My HS junior has 2300 SAT, 3.98 UW GPA and 4.72 W GPA and above average EC. She is trying to decide if she should apply EA or not. From my point of view since the odds of getting into Stanford are so low, I do not want her to ended up with rejection so early in the process with no acceptances until April. Are any benefits applying early if she is not a legacy or an athlete?
Having been through this process this year, with a kid who was deferred from her restricted EA choice, my advice is to avoid it. The SCEA process forced her to put all her eggs in one basket and really focused too much energy on the one school. It became do or die on that one school, and the stress leading up to decision release, and the sadness afterwards made December a really unpleasant month. Her public schools (the only ones you’re allowed to apply to at the same time as an REA/SCEA school like Stanford) were not rolling, so she didn’t have any acceptances to feel good about until January. At this point, with an Honors acceptance to the state flagship in her pocket and 8 more decisions pending in March, she is relaxed and talks about her matches as well as her reaches and is way less anxious than she was in December waiting for the SCEA result.
TL;DR version of my advice.
- Try to avoid SCEA if you can. If there are multiple schools that the kid likes, you are way better off with non restricted EA - apply to a bunch of them so you aren’t putting all the focus on just one place.
- If the kid is set on one of the SCEA schools, find some rolling admissions public schools that should give a safety acceptance prior to the SCEA results and put those applications in along with the SCEA app.
I somewhat disagree…
Definitely apply EA if you think you have a good shot. Be honest with yourself, and think about whether you’re in the top quarter of applicants (and almost all of the applicants will have scores about the same as the ones you put up). If you honestly think your ECs and awards will put you near the top, then definitely apply EA.
Why EA? It removes a lot of the noise. A lot of fantastic, highly qualified applicants don’t get into universities simply because of the noise… it’s exceedingly difficult to find their application in a sea of 40,000 others. That’s what EA helps with. They’ll take a little longer look at the app, and it’ll have a little less noise around it.
EA (as opposed to ED) does not really offer an increased chance of admission for the average student. It helps with avoiding the “slipped through the cracks” phenomenon that some top students experience.
I agree with both posters. My high functioning daughter was also deferred from her SCEA choice in December, though she knew going in that it was a reach, not only because it is for most applicants no matter how high functioning, but also for us financially as we are unlikely to get any need based aid, and the $60,000+ bill is more than we can pay out of pocket while avoiding loans (our goal). I do think her shot was greater SCEA, and now in RD she will be lost in the “noise.” She did get into public schools with scholarships and honors college offers before the SCEA decision came out which did help with the sting of deferral. However, had she not done SCEA, she could have done EA (unrestricted) at all of the private schools that she has applied to since, all of which have merit scholarship opportunities, and we might know or have an idea of where she will be going by now rather than stuck in this limbo until the end of March or early April. Hindsight is 20/20. As a parent I am finding the waiting difficult, though my daughter takes it in stride–or is simply too busy with projects and extra scholarship applications that include the endless writing of essays to be anxious.
A word in favor of SCEA: If your kid is accepted, the stress is over (assuming you can afford it). You can still apply to other schools, but that (large) share of mind that goes into generating college applications and the stress of waiting for results is freed up for other activities. If your kid is rejected, it was a long shot anyway - your don’t apply with any expectations to schools with this level of selectivity, so any disappointment should be minor. If the disappointment if major then its time to recalibrate your expectations more generally, while there’s time to make sure that you have good match and safety options. If you are deferred, it’s just validation that your application was good enough for that caliber of school and good news will be coming - if not from Stanford than from other schools. For all these reasons, SCEA is a good way to go.
I firmly believe that every kid should apply somewhere early—but it must be to the right school. The early “programs” be they early decision or early action (or some other flavor) deals each kid a great card for admissions. The kid can waste this card by either not applying early or by applying early to a school that is beyond her reach.
Recently, I was at a session with the dean of admissions at MIT. It was a private session for only staff and faculty, and the dean seemed to be very candid. It was about college admissions in general, not about admission to MIT. He said, “You almost always get a boost by applying early. At some schools it is a little boost; at other schools it is a much bigger boost. Many schools are not honest about this. You will have to figure it out on your own.”
My subsequent investigations confirmed that he was dead on. You must understand that deans of admissions are judged in part on their admit rate. Heck, it goes into the USNWR rankings. All schools want every kid in America (every kid in the world?) to apply to their school. Then they want every admitted kid to matriculate. Why do you think Harvard just did a big outreach to increase the number of applicants? They were only admitting 6% of the applicants before. Why do you think Stanford sends handwritten notes to students admitted early? I know, my daughter received one last year.
