<p>Interesting the difference between Pomona and CMC. Who are those very few early accepts at CMC, Xiggi? Do they tend to be athletes?</p>
<p>:) I've got relatives (2) there!! People always skip it in lists of top LACs,
yet it is #7- higher than several schools on your list, with a higher slelectivity % than all but two or three!</p>
<p>Most recent data (class of 200) from website:</p>
<p>24.4% RD admit rate ---- 30% ED admit rate</p>
<p>For ED - 189 acccepted out of 623 applicants.</p>
<p>Stats from another LAC:
Middlebury - Class size 575; 741 ED applicants: ED 1=517 applicants; ED 2=224 applicants; 284 accepted ED (38%) with 257 accepted ED for Sept. ad 2n7 accepted ED for Feb. term.
Large number of ED applicants!</p>
<p>Wow, the ED2 there is hardly worth it, with only 27 kids accepted out of 224 applicants. That has to be less than the RD rate. Now, are most of the kids not accepted ED2 put into the regular pool or rejected. The Wesleyan group (very small sampling so not really significant) I have were rejected ED2.</p>
<p>Jamimon - I think my post may not have been clear. Per Middlebury's website, 284 applicants (from ED 1 and ED 2) were accepted ED. The breakdown wasn't between ED1 and 2 acceptances; the breakdown was as to the number of ED admits for a Sept. start date and a Feb. start date. Middlebury accepts a group of students who won't start school until Feb. 2006. Don't know the answer to your question as to whether most ED rejected applicants spill into the regular pool.</p>
<p>Nedad, I apologize for not listing Bowdoin. However, the "selected" schools was not meant to be exhaustive. In a totally arbitrary way, I wanted to compare the rates at the Ivies+Stanford to a selection of LAC. Before being jumped on for the crime of even proposing that AWS could be compared to HYP -regardless of the side the poster would shoot from- allow me to add that there was nothing scientific to the decision. I picked schools that tend to cause more discussions on CC. To avoid this issue, I may extend the list to include more schools and catch the USNEWS top 15 or 20. </p>
<p>I was -and still am- trying to find the reasons behind the differences in ED/EA applications/admissions between the Ivies and LAC. In addition to the obvious one that is SIZE, I think that other factors play a role. Without scientific proof, I believe that the number of ED applicants may follow the questionable USNEWS rankings, and especially their prestige/reputation rankings. I will have to be careful with early conclusions!</p>
<p>Jamimom, I do not have a good answer for the Pomona/CMC differences in ED. All I can say is that the admissions departments seem to be quite different in policies and culture. One possible explanation is that Pomona has a much stronger alummi base and stronger legacies, especially since CMC is a very young school. However, it is pure and simple speculation on my part.</p>
<p>Here are a few numbers for the Ivies. Please note that the numbers may be inconsistent. The schools tend to find "more" applications after posting press releases. Also, the admissions from the waiting list may not be reported in the same way by the schools. The numbers are, however, accurate enough to show the latest trends in admission. </p>
<p>Classes of 2007 and 2008 </p>
<p>2008 Brown
Total Number Applications Received 15,268
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,412
Overall Acceptance Rate 15.80%
Regular Decision Applications Received 13,387
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 1,874
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 14.00%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 1,907
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 540
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 28.30%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 37.80%</p>
<p>2007 Brown
Total Number Applications Received 15,153
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,258
Overall Acceptance Rate 14.90%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 11.80%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 1,919
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 496</p>
<p>2008 Columbia
Total Number Applications Received 17,258
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,275
Overall Acceptance Rate 13%
Regular Decision Applications Received 15,322
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 1,654
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 11.20%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 1,939
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 560
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 28.90%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 42.50%</p>
<p>2007 Columbia
Total Number Applications Received 16,884
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,293
Overall Acceptance Rate 13%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 11.5%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 2021
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 572
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 28%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 43%
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 22%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants unavailable</p>
<p>2008 Cornell
Total Number Applications Received 20,822
Total Number Applications Accepted 6,130
Overall Acceptance Rate 29%
Regular Decision Applications Received 18,276
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 5,010
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 26.60%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 2,546
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 1,120
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 43.99%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 36%</p>
<p>2007 Cornell
Total Number Applications Received 20,441
Total Number Applications Accepted 6334
Overall Acceptance Rate 31%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 29.40%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 2,729
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 1,110
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 40.70%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 37%</p>
<p>2008 Dartmouth
Total Number Applications Received 11,734
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,173
Overall Acceptance Rate 18%
Regular Decision Applications Received 10,455
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 1,759
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 16.80%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 1,278
