why were so few rejected in ED for class of 2011

<p>so i was just looking at the stats for ED for class of 2011 and i noticed that a really small amount were flat out rejected, only 100 out of 2000....and all of my friends either got in or, like they mostly did, got deferred. </p>

<p>but why did so few get rejected? sure, maybe they wanted to keep their options open for RD but still 100 is a REALLY small number.</p>

<p>A lot of schools don't reject many ED applicants because, even though the kids would rather just "get it over with," they want to let the alumni parents down a little easier so that they feel like they "almost made it" (and would keep donating money).</p>

<p>A second reason is because the ED pool is self-selected - there are ~2000 good applicants. In RD, you have people applying just because "they have a chance" and so it lowers the acceptance rate. Of course, some people are really good and they wait until RD because they know they can get into all three top Ivies and a few more places. Back to the quality of ED applicants, because most of them are qualified, they are too good to outright reject and would still be competitive in RD.</p>

<p>I think Princeton also only rejected 100 people because of the 1900 others, all of them could contribute something valuable/worthwhile to the Princeton community. Maybe the rejected 100 weren't viewed as being as valuable/worthwhile, but I think that Princeton kind of wanted to be able to compare those that they ended up deferring to the RD pool. Generally, the ED pool is much stronger and they obviously have a high level of dedication to Princeton. Who knows, though, this admissions world/game is crazy.</p>

<p>
[quote]
a high level of dedication to Princeton

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't think I'll ever see a 10-post per minute topic on a COLLEGE forum ever again. It was entertaining, to say the least.</p>

<p>Princeton practices something called courtesy deferrals.If you are even slightly qualified in the ED round, you will at least get deferred. It's not a matter of how much you will contribute to their community or anything. Harvard also practices this.</p>

<p>^^Yeah. The sad fact is that probably (and I'm totally guessing here) only about half of the deferrals are really deferred, meaning they will be looked at again. The rest of the applications are probably never looked through again and they are sent a deferral letter out of politeness. :(</p>

<p>I think they'll look at them again (at least in principle), but if there's nothing new in the application, and it still has the same "fatal flaw" from the ED round, it'll get thrown in the rejection pile really fast. That's why deferrees should send in extra stuff, I think.</p>

<p>I couldn't bring myself to apply anywhere early because I knew that deferral would be so difficult. It's an extension of hope and a simultaneous termination of it; I think the way it swings varies from person to person. I really respect all the ED people who were deferred who have stuck around and tried to improve their applications and are still hopeful, because you all should be!</p>

<p>I think rejection in the ED round is kind of a slap in the face though. I know my friend who got flat-out rejected from Stanford was really surprised and upset by it, and she had fairly good stats. I don't know. This is making me nervous (optimistically nervous, however).</p>

<p>Stanford only defers a few people, I think acceptance rate from a deferal is 10% or so. I got outright rejected by them, which definately sucked but it also gave me a reality check and made me do a lot of things differently, like take all my tests over again, which was a good idea as I did much better. I don't know if I would have done that if I had been deferred.</p>

<p>

My friend was rejected ED from Swarthmore when everyone else in my grade who applied EA/ED somewhere was either deferred or accepted. It was her dream school, she had very good stats (A/A- average, 2200+ SAT), and it would've been a perfect fit... everyone was sure she'd be accepted. I felt so bad for her.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The sad fact is that probably (and I'm totally guessing here) only about half of the deferrals are really deferred, meaning they will be looked at again.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>:eek: that sounds so scary!</p>

<p>Yeah, a boy at my school got deferred from Harvard and everybody was SO surprised because he is a genius (like...he does pure mathematics for fun and corrects our calculus teacher with unheard of mathematical information daily) and had a 2380 SAT with an amazing GPA, salutatorian as of now.</p>

<p>Anyway, he checked his decision in the middle of class.
And it was really awkward.
And he started crying when I went to console him.
Bahhhh.</p>

<p>That would be awkward. I'm going to check my decision with as few people around as possible. First Yale, then Princeton.</p>

<p>but thats interesting that stanford defers only 10% in the EA/ED round compared to Pton....
and a lot of alumni kids get "courtesy deferrals" and Pton is more "nice" to alumni than other schools (which is prob why pton is such a great school, with such a huge endowment)....but what happens to them in the RD round? they get waitlisted?</p>

<p>I really need to figure out what order I'm checking my decisions in.
HYP?
HPY?
YPH?
YHP?
PHY?
PYH?</p>

<p>That looks like a lot of course abbreviations.
It's really prospective checking-orders, just in case anybody missed that. Any advice, though?</p>

<p>I didn't apply to Harvard or Yale, so chances are I'll go from least selective to most selective. At least then I'll have some acceptances in hand before moving on to the rejections (or hopefully not, but you know).</p>

<p>No rejections for cameliasinensis. I just decided that.
And for everybody else too.
We're going to be the first CC Princeton group where NOBODY is rejected.</p>

<p>My optimism is a bit annoying.
But I like it.</p>

<p>

ooh, I like that idea!</p>

<p>Check them in reverse order of where you want to go. If I had applied to Harvard, I would have looked them up HYP, because I want to go to Princeton most and Harvard least.</p>