The Plague of ‘Early Decision’

Parent Cafe
141

Very low income kids do NOT necessarily know the outcome except maybe at schools that are no-loan (which is very few).

I was a pell-eligible kid. I applied to selective LAC’s that met full need. Every single one that accepted me offered a package that would have made it possible for me to go. But t here were small differences in net prices, and pretty significant differences in how big the loan portions of the packages were. I picked the cheapest, lowest-loan option.

Now, the differences in net price were amounts that I would consider irrelevant at my current income level (maybe $1000). But to a lower-income family like the one I grew up in, those differences mattered. My parents were very committed to my education and would have paid the higher amount if that had been the only option. And if I had applied to ED and the offer had been at that amount, that’s what they would have done. But it was much better for us to be able to look at all the offers and say “Hey, this might not have been my absolute top choice but it’s a great option and will cost less and leave me with less debt at the end.”

142

LF – No problem with kids/families taking advantage of the market/system that is presented to them (legacies, ED, athlete hooks, merit aid, etc.). And clearly ED works out great for some of those kids/families who play.

But that doesn’t change the fact that binding ED is a mildly sleazy practice set up to benefit the schools rather than the kids. ED contains a whiff of used car salesmanship – “Special one time deal good only for today-- but the deal’s off if you leave to shop at the lot across the street.”

You have to respect the selective schools that abstain from ED and SCEA (USC, Georgetown, UVA, Notre Dame) and are fine living with the un-gamed yield and admit rate statistics as compared to their peer schools. They are fine if some of their non-binding early admits (yes I know USC does nothing early) also get into other swanky schools and choose to enroll there; they also probably enroll their share of kids who turn down swankier schools.

But JHS makes a very important point.

It is one thing for a school to use ED or some other mechanism to manage their business. Everybody has a budget to meet. But it seems like Penn’s market innovation from the 1980s (which turned out to be HUGELY successful for Penn – USNWR #20 in 1990; #8 in 2017) has gotten out of hand.

Getting a quarter of your students from ED is one thing. Getting half your students that way makes it feel more like a racket.

143

I guess I’m confused over the level of frustration some seem to be expressing. Do your homework and find the best opportunity for you. No one blinks an eye over athletes who may not meet the qualifications of the rest of the admitted class. As for FA, it’s the only expressed way to break the ED agreement. It’s the decision of the student and their family exclusively. At that point, continue to shop for merit or a more favorable package.

144

MM – I think it is a matter of degree.

Is allocating 50% of your seats to athletes the same thing as 15%?

Is allocating 50% of your seats to legacies the same thing as 15%?

Is allocating 25% of your seats to ED the same as 54% (Penn) or 51% (Vandy) or 50% (Northwestern)?

145

Don’t do Early, if it doesn’t work for you.
I’ve never said it’s the only way or looked at it as improving chances in a meaningful way. Instead, it’s a dance-

If you’re ready to commit to X, if accepted and the aid fits, feel free to apply Early. They’ll give you a sooner answer and expect your commitment.

If you want to play the field, do so. But some here are calling it underhanded. Seems you’re bothered how it affects (it keeps being repeated) RD chances. You’re focused, it seems to me, on the wrong piece of the puzzle. That is, your belief you can up the odds, even a fraction being so important. Do you realize it’s not just an odds game, the more competitive the tier? You have to match, it needs to show you will fit and thrive, how you add to their community. No dart throwing, rather your actual whole app and their judgment.

This isn’t concert tickets where you stay up all night for the order line to open. It’s not getting mad cuz they said the line would open at 6am and they snuck in buyers at 4am. And there you are at daybreak, with nary a chance. Lol.

146

LF. This comes around to the wealthy simply because having money gives you “options”. To a middle class family they do not have the “option” to apply ED to get into the first batch of 50% seats allocated during ED because they do not have the funds for full pay. The wealthy ED student could then be deferred into the RD pool, thus getting a second shot. The middle class student is relegated to the RD pool after half the seats are taken.

It is pretty simple to see how this system benefits the colleges and wealthy. Is anyone surprised? I doubt it. The kings and queens always had it different. Life is not fair.

147

Read Lookingforward’s last post and then read it again and again.

Most of the kids that I know in real life over the last few years assumed it was EXACTLY the concert ticket analogy. A kid who is destined for Muhlenberg or Juniata (just based on stats alone, never mind not having everything else) doesn’t magically move to the head of the line for Penn or JHU by virtue of applying early. And all the analysis of the numbers and regurgitation of ten year old studies doesn’t change that. These are kids with a zero chance of getting into Penn. Applying early doubles that zero chance to exactly zero.

