I should add, both of mine landed above where their stats alone would have seemed to predict. Because they were true matches for the sorts, attributes, energies that make those schools what they are. I never called “crapshoot” or “lottery.” Nor figured ED, for D2, would “make up for” something missing.
And we were chill about the ED. She’d either get in or not and had her alternates lined up. No nail biting, no frenzied need to game it.
Exactly. If my D wasn’t accepted ED (or if she had chosen not to apply ED) there would have been about 15 applications sent out, lowering acceptance rates at those colleges. Multiply that by the large number of kids we know who applied early, and the thousands across the US who apply ED and all you are going to get is a more competitive RD pool and even lower RD rates of acceptance.
My D’s ED college specially states that there is no stats bump for applying ED and that the ED group has stats at least as high as the RD round. Looking at it from the other side now, we could see that the ED group was comprised of so many recruited athletes and legacy kids that it makes sense why the acceptance rate was higher than that in RD. I think you get a “bump” since colleges want kids who really want to be there, but it’s not the kind of bump that unhooked kids think it is.
“by eliminating ED everywhere, you’ll end up with more apps in the system, and therefore admit rates might not go up.”
I think the bits of data we do have suggest that admits rates go down with ED and go up without ED.
Duke’s ACT score range is 32-35. ND’s ACT score range is 33-35. Both are quite popular schools and fairly similar in terms of selectivity. Both use the Common App. ND has really good yield (53%) without ED. Yet ND’s overall admit rate is 80% higher than Duke’s.
I can’t think of a non-ED reason to explain that. And you see the same pattern with USC and Georgetown versus peer shools that use ED.
Since 80% of the ED appliers don’t get in ED, seems to me that app numbers would not sky rocket. So admit rates would fall. Which would lead perhaps to even fewer overall apps.
Based on anecdotal info that I know from families that got into both, the finaid at Duke tends to be more generous. (Or used to.)
ND can attract a different pool, for various reasons.
What’s the magic in no ED? Wouldn’t you like to know who’s serious, if you were on the other side? We like NW, he matches in all the ways we want, is ready to commit, let’s take him. Versus we like him, but have no idea his intentions.
How often, IRL, do you settle for Maybe? For an important hire or even an invite? Maybe we’ll get him, maybe some other school is his beloved?
“Exactly. If my D wasn’t accepted ED (or if she had chosen not to apply ED) there would have been about 15 applications sent out, lowering acceptance rates at those colleges.”
That’s not the whole equation. 20% of ED applicants get in. Fewer apps from them.
But 80% of ED applicants don’t get in. So lots of apps from them.
But if you got rid of ED, admit rates would rise for the entire system. So you’d expect fewer apps (not more) as admit rates rise.
Net effect is hard to tell. Maybe mild decrease or mild increase in apps. Or no change in apps. But no reason to think huge spike.
This is going to sound like one of those “To hold up his pants” kind of answers, but… ND’s rate is higher than Duke’s because they get 40% fewer applications and accept 23% more students (roughly). The ACT thing could be explained by institutional preference. Why does Duke get more applications? I don’t know. East coast location? Basketball team? Weather?
Huh? I am guessing you mis-typed something here or left out a word. Please clarify if that it so, and if not I apologize and offer the following:
Yes there is, @MamaBear16 gave it, and you quoted it in your very post.
When you are talking about the Penn, Brown, Vandy, Duke tier, your ED admit rate is 25% or less.
“Why would falling rates lead to fewer overall apps?”
Overall admit rates would be higher if there was no ED. Because yield would have to go down.
Some kids who today only submit one app would do more apps. But other kids who submit 15 apps today would submit fewer. Since they would be facing easier/higher admit rates than the very low rates you see today at the RD stage.
But you have to run the experiment to be sure how it would work out. Quite likely the number of apps doesn’t move that much either way as the system normalizes.
Plenty of schools do just fine without using ED – HYPSM plus GT, ND, USC. Duke, Brown, Penn and Vandy would do just fine too without it.
With the benefit of dialing back the arms race and gamesmanship that comes from having 50% of the seats allocated via ED.
Do all those ED kids REALLY love Duke or Brown or NW or Penn above all others? Or do a bunch of them figure they are dumb if they fail to shoot their one silver bullet?
What a mess you’re proposing.
Limit the number a kid can apply to, fewer apps received by colleges, there’s your higher admit rate. You have no idea whether kids would submit fewer.
As it is, the Ivies and SM are receiving too many apps to reasonably handle. And while reviewing the tsunami, trying to figure yield.
Again, no one should apply ED unless their first choice is set and makes sense.
But more shutouts to students who did not receive the best college counseling.