I believe there is a small boost to applying early to Stanford. Why else would Stanford have early admissions and prohibit you from applying to any other private school? The private schools are their only serious competitors (really only HYPMC). The protestations of the admissions office are an example of a school not being totally forthcoming.
At other schools the boost can be much greater. Any school that is binding early means you get a big boost by applying early. Remember, one of the very top goals of any admissions office is to lower the admit rate. What better way to do so than by admitting someone you know will enroll because they must enroll?
The decision where to apply early—where to play your one early card—is one of the most important decision any kid can make at this stage of the game. (I’m obviously talking about next year.) Many kids waste their card by applying early to their dream school even though even with the early card they have no realistic shot of getting admitted. Here is a link to a very good analysis of this choice by one of the top secondary schools in the country:
http://www.lakesideschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=204&nid=813413&rc=0
Should your daughter apply early to Stanford? A college counselor once told me that a kid should apply early to a “near reach.” This is sage advice. But who is a “near reach” for Stanford? Forget about recruited athletes, they are in a different category. There are a lot of kids with top boards and grades who are denied at Stanford. Complicating the fact is that Stanford’s admission is somewhat “quirky.” Ask yourself: Is there something that really makes your daughter stand out in this crowded and talented field? My daughter had two major international awards (one awarded to about 30 kids a year and the other awarded to about 40 kids a year) and is a primary legacy. She was probably number one in her class (the school won’t release this info) with near perfect board scores (for instance, four 800s on SAT II). The school sends about 1/3 of its graduates to the Ivies, Stanford, MIT, Caltech, and the Little Three. We decided she was a “near reach” for Stanford. She applied early and was admitted.
My niece applied early to Yale this year. She has very high board scores (north of 2350) and almost perfect grades from a so-so large public high school that seldom sends kids to top schools. She has no distinguishing EC or awards. A very nice kid. She was deferred at Yale. I thought it was a bridge too far, but I kept my mouth shut. Perhaps she will get into Yale on the regular round, but I doubt it. I think she would have been better off applying binding early to Amherst, a school that interests her almost as much as Yale. The Lakeside link is directly relevant here.
There are no easy answers to this tough but important question. I think it is the one part of the college admissions process that most kids need the most help. Hope my thoughts help.
Great article @fredthered . It is very difficult to estimate true standing in the application pool for a particular child. Tests and GPA aside I have difficulties estimating level of her EC. With a few state and regional sport awards and few good leadership positions in her other ECs, freelance job since last year , DD does not have any international recognitions as your D had. She spent too many years committing to the sport that took almost all of her time outside the school for many years. But she did not make a National Team, only regional and participated in National level competitions for a few years, but again, did not rank in a first 12. The other SCEA she is considering is Caltech, where she might have a boost due to a gender card, but I do not know if she will be happy at Caltech since it might be too challenging for her.
This is an easy choice. You should go EA on your first choice, realistically attainable school (that will be affordable, considering aid, etc.).
You can do all others RD. That way, you are likely to have a bird in the bag fairly early, which gives you some latitude in how much gymnastics you do to support all the other applications.
@seal16 I would definitely have your daughter apply EA—despite what many colleges say, the odds of getting in are higher, ranging from slightly to significantly. But I would also insist that she complete and submit applications to her other top choices before hearing the EA decision. That will focus her on other schools too and make things easier if she ends up getting deferred or rejected. My son applied to Yale EA and got in, but he also applied to four other schools (plus three state schools, which had early deadlines) he was seriously interested in. If he hadn’t gotten into Yale, over Christmas break he would have applied to an additional four schools he was also very interested in. I think even having to apply to just four then would have been hard for him—the wind would have been taken out of his sails. So in my opinion the best strategy, though not an inexpensive one, is to apply early but also finish and submit as many other applications as possible before hearing. Then if your daughter gets in, she can relax a bit and see whether she gets into any of the others and, if financial aid is a concern, compare offers. If she doesn’t get in, at least she’ll have finished most of the work before Christmas break.
@seal16 Just to be clear, the other schools my son applied to were all RD.
I’ll chime in again the SCEA. I watched 2 friends have their kids try it this year with Stanford, and neither got in. (We do know others who did, so it’s not a lost cause…). But the stress of the deferral/denial in December is worse because there are so many great non-restricted EA schools that your D won’t be able to apply to. Those can really help cushion the blow for future rejections. Instead both of these kids are sitting on no acceptances (UCs haven’t sent out decisions yet) at this late date and both are very stressed about it. Ultimately it’s up to your D whether or not to take the chance, but having some nice acceptances in December has made senior year much less stressful for my D and many of her friends.
Seal16: I’m not sure there is a gender card to be played at Caltech. Caltech is very different than other schools on admissions. URM doesn’t matter. Legacy doesn’t matter. Athletics doesn’t matter. It is only academic achievements and academic promise that matters.