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 384
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 30%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 35%</p>
<p>2007 Dartmouth
Total Number Applications Received 11,853
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,099
Overall Acceptance Rate 17.50%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 16%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 1,217
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 394
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 32%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 37%</p>
<p>2008 Harvard
Total Number Applications Received 19,752
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,110
Overall Acceptance Rate 10%
Regular Decision Applications Received 15,801
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 1,208
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 7%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 3,889
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 902
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 23%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants Non binding - 819/1638 OR 50%</p>
<p>2007 Harvard
Total Number Applications Received 20,987
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,094
Overall Acceptance Rate 9.98%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 6.80%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 7,614
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 1,059
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 14%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants non-binding</p>
<p>2008 Penn
Total Number Applications Received 18,278
Total Number Applications Accepted 3,846
Overall Acceptance Rate 21%
Regular Decision Applications Received 11,504
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 2,726
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 17%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 3,387
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 1,120
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 33.10%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 45%</p>
<p>2007 Penn
Total Number Applications Received 18,827
Total Number Applications Accepted 3,858
Overall Acceptance Rate 20.50%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 16.50%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 2,882
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 1,122
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 33%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 47%</p>
<p>2008 Princeton
Total Number Applications Received 13,690
Total Number Applications Accepted 1,732 (101 from waitlist)
Overall Acceptance Rate 12%
Regular Decision Applications Received 11,875
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 1,050
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 8.80%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 1,815
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 581
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 32%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 50%</p>
<p>2007 Princeton
Total Number Applications Received 15,725
Total Number Applications Accepted 1,601 (31 from waitlist)
Overall Acceptance Rate 10%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 10.90%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 2,350
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 591
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 25%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants unavailable</p>
<p>2008 Yale
Total Number Applications Received 19,674
Total Number Applications Accepted 1,950
Overall Acceptance Rate 9.90%
Regular Decision Applications Received 15,600
Regular Decision Applicants Accepted 1,280
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 8.20%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 4046
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 670
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 16.60%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants non-binding</p>
<p>2007 Yale
Total Number Applications Received 17,731
Total Number Applications Accepted 2,015
Overall Acceptance Rate 11.40%
Regular Decision Acceptance Rate 9.60%
Early Decision/ Action Applications Received 2611
Early Decision/ Action Applications Accepted 557
Early Decision/ Action Acceptance Rate 21%
Percent of Class Filled by Early Applicants 43%</p>
<p>Jamimom, I wonder if the difference in the EDII/ED numbers may be the result of the schools assuming that there is gaming going on. Maybe their thinking is we are seeing many apps from students preferring HYPs, let's wait until the RD round and cherry pick the characteristics we need from a much larger pool of applicants, even though we know we are giving up a few smidgens of yield to do that. I know that thinking is rather convoluted, but when my daughter proposed applying an EDII school, if rejected ED, this was one scenario that I thought of - that in the EDII round the applicant has lost the "love card", so if he has something the school knows they need, well that's great, otherwise the student might be at a disadvantage. I wonder what the deferral rate for EDII is?</p>
<p>what is AWS and LAC?</p>
<p>"I have a few probelms reconciling the reviews and attempts one can read on CC's Wellesley and Smith forums with this statistical fact. "</p>
<p>Gosh, I don't see what's so mysterious. You knock out half the potential applicants by virtue of their Y chromosomes, and then knock out half the remaining by virtual of the fact that their potential classmates won't have Y chromosomes.</p>
<p>It's terrific for those who go!</p>
<p>"what is AWS and LAC?"</p>
<p>AWS = Amherst Williams Swarthmore
LAC = liberal arts college</p>
<p>"Gosh, I don't see what's so mysterious. You knock out half the potential applicants by virtue of their Y chromosomes, and then knock out half the remaining by virtual of the fact that their potential classmates won't have Y chromosomes."</p>
<p>Mini, I do not think that we are addressing the same issues. The "explanation" based on a smaller pool of potential candidates fails to lift the mystery. After all, more than 10,000 women apply ED or SCEA to the Ivies.<br>
