Applying Early Decision

Here are some schools where the gap between the admission rates for Early Decision (ED) and Regular Decision (RD) is quite large:

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.....................ED 65.0% RD 44% gap: 23.9%
Santa Clara University.....................................ED 76.0% RD 37.2% gap: 38.8%
Lehigh University............................................ED 58.0% RD 28.1% gap: 29.9%
Oberlin College................................................ED 54.0% RD 27.0% gap: 27.0%
Bates College....................................................ED 50.3% RD 21.8% gap: 28.5%
Haverford College ...........................................ED 46.0% RD 22.3% gap: 23.7%
Case Western Reserve U. ................................ED 49.0% RD 26.2% gap: 22.8%
Tufts University ..............................................ED 39.0% RD 13.6% gap: 25.4%
Washington University...................................ED 37.6% RD 15.5% gap: 22.1%
Williams College .............................................ED 37.0% RD 15.5% gap: 21.5%
Swarthmore College........................................ED 36.0% RD 10.7% gap: 25.3%
 
Last edited:
Number 1 my DS wouldn't back out of it, if accepted. Number 2, both SA's and this school are incredible Plan A's. And finally, it's the schools who push/encourage kids to apply ED. I've sat in on at least 2 'preview/open house' days where they are told by admissions, "Your chances increase exponentially if you apply ED." So, who's really gaming the system? Let's not forget these are 17 year old kids, typically, making these decisions. My DS wants to be an officer and get a great education at the same time. A LOT of things are in play when trying to get a nomination and appointment to an SA, many these kids can't control or even understand. In my opinion, they should constantly be weighing ALL options.
 
Holden100 said:
Number 1 my DS wouldn't back out of it, if accepted. Number 2, both SA's and this school are incredible Plan A's. And finally, it's the schools who push/encourage kids to apply ED. I've sat in on at least 2 'preview/open house' days where they are told by admissions, "Your chances increase exponentially if you apply ED." So, who's really gaming the system? Let's not forget these are 17 year old kids, typically, making these decisions. My DS wants to be an officer and get a great education at the same time. A LOT of things are in play when trying to get a nomination and appointment to an SA, many these kids can't control or even understand. In my opinion, they should constantly be weighing ALL options.
Click to expand...

I’m here to tell you applying ED to a school and getting accepted has just reduced your DS’s option to 1 school.

No weighing options at that point.

So if schools game the system, then that still doesn’t make it right for us to game the system.

Your DS was in a similar situation as my DD last year. Things worked out for her. I hope things work out for your DS too. He’s got a caring parent - you- who will give him the appropriate guidance to make it work out in the end. Good luck on this journey. People say it’s a roller coaster ride. It’s absolutely true. [emoji106]
 
Yes, his options end on Dec. 15th, if accepted, but it's a great option. Today, he's okay with it; that may change tomorrow. I don't see it as him gaming the system, but playing by the rules given to him. It is most definitely a roller coaster ride, and I can't wait to get off!
 
GoCubbies said:
So if schools game the system, then that still doesn’t make it right for us to game the system.
Click to expand...
I don't see how it's gaming the system for a school to encourage ED. If I were a college, I'd want kids for whom the school was their first choice who are extremely excited to be there. I think ED rates SHOULD be higher, though just quoting rates is only half the story without knowing if the pool of kids for ED and RD are equally qualified applicants.
 
Some great comments and advice in this thread. And I agree that just because many elite schools are elite on education but apparently not elite on ethics, it is not right for an applicant to rationalize conducting themselves in a dishonest manner. Someone has to make the mature and honest decision to play by the rules and the schools pretend to be these pillars of quality when in many respects ED is all about filling the front of the airplane up with full paying customers - whether its an affluent applicant or a full price govt scholarship.
 
