<p>
[quote]
...Now that early admissions has been dropped, one pressing logistical question concerns the number of students who need to be admitted through the regular decision process to fill the Class of 2012, Dean of Admission Janet Rapelye said. Since the University has traditionally admitted about half of its freshman class during the Early Decision round when candidates are required to attend the University if accepted Rapelye admitted that it would be difficult for her office to judge how many accepted students would matriculate at the University this year...</p>
<p>Rapelye added that, because of this year's uncertainty about expected yield, her office will initially admit a "conservative" number of students and then possibly take "several hundred students off the wait list."</p>
<pre><code>In past years, the University has taken a very limited number of students from the waitlist, with 47 students accepted from the list last year and none for the Class of 2009. "It doesn't matter whether they are admitted in regular decision or off of the waitlist," Rapelye said. "In the end, they are still admitted to Princeton that's what counts."
With the prospect of an increased admit rate and decreased yield, the University may jeopardize its number-one spot in U.S. News and World Report's annual ranking of the top schools in the nation, since the magazine uses both criteria in drawing up its list...
</code></pre>
<p>Harvard and the University of Virginia, both of which also dropped their early admission programs over the last year, will face some of the same challenges as Princeton. To publicize their schools' application and financial aid policies, the admissions deans of the three universities are currently touring 19 cities across the country.
<p>The class will be more diverse but less qualified. The former effect will probably be rather strong, and the latter effect will be relatively weak. Therefore, if you consider diversity (particularly socioeconomic diversity) an important goal, the change will be good. If you don’t believe diversity is an important goal, the change will be a step in the wrong direction.</p>
<p>I talked with the former dean of admissions Fred Hargadon at a lacrosse game last spring. He said that ending Early Decision was a huge mistake and they would have a hell of a time making a good class. It really was a terrible, terrible decision.</p>
<p>Lest we forget, Dean Hargadon was responsible for enshrining the silly ideal of the ‘Princeton Man’ and ensuring that Princeton’s image was tarnished in the eyes of superstar applicants. It’s almost tempting to say that the best guide to the truth is the opposite of what he says, but then again that would be a logical fallacy. And he certainly does know as well as anyone that the main reason Princeton attracted academic superstars at all during his tenure was by locking them with early decision. Whether that’s still the case remains to be seen, but Tilghman and Rapleye have proven rather adept so far. I wouldn’t choose to bet against them at this point, least not on the suggestion of Dean Fred.</p>
<p>I’m unfamiliar with the differences in admissions policies between Hargadon and Rapelye - would someone care to tell me what the difference is here? For example, what is the “Princeton man” concept?</p>
<p>“So what if he is mediocre? There are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren’t they? We can’t have all Brandeises, Cardozos, and Frankfurters and stuff like that there.”</p>
<p>Dean Hargadon essentially liked classically WASPy qualities: athleticism, traditional masculinity, not eggheady, etc. [Edit: Which is to say, I suppose, the qualities typically ascribed to Princeton by public conception.]</p>
<p>Dean Rapleye wants to court highly intellectual students (academic superstars), as well as create a much more diverse (socioeconomically and racially) campus.</p>
<p>Hopefully ending early decision won’t have too much of an effect on selectivity. I think it was a stupid test to do - I’ve heard arguments for it, but they are pretty weak…</p>
<p>And do the middle-class Asians still have a disadvantage (since there are supposedly so many of them that are so qualified)? Or will there be a little boost for them as well?</p>
<p>I agree with GR Elton, eliminating ED SHOULD help all low-income students, though I don’t know if there was a large overlap between the low income students who would apply ED and those who would apply RD (versus those who don’t apply at all). </p>
<p>I preferred Fred to Rapelye, though I didn’t necessarily appreciate his Princeton Man concept. I think Rapelye has taken an extreme position compared to Dean Fred. None of these deans particularly courted egg-heads. I would say that Fred courted legacies/athletes relatively heavily, whereas Rapelye has courted women/minorities. Both frustrate me, as I fall in neither category (though I will ABSOLUSTELY support someone like Dean Fred AFTER I graduate and have kids who want to apply to Princeton) :)</p>