I do not have problems understanding the numbers and statistics for Wellesley, and to a smaller extent for Smith. What I do not understand is different, and here it is again: On the one hand, the schools have a fanatical group of supporters who extol the greatness of the school and do not hesitate to compare -and often positively- to the more prestigious LAC or even to the Ivies. According to this group, the schools offer an education that is out-of-this-world - a fact which I agree with wiithout hesitation . On the other hand, only a few hundreds applicants indicate that the schools represent a clear FIRST choice. With ED acceptances rates of 68% and 81%, it is hard to argue that the schools accept a VERY large number of candidates. I do not know about you, but if I knew that Smith or Wellesley were my first choice, I would jump at the opportunity given by such skewed and generous admissions' rates. So, why is the total of ED candidates so low compared to the RD numbers of close to 3,000 and 4,000 for both schools?</p>
<p>Xiggi, this is just one parent's observation, so take it for what it's worth...only now, after months of (my) casual comments on the potential benefits of going to a women's college is my daughter even willing to look at a website. She vowed long ago that she would not consider a women's college, and only by pointing out the proximity of Barnard/Columbia has she (grudgingly) agreed to a peek at their website. From my reading on the Smith board, I gather that this initial attitude in not unusual. This would seem to rule out ED for many young women; I suspect that a senior year visit is what clinches it for most.</p>
<p>Mine wouldn't have even considered an ED to a women's college (actually, anywhere, because of finances.) She was already attending a co-ed college (Evergreen) and was quite comfortable there. And it was close to the bottom of her stack of applications - until she visited (it wasn't the "second-best alternative" - more like 6th.) Had she not visited, she would be elsewhere. After the visit, it was obvious. Might be different for others.</p>
<p>The admissions folks there will tell you the same thing - if they can get a candidate to the campus, they can compete with anywhere. Anecdotally, I can say it worked for us -- the Ivies fell after visits, as did A. and W. (which I thought would be her first choice.) But they have difficulties getting folks there, which is compounded by their commitment to lower-income students (25% Pell Grant recipients), who have less money to travel. So the women's colleges are clearly NOT the first choice for many applicants (just as I wrote, they lose Y chromosomal applications, and they lose those who believe they need to be around Y chromosomes - and they lose them either as in not applying, or heading to the bottom of the stack.) I just don't see any mystery.</p>
<p>Excerpt from:</p>
<p>THOUGHTS ON EARLY DECISION
Karl Furstenberg, Dean of Admissions & Financial Aid</p>
<p>Much has been written about early admissions programs during the past year. I thought it would be helpful to share a few ideas on this issue because the early decision debate sheds light on a series of questions about the state of selective admissions more broadly.</p>
<p>These questions include: pressure on students, equity and fairness in the admissions process, the integrity of the secondary school educational process, and institutional self-interest.</p>
<p>During the past year many selective colleges, including some Ivies, increased the percentage of their entering class accepted through early decision to more than 50 percent. At Dartmouth we have been quite consistent in recent years in admitting approximately 35 percent of our class through early decision. This proportion seems appropriate given the relative size of the early and regular decision pools. We typically receive 1,200 early decision applications and another 9,200 in regular decision. Our general strategy has been to apply the same criteria in early and in regular and not to attach any particular advantage to early applicants. This approach is strengthened by the fact that admissions decisions are made on a need-blind basis and students receive the same financial aid package whether they apply early or regular decision. </p>
<p>Some colleges and universities, for reasons of self interest, give an advantage to early applicants in a calculated effort to lower admissions rates and increase yield. At Dartmouth, we know that our regular pool represents great academic strength and diversity of backgrounds. Given this, it would be unwise to take a larger number of students early for the purpose of improving admissions statistics. Preserving the majority of spaces in our class for regular decision ensures enrolling the strongest and most interesting class possible.</p>
<p>The critics of early programs argue that early programs create undue pressure on students that accelerates the admissions process earlier and earlier in the high school career. There is no question that today's students are under more pressure but the issues surrounding early admissions may be more a symptom of this pressure than the cause. If early programs were eliminated altogether it might actually
increase pressure surrounding the admissions process. This is because students would not have the option of resolving their college search early and would be likely to submit many more regular decision applications. If applicant pools at selective colleges and universities showed substantial growth, institutions might move application deadlines earlier so as to have enough time to evaluate all the applications received. </p>
<p>If this were the case, all students would need to make their application decisions early in the senior year, not just the relatively small numbers that currently consider this option.</p>
<p>Furthermore, there would be a longer period of uncertainty as students waited until late March or early April for decisions from colleges. The combination of more applications per student and a longer time period to receive decisions would create additional uncertainty and anxiety for students. An unfortunate consequence of this scenario is the likelihood that students would seek more purchased services such as test preparation, private counselors, and essay writing assistance to aid in the admissions process. This, of course, would raise additional concerns about equity and fairness, a major issue in college admissions generally.</p>