This is the main flaw in your logic – that there is somehow an easier way in because of no ED. That the pie is bigger because it’s cut a different way, and that applicants would have a better chance.
The only thing that reduces demand is increase in supply.
I am sure I am on the verge of getting the “is not a debate society” warning, so I close my position with that point. 
That’s how it is, today, ucb.
Maybe if you could only apply to 5 or 8, you’d pick more wisely, focus less on wild hare reaches, have the right balance of matches and safeties…and research the heck out of your choices and your true match. I really detest this WTH, blindly throw my hat in the ring, it’s all a crapshoot, thing that weighs down the process.
Granted, my perspective is a reach school. But I firmly believe that, the more you know, the better you can target to your choices. That’s part of why we didn’t focus on the X% vs Y% vs Z% thing, didn’t shred those hairs, in our kids’ searches.
Earlier, nw spoke of needing to apply to more selectives, to increase your odds of one or two acceptances. Not in my book. You increase your shot by not applying blindly.
Congrats on your success with your kids - but what does that have to do with this conversation?
I’m wondering if some people are unnecessarily taking this conversation personally. I think earlier someone said that they were “offended” by Bruni’s article. I don’t get that - unless you think it’s a personal attack on your child?
If someone said that the SAT was unfair to certain ethnic groups - would parents whose kids did well on the SAT be offended by that statement?
You’ve been on CC for a year, and you don’t know that the answer to your question is clearly yes?
You may have missed my other posts. While some are narrowly focused on some “-ish” increase in odds, or which college says what about any “advantage,” several of us are saying it’s more than whether there is or isn’t some small perceived boost. To work ED, you need to know what you’re doing. And despite the common CC refrain that it’s all a mystery, throwing up their hands, there is info to learn and go on.
Again, “unfair” implies it’s someone or something else’s fault. “Unwise” was the original suggested replacement word, for jumping into ED if you can’t afford the school, need to compare offers, are chasing merit, undecided, not prepared, etc, etc.
Standardized testing isn’t a choice. In all but a few cases, it’s mandated. ED is an option.
Last post from me. I promise.
The main argument why ED is not so bad is that everyone is free to play the game. Or not. Free country. And if you are not 100% sure on your #1 school, then you should stay out of the game and there will be plenty of other good choices available.
My $0.02 is that’s not what is actually happening. Let’s take Northwestern as the example to prove that the acceleration of ED is more about gaming your chances.
In 00-01, NW got 801 ED apps and filled 21% of its seats through ED. 5.4% of apps were ED.
In 06-07, NW got 1,208 ED apps and filled 25.6% of its seats through ED. 6.6% of apps were ED.
In 15-16, NW got 2,667 ED apps and filled 47.6% of its seats through ED. 8.3% of apps were ED.
As compared to 15 years ago, do you think there are three times as many high school kids that just truly totally love NW to the exclusion of all other schools?
Or does that trend reflect that more kids/families have figured out the odds of the game. And are changing their behavior accordingly to maximize their chance to get into a top school?
Note that NW’s extensive use of ED doesn’t seem to be doing much to tamp down the overall number of apps. 14,725 in 00-01. 18,385 in 06-07. 32,122 in 15-16. I’d argue the ED gaming of the system (which drastically lowers the RD admit rates) is one of the drivers of that big app increase (most of which are RD).
"Or does that doubling reflect that more kids/families have figured out the odds of the game. And are changing their behavior accordingly to maximize their chance to get into a top school?’
Yes, of course. Parents and kids feel that its you have a better chance with ED so they ED the top choice-many times highest reach- that is on their kids list. IF they can afford it (especially if they KNOW they will be full pay).
Correct
Of course not. But so what? (EVERY policy has unintended consequences.)
Not sure that they care (much). Yes, I realize that was not your point, but again so what? So apps increase at highly selective schools, (some/many of those apps are from Internationals looking for a free ride)?
Sure, from a public perspective it ain’t great, but is it really a BIG societal problem if the HYS admission rate drops to 1% over the next decade? Contrast that (first world?) problem with the inner-city drop out rate that remains close to 50% in some urban areas.
I don’t get the fuss over ED. My family is low income and we felt zero risk about my son applying ED. If the financial aid is not enough then you can refuse admission. In our case, our first son applied EA to a top 20 school and got great aid. He did not apply ED anywhere because he wasn’t sure where he wanted to go, but it wasn’t about shopping for aid. He applied only to schools that meet all financial need. And they were true to their word. The next time around with our second son, he applied ED to a top 10 school (meets all need) and got great aid. But even if they hadn’t, you can opt out of ED acceptance on that basis.