have excellent choices.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have heard from enough middle class parents that they would not apply ED because of the financial uncertainty
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That may be true for some schools but Princeton along with Williams and Amherst have no peers when it comes to FA.
Princeton is one of the few that does not consider home equity.
Packages offered are usually more generous then what even their online calculator reveals.</p>
<p>There should really be no uncertainty IMHO.</p>
<p>Yes, however, Princeton and others get painted with the same ED brush by most people. I suspect that if they switched to SCEA with the same FA they would get the yield that they desire. In fact I am a bit surprised that they do not get a better yield RD with the FA they provide.</p>
<p>I also appreciate that Princeton provides a credit for private school tuition. BTW, Williams has taken down their online calculator.</p>