<p>In looking toward the future, our plan is to continue Dartmouth's early decision admissions program and to maintain our admissions practice of treating the early and regular applicant pools consistently. On balance we believe that, if used responsibly, students who have a particular college or university as a clear first choice can simplify the admissions process and, if admitted, conclude their college search late in fall without having submitted multiple applications. The sorting out of a portion of the applicant pool early in the year works to everyone's advantage.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The critics of early programs argue that early programs create undue pressure on students that accelerates the admissions process earlier and earlier in the high school career. There is no question that today's students are under more pressure but the issues surrounding early admissions may be more a symptom of this pressure than the cause. If early programs were eliminated altogether it might actually increase pressure surrounding the admissions process. This is because students would not have the option of resolving their college search early and would be likely to submit many more regular decision applications....</p>
<p>Furthermore, there would be a longer period of uncertainty as students waited until late March or early April for decisions from colleges. The combination of more applications per student and a longer time period to receive decisions would create additional uncertainty and anxiety for students. An unfortunate consequence of this scenario is the likelihood that students would seek more purchased services such as test preparation, private counselors, and essay writing assistance to aid in the admissions process. This, of course, would raise additional concerns about equity and fairness, a major issue in college admissions generally.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>While I can see how reasonable people could disagree with this, I tend to agree. Critics claim ED benefits the college more than the student, but it has been a HUGE benefit to my kids (two did ED so far) to be able to spend most of their senior year learning in a relaxed atmosphere, happily secure in where they were headed.</p>
<p>Critics also say, "It's too much pressure to make a decision that early!" Well, many kids have been visiting colleges since junior year (or even before!). Yes, it's too early for those who begin the college search in September or October of their senior year, but everyone we know has been thinking about college for some time; another three months isn't going to make a difference.</p>
<p>For those who think it is unfair because not everyone can choose ED - well, as long as the percentages of the incoming class are not excessive, then I don't really see the "fairness" issue.</p>
<p>Having said all that, it would be better if all colleges just went to EA :)</p>
<p>Here is one for the Ivy's</p>
<p>Putting aside financial aid considerations, I think the binding ED round is closer to an ideal college selection process than the regular round.</p>
<p>To me, the flaw in the whole college application process is that kids are applying to too many colleges. For the kids, this means that they really aren't doing as much self-selection as they should be. From the college's standpoint, they have to process a mountain of apps, the majority from kids who know little or nothing about the school, and who have no intention of enrolling should they be accepted. The "yield" from the RD round is so low, even at the top colleges, that there is essentially no predictability at all. Basically, a big waste of everybody's time: students and adcoms. Even worse, it's a viscious cycle. Applying to more colleges make the game less predictable, and increases the pressure to apply to even more schools.</p>
<p>Contrast that to the ED round. Swarthmore, for example, got 311 ED apps for last fall's class, less than 10% of the apps they got in the RD round. Everyone of these 311 apps has a very high degree of consideration. These aren't "throwaway" apps like half the kids who figure, "yeah, I'll apply Early to Princeton and see what happens". </p>
<p>It takes a very real commitment to apply binding ED to Swarthmore, especially when you figure that the "stats" of these kids would give them many wonderful alternatives. It's a very real statement that, "I've checked you out, I have a pretty good idea what you are all about, and I am sure Swarthmore is for me". Wouldn't every college love for all of their applicants to make that statement?</p>
<p>Plus, the college is getting a stack of applications that is largely pre-culled in terms of academic qualifications. The overall stats of the ED acceptances are basically the same as the overall stats of the freshman class. So, accepting 140 of them (45%) must mean that the pile of 311 had some good stuff in it. These kids did their homework. Yeah, there were probably some reaches in there. But, the ability to read each app thoroughly and weigh the de facto interest in the school probably paid off for some of the reaches.</p>
<p>In effect, the ED round is so much cleaner. No apps from qualified students who have no intention of enrolling. Not too many apps from kids who aren't even in the ball park or who haven't bothered to learn even the most rudimentary information about the college. If the entire college application game had that degree of self-selection, everyone involved would benefit immensely.</p>
<p>sybbie - interesting article but of course it is complete BS. Dartmouth accepted 33,9% of it ED applicants second only to Cornell's 41.7% among Ivy's. It's overall acceptence rate last year was 18%. ED kids are locked in and the institutions so they fall into one of two categories - wealthy or those who will be saddled with enormous loans.</p>
<p>Interestedad, I agree with the advantages of ED. The problem with ED is that it discriminates against those who already have the least amount of flexibility. When you have a kid who absolutely needs financial aid to go to college, and it has to be a set amount, many times due to family situations beyond his control, he cannot be bound into some an agreement. Though the top schools tend to be generous with the aid, there are often families that really should be paying a tidy sum that will not or cannot for some reason, and there has to be other options for such kids. With some early plans, kids cannot even apply to early action schools which compromises them for scholarships. I know one young man who wanted to apply SCEA to Yale, but his family is in a messy divorce situation, and he wasn't sure if the money would be available for college. He applied EA to BC instead in hopes of one of the Presidential awards. It really is already unfair that some kids have to be conscious of cost while for others it is no issue. Binding ED makes this gap even larger.</p>