Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

Take Aways From This Year's Admissions


Replies to: Take Aways From This Year's Admissions

  • runswimyogarunswimyoga Registered User Posts: 925 Member
    I heard on a talk radio program today an admissions director talking about trends in private college admissions - some of which I thought were interesting and kind of illustrated some of what this discussion has said.

    She spoke about her school's admissions trend towards moving away from seeking well rounded students to moving more towards seeking well rounded classes. In order to do that she said they put more emphasis in early action and early decision acceptances and she expects that trend to continue.

  • eiholieiholi Registered User Posts: 312 Member
    edited May 2017
    But the ED zone is really more like 7-20 (roughly Duke through Emory).
    @northwesty So EDing those at 1-6 won't help? Then why do some of the 6 keep EDs?

    When RD acceptance rate drops to <2% for the ED schools, those who EA the 1-6 EA schools are real risk taking top students and thus are attractive to the ED schools in the RD round. (The whole thing is crazy and something will happen in the next few years).
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 16,078 Senior Member
    In my opinion it is another way to tighten up what has morphed into what amounts to an almost year long process for kids.
  • PurpleTitanPurpleTitan Registered User Posts: 11,628 Senior Member
    "Disagree. ED is a big plus factor, even for the unhooked. And those top ~10 colleges (however defined) tend to have the most generous fin aid. ED could be the ticket to a top 10 school at a big discount. "

    There aren't that many top 10 ED schools to begin with. If you go by USNews, only Columbia, Duke, Penn, JHU, and now UChicago.
  • PurpleTitanPurpleTitan Registered User Posts: 11,628 Senior Member
    edited May 2017
    @londondad: My understanding is that NU just doesn't give much of a bump for legacies, period. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was nonexistent in RD.
  • PurpleTitanPurpleTitan Registered User Posts: 11,628 Senior Member
    @suzyQ7: "ED is a plus factor, but not that big. Remember, those ED admit rates include athletes and legacies. For unhooked applicants, ED gives an edge - but I would call it a 'big' plus factor."

    This really depends on the school. Like legacy preference, ED edge could vary a lot even among elite peers. Also note that there are top schools where recruited athletes won't be taking up a big chunk of the ED admit pool simply because those schools don't value athletic ability that much. At DivIII UChicago, WashU, Emory, Tufts, mostly DivIII JHU (and maybe DivIII CMU though I have heard that they do give their athletes a bump), there would be plenty of space for non-athletes. Caltech doesn't value athletic prowess at all and they and MIT don't give any bump to legacy, but they are EA.
  • PurpleTitanPurpleTitan Registered User Posts: 11,628 Senior Member
    @TTG: "Say a very competitive Top 20 LAC with a 56% female student body receives an ED app from a male from Nebraska who has something a little unique that the school thinks would benefit and enhance the school community, but scores/grades put that student at a very marginal level. They might very well accept that student and know they will have that unique something in the community"

    I doubt they would take a marginal candidate even in that case; most marginal accepts are hooked in some way, but if that candidate had solid stats within the 75/25 range but nothing else to recommend him other than being a guy from a small far-away state, applying ED instead of RD could be the difference between acceptance and rejection.
  • LoveTheBardLoveTheBard Registered User Posts: 1,707 Senior Member
    @momofthreeboys , While I agree that ED is a solid business strategy and can see why schools want to use it, ED disadvantages students that need to compare financial aid and/or merit scholarships and advantages the wealthy. I have no problem with EA or SCEA and very much like the Questbridge-type match system wherein students rank their choices, or I can get behind making kids show their interest in some other way, but I deeply resent the one-sidedness of the ED "advantage."
  • TTGTTG Registered User Posts: 1,137 Senior Member
    @LoveTheBard, I agree and think the squeeze is on the middle class and lower-income families. Hard to pay tuition/other costs that have increased much faster than incomes but too much income to merit special consideration or qualify for extraordinary aid. For lower-income families, it puts great pressure on kids to be incredibly special or choices are very limited.
  • saillakeeriesaillakeerie Registered User Posts: 2,036 Senior Member
    I would say that about quite a number of posts on this thread but not the one you quoted.

    For your view of the post I quoted to be valid, you must believe certain other posters here are liars. Seems unlikely to me you have enough info to know that. As such, its being implied (in the face of evidence to the contrary). Which is why I made the statement about intellectual laziness/dishonesty.

    Now in terms of the discussion here, none of it really matters as no one here is making policy in terms of college admissions.

    Where I think it is relevant in a more important sense (though beyond the scope of this thread or board) is general policy discussions. Its becoming more common to see people impute invalid motives to criticism of a policy they favor. No doubt sour grapes isn't a valid reason to criticize a given policy. And criticizing a given policy based on the race, gender, religion or political affiliation of its proponent isn't valid either. If you prove one of those are the reason behind the criticism, you can avoid addressing the criticism itself. But today its too often the case that the invalid motive is assumed (without evidence) to avoid any discussion about the criticism itself. As a result, the level of discourse on many issues pretty much sucks.
  • PurpleTitanPurpleTitan Registered User Posts: 11,628 Senior Member
    @TTG: I don't think a 25th percentile kid is getting in to Bowdoin just because he's from a small state and is a guy who applied ED and plays guitar.

    He would need something more. And there wouldn't be a lot of competition to get him from Bowdoin's peers, either.

    Again, at that level, anyone at 25th percentile or below has a strong hook.

    Now, drop down the rankings 30 spots or so and your example becomes more realistic.
This discussion has been closed.