Moreover, the kid who is marginal (at best) for Dartmouth or Middlebury isn’t “risking” anything by not applying early. That’s the kid who is giving up the certainty of getting in early to a college which would so love to have him/her that they are going to admit him/her in December. And would admit him/her in April.

I think people have a fundamental misunderstanding of statistics when they read the numbers. It’s not that a particular kid- who doesn’t have a shot- gets a BETTER shot by applying early. That kid isn’t getting in, no way no how. The percentage of the class that gets locked in early doesn’t change THIS kid’s odds. The fact that the chunk which gets locked in early includes the athletes or the soon-to-win Intel or the RSI kids and the soon-to-be-announced Presidential Scholars- again- not relevant, because this particular kid is none of these things and is not getting in.

This is what is so sad about many kids application strategy. Predicated on a fundamental misunderstanding of how the adcom’s are matching up what they want with what they see.

True story- a young prodigy (very young, and truly a prodigy, not just a suburban kid in a gifted program) admitted early to one of the HYP’s a few years ago even though College Board messed up and never sent his scores. As in- never sent his scores. College never emailed to say, “what the heck, where are your SAT’s”, they just admitted him. The transcript was screwy and hard to understand (combination of home schooling, a few community college courses, some wacky mess up’s with AP’s at the high school due to scheduling issues with his main EC in which he was world class). This HYP didn’t care that they had no GPA or class rank or scores. He sent in his bit- they accepted him- and in May he got a form letter asking for his SAT’s just to “complete the file”, i.e. allow the college to complete the data dump.

This is one reason why looking at the early vs. regular admission rates is so misleading if you try to apply the “rate” to your own kids chances of admissions. You don’t see the applications; you don’t see the talent pool. You know the three kids from your town who got denied last year in the early pool and think your kid can buck the tide.

If your kid is admittable in the regular round, loves the college as a clear first choice, and you can afford the package on the NPC- then apply early. But to think that early is going to “upgrade” your kid into a different tranche by virtue of being early at one of the mega-competitive schools- no, that doesn’t happen.

148

I am not sure what student athletes have to do with this discussion. That’s an entirely different discussion. Early Decision generally improves chances of admission, but some cannot participate because of economics. Everyone seems to agree with that and some say, “it does, but so what”. For most people (those in middle and upper middle class incomes with more than one child), money matters and ED is not a choice. We have to explain the hard facts to our kids. At 16 & 17, most don’t understand what debt really is or that college is really a financial decision.

149

“But to think that early is going to “upgrade” your kid into a different tranche by virtue of being early at one of the mega-competitive schools- no, that doesn’t happen.”

“I’ve never said it’s the only way or looked at it as improving chances in a meaningful way.”

I think you guys have it wrong. Because ED does improve chances in a very significant way. And no one has said that ED is going to move a kid from Bohonk U. to Penn or Northwestern. That’s silly.

Let’s say there’s a kid who is competitive for admission at the Duke/Northwestern/Penn/Vandy group of schools. That kid very significantly INCREASES their chances of admission at one of those schools by choosing to go ED. That’s the deal that those schools dangle. And since the chances of RD admission are so low at those schools (largely due to the yield and admit rate effects of ED), the “game theory” tells you to pick one of those to go ED, even if you really aren’t totally sold on that school over all the others.

I’ve experienced ED, EA and RD with my three kids. For my youngest/most recent applicant, we ended up not going ED because the top choice (but not the 100% choice) was Notre Dame which only does EA. Had the top choice (but not the 100% choice) been Vandy or Northwestern or Penn, my kid likely would have gone ED even though the kid wasn’t 100% locked/loaded on that school. Because the game tells you you are pretty much stupid if you don’t do that.

I find that a mildly sleazy thing for Vandy/Penn/NW to do, and I respect ND for not doing that. But clearly this is a first world problem.

YMMV.

150

.

ED in and of itself does not necessarily increase the chances of admission at these schools. You’d have to be able to look at the qualifications of the ED and RD application pools. The adcoms don’t give us that information. However, it’s a safe bet that the ED pool is stronger. It’s filled with applicants who’ve gotten their application together earlier, who generally aren’t scrambling at the last moment. It’s got the legacy kids who know that they can only play that card during ED (Penn is infamous for this). And the athletic recruits of course. The kid who’s competitive for admission without any of those hooks is not necessarily advantaged by applying ED within that group.

There ARE schools where applying ED can give a boost. Further down the selectivity scale that’s certainly true; for example, over on the Jewish B Students thread it was well known that applying ED to Elon was a good idea for those with a slightly weaker academic profile.

151

Again, the Harvard quote fits. There’s an assumption the top schools are dumb, greedy, and out to find the next sucker. Maybe it’s some convoluted self defense tactic for some families, but Geez. Work on your own understanding of what that college really looks for, what they actually say, whether you do match (beyond stats and some desperate desire to go to the best school that’ll take you.) Present a great app and supps, not just the generic, “Here I am, here are my passions, my leader titles in hs clubs, I’m special, I really want you.”