jebdad said:
Some great comments and advice in this thread. And I agree that just because many elite schools are elite on education but apparently not elite on ethics, it is not right for an applicant to rationalize conducting themselves in a dishonest manner. Someone has to make the mature and honest decision to play by the rules and the schools pretend to be these pillars of quality when in many respects ED is all about filling the front of the airplane up with full paying customers - whether its an affluent applicant or a full price govt scholarship.
Click to expand...
Agree 100% that when you decide to apply ED, you're jumping with two feet in, which is why my DS has completed his early app, but is sitting on it for a few more days. He doesn't have much more time to sit on it since the teachers require at least 4 weeks to complete their recommendations. My "glass half full" attitude wants to believe schools really push ED after the advent of the common app. With SO many apps coming in, they just want to know who really wants to be there. My "glass half empty" attitude says maybe they're just trying to keep their accepted to enrolled stats where they want them. I'm not sure they give much consideration, at this school anyway, to who has the full gov't scholarship; makes sense that they would, but DS was told last summer by one of the ROTC officers that for the class of 2023 they had 50 applicants with full scholarships in hand, and the school only accepted 10, most off of ED (I think only 1 was RD). Appreciate all y'all's input and advice! Good luck to all those kiddos out there making these tough decisions!
 
A bit of background that may or may not influence your decision but will help you to understand the colleges' interest in nudging applicants toward ED. There's a reason that more and more universities have given their admissions function the new label, "Enrollment Management." The goal is to optimize for, that is, to manage the process in such a way as to ensure, four different desired outcomes:
1) attain the highest average SAT/GPA from the entering class;
2) increase yield ie % of admits who accept;
3) achieve the desired social/ethnic sorting (including legacy admits and athletes);
4) meet or exceed a pre-defined REVENUE THRESHOLD.

ED helps to ensure outcomes #2-4, above. The impact on yield (#2) is obvious; ED also enables the college to check off the athlete and legacy admit quotas so that they aren't scrambling to fill these slots later.

What is less well known is that goal #4 - what the "enrollment management" consultants would call "optimizing for revenue" - is absolutely critical to every university. They cannot fund their operations out of the endowment returns because the vast majority of donations are dedicated to specific purposes and cannot be used for the general operating budget. So the colleges typically need to ensure that at least 40%, sometimes over half, of their admits are full-pay.

ED is a neat trick for ensuring that the admitted student will be full pay AND will definitely attend. It's a two-fer, achieving goal #2 and goal #4 at the same time. This is why it is so favored by private colleges that need to find those few families that will pay extraordinary sums of money for an undergraduate degree.

Now, it could well be the case that these admissions folks are signaling to you that they earnestly desire a full-pay ROTC scholarship admit such as your child and will therefore admit him for sure if you apply ED. In this case, you would be seen as having an admissions "hook" similar to that enjoyed by recruited athletes and super-wealthy alumni (read: actual or potential mega-donors). I think it's worth having a candid conversation with them and putting the q. to them directly.
 
thibaud said:
A bit of background that may or may not influence your decision but will help you to understand the colleges' interest in nudging applicants toward ED. There's a reason that more and more universities have given their admissions function the new label, "Enrollment Management." The goal is to optimize for, that is, to manage the process in such a way as to ensure, four different desired outcomes:
1) attain the highest average SAT/GPA from the entering class;
2) increase yield ie % of admits who accept;
3) achieve the desired social/ethnic sorting (including legacy admits and athletes);
4) meet or exceed a pre-defined REVENUE THRESHOLD.

ED helps to ensure outcomes #2-4, above. The impact on yield (#2) is obvious; ED also enables the college to check off the athlete and legacy admit quotas so that they aren't scrambling to fill these slots later.

What is less well known is that goal #4 - what the "enrollment management" consultants would call "optimizing for revenue" - is absolutely critical to every university. They cannot fund their operations out of the endowment returns because the vast majority of donations are dedicated to specific purposes and cannot be used for the general operating budget. So the colleges typically need to ensure that at least 40%, sometimes over half, of their admits are full-pay.

ED is a neat trick for ensuring that the admitted student will be full pay AND will definitely attend. It's a two-fer, achieving goal #2 and goal #4 at the same time. This is why it is so favored by private colleges that need to find those few families that will pay extraordinary sums of money for an undergraduate degree.

Now, it could well be the case that these admissions folks are signaling to you that they earnestly desire a full-pay ROTC scholarship admit such as your child and will therefore admit him for sure if you apply ED. In this case, you would be seen as having an admissions "hook" similar to that enjoyed by recruited athletes and super-wealthy alumni (read: actual or potential mega-donors). I think it's worth having a candid conversation with them and putting the q. to them directly.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the background, appreciate it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top