wjb

SCEA does not "advantage the advantaged" in a significant way. Unlike binding ED, which eliminates the succesful applicant's opportunity to compare financial aid packages, EA, including SCEA, is not binding. Yale SCEA applicants are free to apply concurrently to schools with rolling admissions (generally large publics). Moreover, they are at complete liberty to apply to any and all schools RD and compare and re-negotiate financial aid packages before making a commitment.

cosar

I certainly agree that EA is better than ED. And I also agree that for those who are savvy enough to use it and are successful, early admissions can be a real positive. (My son was admitted early to his first choice school and it made his senior year of high school much more enjoyable.) But statistically speaking, there is just no question that early application pools, whether they're EA or ED, are heavily weighted towards the advantaged. And high school guidance counselors across the country applauded when Harvard and Princeton (and UVA) took the lead in eliminating their early admissions (unfortunately, they led, but no one else followed).

I think the real test for Yale, given that they seem not to have captured a yield advantage this year by keeping EA, will be whether there's been any impact on their ability to build a diverse class. If they've been hurt in this area, I think they'll seriously consider eliminating EA for next year. If not, they'll probably continue to hold out and see if they can get a yield advantage next year. The problem is that Harvard and Princeton have made clear that if no one else follows them, and if it turns out that their admissions are hurt by not having EA, they will reinstate it. Which would be a shame in my view.

P.S., an interesting (and relevant) quote in this article from the head of admissions at Harvard:

The Harvard Crimson :: News :: 200 Taken Off Waitlist

Obviously Harvard and Princeton had the courage of their convictions that eliminating early admissions was the right thing to do, as it is clearly not the self-interested thing to do.

AnotherMom2009

Frankly, I am insulted by H&P's reasons for dropping EA. They imply that URMs are not smart or savvy enough to apply EA.

With all the information readily available to everyone on the internet, students with even a little bit of initiative can find all kinds of information. Students should NOT rely solely on their guidance counselor to walk them through the admissions process. Students need to be more proactive and resourceful.

Although we live in a pre-dominately "white" community (read 99%) with an excellent school system, we have received most of our information (summer programs, application process, scholarship information) from web sites.

Ephemeral2

"Frankly, I am insulted by H&P's reasons for dropping EA. They imply that URMs are not smart or savvy enough to apply EA."

Wow. Are you kidding? I hope so. That is NOT the reason Harvard and Princeton dropped early admissions.

SaltLick

No, but those are the reasons they gave. That students can't figure things out for themselves.

posterX

Harvard is taking more than 200 off the waitlist.

Their yield was lower than expected (and lower than initially reported), indicating that they lost a lot more cross admits to Yale than they expected.

AnotherMom2009

"Frankly, I am insulted by H&P's reasons for dropping EA. They imply that URMs are not smart or savvy enough to apply EA."

Posted by Ephemeral2 -
Wow. Are you kidding? I hope so. That is NOT the reason Harvard and Princeton dropped early admissions.

Please see link below to Harvard Gazette with quote from interim president Bok -

"Early admission programs tend to advantage the advantaged," Bok continued. "Students from more sophisticated backgrounds and affluent high schools often apply early to increase their chances of admission, while minority students and students from rural areas, other countries, and high schools with fewer resources miss out."

Harvard to eliminate early admission

rd31

Yale's yield may go down a bit because Harvard is accepting so many from the waitlist. They may steal a lot of new Yalies on their waitlist.

ihavehope13

^^^^^Oh please. I am genuinely very glad that Yale had EA when I applied, and it would have made the application process much more stressful if they hadn't offered the option of applying early. Anyone with access to a computer can take advantage of EA, and if they're Yale-quality applicants, they will figure it out. It's illogical to think that someone "without advantage" will not know about EA, and then that the admissions office will be more likely to turn them away if they don't apply EA. Also, I have not personally seen anything but theoretical evidence that EA admits are "less diverse"- whatever that really means.

rd31, I had not thought of this. It is possible, but probably will have a small effect... maybe a percentage, tops?

Ephemeral2

Helping the disadvantaged gain equal footing is very different from "saying that URMs are not smart or savvy enough to apply EA." It has nothing to do with not being smart or savvy enough to apply EA. It has to do with financial situations.

wjb

I agree that any student who is "sophisticated" enough to apply to HYP should also be "sophisticated" enough to understand his or her early acceptance options. In addition, IMO it takes the same level of sophistication to increase one's chances of moving from a waitlist as it does to understand early options. And in most situations, moving off the wait list carries the economic burden of forfeiting the initial deposit (required at all but a handful of colleges -- not Yale and several others, I believe). No benefit to lower income students there.

And talk about stress! At least with SCEA/ED, many students are done with the stress factor by December. This year, with the trickle-down effect, large numbers of students may feel uncertainty about their college destinations well into the summer.