<p>According to College Board:</p>
<p>Percent applicants admitted: 31%</p>
<p>However,
Number of early decision applications received: 409
Number admitted under early decision plan: 212</p>
<p>212/409= .518
(.518)(100)= 51.8%</p>
<p>Those of us who applied ED are statistically more likely to get in.
!!!</p>
<p>It’s true!
adshuikh</p>
<p>:( oh no!! well thats good for you, good luck!!</p>
<p>for me there are only two results, AD or REJ
TvT</p>
<p>Lorraine, don’t worry –there are lies, damned lies, and statistics</p>
<p>The vast majority of students that Barnard admits are admitted in the RD round – something like 85%. (I’ve done the math before in another thread). The ED pool is not comparable to the RD pool for a number of reasons. Using figureskaters stats, at best, 86 ED applicants were admitted who would not have been admitted anyway in the RD round.</p>
<p>I didn’t want to rain on figureskater’s parade because she is eagerly awaiting ED results – but I think that there is a very small number of students under narrow circumstances who may benefit from ED. You can’t draw any conclusions about “chances” without knowing the overall composition of both applicant pools.</p>
<p>I think that number is very decieving… The group of girls who decide to apply to ED are probably a self-selective group.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So are you basically agreeing that lower-scoring students benefit when they apply ED to Barnard?</p>
<p>from what I’ve seen and the ED Results thread I’ve read…applying ED vs RD doesn’t affect your chances that much. Like the person above me said, the ED is very self-selecting.</p>
<p>The ED and RD applicant pools are quite different. The ED pool is highly self-selecting, with a high percentage of applicants who would have been admitted RD. The RD pool includes many more “reach” apps because so many can be sent to many schools, but only one “reach” app can be sent at ED time, making the ED acceptance rate appear higher for most apps.</p>
<p>Well, I think that if the adcom is on the fence about a certain student and that student happened to have applied ED (especially if they weren’t requesting financial aid) it could probably be a deciding factor. But someone with no hooks, ECs, and 1700 SATs certainly isn’t going to get in just because they applied ED.</p>
<p>:/ well I feel silly.
still, I like my math.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think so; I feel that higher scoring students might have improved chances when applying ED to Barnard. I assume that during ED, all colleges select among hooked applicants and the highest scoring in the applicant pool; and ED applicant pools tend to be made up of stronger students.</p>
<p>In the RD round, because there are so many applicants, a high-stat applicant who does not have remarkable EC’s or stand out from the pack in other ways may essentially get lost in the shuffle; or the ad com might assume that a particularly strong applicant is using Barnard as a backup for other schools (particularly Columbia), and waitlist that student rather than offer a space that they believe the applicant will turn down. (I believe that the Barnard admissions staff might be particularly keen on trying to avoid admitting students that they feel are probably applying to Columbia as well, and are highly likely to be accepted at Columbia.)</p>
<p>I don’t see how ED can possibly improve chances for unhooked, low scoring applicants. You would have to assume that ad coms work against their own interests, thinking: “Hmmm, we know that we will have 10 times as many applicants to choose from next month, let’s tie up some spaces with weaker students.” </p>
<p>If a school is need aware, then of course they’ve got an interest in filling slots with full-pay students who have promised to attend – and ED certainly allows them to do that – but Barnard claims to be need-blind, so except for development cases, ability to pay is probably not a hook in the ED round.</p>
<p>^Okay I get it now</p>