I’d bet this thread will cycle back, yet again, to some boost in Early. But you get in because you’re the right fit for them, regardless of when you apply. And based on institutional needs, of course. If you want to game it, do so with savvy, an awareness of what really matters to them, not just your hs glory.

@MassDad68 not just the wealthy. Or any synonym for that. Why can’t a middle class family run NPCs? Why assume they have to be full pay, if the NPC shows otherwise, a do-able package? And if it does not, neither ED nor RD to that school are sensible, in the first place.

Btw, that school I know most about is so proud of the number of first gens and low SES that they admitted in the first round just now. They meet full need, they have a Net Price Calculator online. They took a group of kids they’re excited about, who applied well. Not the first hundred in line at 4am.

ps. Athletes came up because they fill a chunk of the Early slots, thus throwing off the supposed better rate of acceptance. Most of them, recruited, pre-read and endorsed, have a special chance. And they’re a not-incidental number of the total admitted in that round.

152

“ED in and of itself does not necessarily increase the chances of admission at these schools.”

From the Duke website:

“There is an advantage in the admissions process to applying Early Decision. In 2015-2016, we admitted 24% of students who applied Early Decision and 9% of students who applied Regular Decision.”

So Duke is lying about what they say they do? So they are defrauding kids into applying ED? That would be really really really sleazy thing for them to do.

153

Duke is not defrauding kids. However, Duke is also not mentioning that the ED applicant pool differs from the RD applicant pool and that this difference in the applicants may contribute to the difference in acceptance rates.

154

Is Northwestern lying about this too?

“Applicants who choose Early Decision send a strong, positive message to Northwestern. Given their high level of interest and overall academic and personal strength, Early Decision applicants experience a higher rate of admission.”

155

Only if you are a great candidate, one of blossom’s points. No boost for the middling kid who simply throws his hat in the ring.

Some here DO think a Duke is defrauding- most of this thread claims that Early is a scam, a trap, a spiderweb and families are powerless to avoid the crazy vortex.

See this from the college’s perspective. They get a real pool of kids not treating it like scattershot, Kids wiling to say, you take me and you offer the right aid, and I will come. From those, they pick the best. Not every fourth kid and you darned well better be in line right away.

Don’t jut quote the words, northwesty, and miss what this is really like.

And remember, this is still holistic.

156

Dunno about the ins and outs of Duke’s ED. At the very least, Duke is being disingenuous. The presence of the athlete cohort in ED bumps up the admissions rate. That advantage doesn’t spread to everyone in the ED round. Again–you can’t fairly compare admissions odds without knowing what the application pools are like. Duke doesn’t give that info. No school gives that info!

I’d wager that Duke, like many other ED schools, is trying to snag top applicants who are perhaps wavering between an SCEA school versus the better odds of applying ED to a slightly less uber-selective school. Which would translate to an ED application pool that is–surprise!–academically stronger than the RD pool. Which then results in a higher acceptance rate.

157

Wake Forest lying too?

“Early Decision applicants are given some preference in the admissions process.”

158

“Applicants who choose Early Decision send a strong, positive message to Northwestern.” Yes, of course. That does count for a great deal, because schools would like to protect their yield. So if you are a great applicant, and you want to reassure a school that it is your top choice, ED is a powerful way to wave the flag.

That’s why D1 applied ED. Too many students from her high school applied to her top choice as an RD match/safety. The adcoms weren’t stupid, and RD admissions rates from her high school had dropped. She wanted to be absolutely sure that the adcoms knew she would come if admitted. Should she have been admitted during RD regardless? Yes.

159

northwesty, ditto for all of these. “given some preference” can mean anything for the unhooked. It’s highly unlikely to mean “we’ll spot you an extra 50-100 points on the SAT”, or “if you were on the bubble as an applicant during RD, you’re much more likely to get in.” It’s the quid pro quo. The student is saying “you’re my top pick, and if you admit me I will attend.” The school is saying “OK, we don’t have to worry that you’re waiting to see if Stanford admits you, which given your stats seems not impossible, so we will snag you now.”

160

“Should she have been admitted during RD regardless? Yes.”

But WOULD she have been admitted over all those other kids during RD?

If your kid got no admissions advantage by applying ED, then your kid got played. All you got was the same answer earlier, which of course could be accomplished by the school merely having non-binding EA.

Come on. You doth protest too much. You know your kid got a boost by applying ED and giving up some other alternatives.

How much of a boost is hard to quantify. But it would be outrageously unethical for Duke or NW to tell ED kids there’s an advantage when there’s not one.