All of the other top schools are essentially 50/50 male/female. Do you think this is chance? Caltech is 60/40.
If your daughter is very strong in math and science, there might be a gender card at the other top schools (although I’m not sure of this). But I would question whether it would help at Caltech.
Having said this, I think Caltech is an amazing school. In some respects, it is a model for what top colleges should be. On the other hand, if you go there and determine that math or science is not for you, don’t know if it is the best choice ex post.
@MamaBear16 That is why I am against her applying SCEA to Stanford. She does not have any other EA schools on her list, with exception of Caltech. She plans to apply to schools only in California and will be waiting on UCs decisions until April.
@fredthered She is a science kid, but she is not quirky as I think majority of extremely talented people are.
Read @fredthered’s (legacy and parent) long response very carefully. And @N’s Mom response (she is legacy, parent and interviews for Stanford). Those who have used the most sophisticated college counselors in recent years understand that some students/parents think they should apply to another school SCEA in the northeast with “higher” early admit rates (YHP) in lieu of applying to their true “dream” school REA to increase their chances at one of these schools and then apply to Stanford in the regular round…but, the savvy counselors will tell you don’t let the numbers deceive you. Those who apply REA do get a “boost”…
…I recently did a calculation…for those who applied REA last year…the combined total (REA accepted plus REA deferred accepted came close to 900). A lot higher than what the REA applicant numbers would make you assume…
…and to @seal16’s issue regarding legacies and recruited athletes: many of the “recruited” athletes are admitted throughout the application cycle…not just in the early round…and many of the “recruited” athletes are legacies and some URMs as well (so many boxes can be checked off for some candidates). For some strange reason the general public thinks that Stanford recruits a lot of athletes…the fact of the matter is they only “recruit” a small number of the best student athletes who can compete nationally and also meet the stringent academic guidelines…so there aren’t many to choose from each year to be frank. And for the vast vast majority of the Stanford applicants…you are only competing against the academic/scholar/musician/artist/actor/community leader types…
…and last but not least…getting into Stanford in the regular round is extremely more daunting…where you will be competing with those who will have waited just like you. Do you want to be compared with 7,000 or so…or 40,000 or so (many of these already with early acceptances in hand from Harvard, MIT, Caltech, Princeton, Yale, Chicago, Georgetown, etc…along with the vast majority with deferrals from the above schools along with all the other highly selective ED schools like Duke, Columbia, Cornell, Northwestern, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, etc)? Pick your poison…and pick it wisely…because you only get one “best” shot at Stanford…and for most it is in the early round if they have the appropriate credentials…
…hope this helps.
I agree with those advising applying EA (whether that’s at Stanford or elsewhere). The research of Chris Avery and colleagues - the most rigorous analysis I know of - concludes that there is a boost in chances from applying EA, even after accounting for the recruited athletes, legacies etc. in the EA pool.
Not as much of a boost as at ED schools perhaps, for the obvious reason that ED schools are more likely to admit people that they know will attend, which those admitted ED are supposed to unless there are financial issues.
I do think applying ED requires some careful thinking as that’s making a commitment to attend if accepted.
As far as I can see there’s no reason not to apply EA, as long as the student has the application and supporting materials in good shape . . . some boost in admissions chances without making a binding commitment to attend.
Thank you everyone. I completely agree that there is no reason not to apply EA. She just wants to apply EA to Stanford and I think she might or might not have a better chance at Caltech.
I agree that the Avery paper is a good one. People interested in this topic should read it.
The rub with EA is that many of the top schools only allow you to apply to them early. Stanford, HPY fall into this category. MIT and Chicago don’t (I believe).
@seal16 Interesting . . . Stanford and Caltech are a bit of an apples to oranges comparison I think. Certainly the percent of applicants admitted is higher at Caltech - around double the rate at Stanford from what I recall - but FWIW, Caltech also has the highest average SATs of any college in the country and I think has more of a self-selecting applicant pool.
Just a hypothesis, but admission may be a bit more predictable at Caltech - for those few who fall into the category of very high achievers in STEM fields. Not saying it’s easy by any stretch, just that it may be more clear who has a good shot at admissions.
While Stanford also has extremely strong engineering and sciences, there are also many people majoring in English, History, etc. so the applicant pool and process are different (and I would hypothesize, less predictable).
@seal16 - which one is HER top choice? Which one does she want to attend more - Stanford or Caltech? IMO, that is the one to which she should apply. Not the one where you think she might have better chances. Just my $0.02.
I’m really not trying to be snarky. I just think she should decide which one is the one.
@fredthered That’s a pretty interesting piece from Lakeside School in post #5. It’s too bad more kids don’t have access to the kind of counseling that school offers.