Gatekeepers? As if the student who doesn’t get into Tulane is doomed to fold sweaters at the Gap for the rest of his life? The student who can’t afford to apply to CMU early because she needs to compare aid packages will end up flipping pancakes at Waffle House?
Really. We don’t need to add fuel to the fire with hyperbole. A kid who doesn’t get into Tulane is likely to have many other fine choices. And the social good that colleges provide our society isn’t the “promise” of open admissions, or zero gatekeeping, or “100% affordable for 100% of families. “ None of that is implicit in the non-profit status. The Metropolitan museum charges admission. Don’t like it, don’t want it, can’t afford it? The Smithsonians are free (when the government is operating), as are many other non-profit museums which have various days/times/categories of admissions breaks.
You’re getting chemo at Sloan Kettering hospital? You and your insurance company are paying for it, non-profit status notwithstanding.
We don’t live in a country where any individual or groups of colleges act as Gatekeepers. Joe Biden graduated from University of Delaware, which sadly had to shut up a lot of people yelling that Harvard and Yale had a special responsibility to the country since “that’s where future presidents go”. Except for Nixon and Reagan and Carter and Ford and Obama…. etc.
Today? And yesterday. Everyone in my family applied ED way back when - like a half century ago! - as did many of our friends and eventual classmates. We were happy that option existed so that we could have a decision early. I didn’t see myself as a powerless pawn.
Just a comment on recent decision by Tulane to penalize a private high school in Colorado where a student failed to honor their ED commitment. I fully support Tulane’s decision to refuse any ED applications from said high school for one year. The ED admissions process generally gives applicants a much greater shot at admissions, while guaranteeing the college making offer both a 100% yield, as well as enrolling a student who clearly wants to attend their school. ED is a compact between the student, family, sending high school, and college. Everyone understands the rules, process, and responsibility to honor and accept an offer of admissions via ED, if made. I would surmise that had the sending high school advised both the family and Tulane of their intention to INFORM EVERY OTHER COLLEGE SAID STUDENT APPLIED TO, AND INFORMING THEM OF STUDENT’S NOT HONORING ED ACCEPTANCE AT TULANE, that Tulane would not have resorted to banning any/all ED applications from said high school for one year. I would further surmise that Tulane was not only extremely unhappy and displeased with the ED accepted student’s decision to not honor their acceptance, but with the consequent failure of the sending high school to make it painfully clear to the student in question, that their failure to accept Tulane’s offer would be met with the harshest consequences, including the high school informing all other colleges where said student applied, of his/her transgression. Had that “stick” been utilized, I strongly suspect the student would have backed out of their decision to not honor their acceptance to Tulane. I further surmise that only after probing the high school and their lack of an adequate response to student’s transgression, that Tulane felt it necessary to punish the high school in question. Good for you, Tulane, for firing a shot across the bow of the offending high school! And, if it happened again, my second shot would be to deny any/all applicants from said high school for the next ten years. Only then will the high school “get” the message that ED acceptances are to be honored, unless the financial aid offered isn’t affordable, including additional requests made to increase aid package so that it becomes more affordable.
There has been lots of writing around students entering into ED with their eyes open. While I think this is true, private schools are far more likely to push students in the direction of ED to try and accomplish the college outcomes families have come to expect. Vicious cycle.
Except Tulane says that the counselors have been ‘nothing but professional’
Seems like Tulane is holding the counselors responsible, and the kids in the next classes. Was there something the counselors could have done to prevent this? It doesn’t seem that Tulane thinks so, but yet the ban is in place.
Counselors can have a big influence on promoting schools. I remember being in the counselor’s office to discuss something else and there was a poster on the wall of a small New England school (this was in Southern California) and I asked the counselor why that school. She said she really liked it and had had several students accepted in the last few years. My daughter went to U of Wyo from a Florida hs, and the next year another kid from that school also went to Wyo. Schools can be contagious, but not if the counselors aren’t promoting them.
And sometimes it’s not nefarious at all. A student wants a double major in Genetics and Music Performance. Counselor does the research and the legwork and comes up with five solid choices where that’s possible and which fit the kid’s stats.
Would you expect the counselor NOT to tell next year’s seniors “Hey, XYZ university has a very flexible program where you can major in two different things, one in Arts and Sciences and one in the Music school”? Or better yet reach out to the band and chorus directors to say “if you have students trying to decide whether to continue with music or just ditch it and do something “practical” have them come see me so I can tell them about XYZ”.
There was a kid in one my kid’s HS class who had some unusual interests, budget issues, off-beat EC’s which she hoped to continue in college. All the parents were impressed by how doggedly one of the guidance counselors dug in to figure out how to guide this kid to the right college. AND found a place which would give the kid in-state tuition if the major wasn’t offered at the kid’s flagship (which it was not).
The system is the issue. Tulane is technically within its rights to expect students to honor binding ED commitments, and its response reflects a desire to preserve fairness and predictability in a process built on trust. But the fact that this incident made headlines underscores how fragile that trust has become. When private schools feel pressure to push ED as a strategy, students often commit before they’re truly ready, and colleges feel compelled to enforce rules that were never meant to carry punitive weight. No single party is fully right or wrong… everyone is acting rationally within a flawed system. The Tulane situation brings into view what has quietly been true for years: Early Decision rewards privilege, punishes uncertainty, and forces young people to make binding choices in a system that often gives them little real freedom.
Is it really all that different from getting a physician friend to make a phonecall and get you in to see a provider that you otherwise couldn’t get an appointment with for months? Or a chef friend to get you into a restaurant that has been booked for months? Many, many moons ago I was coming home from college for winter break and wanted to see a Broadway show that was very hot at the time and sold out for eons. Well, my mom happened to be family friends with the producer, and yep, we got third row center seats. Many use contacts under certain circumstances, but it’s not unethical. In some cases it’s not what you know, but who you know. Is it “right”? Maybe yes, maybe no. Sure, the scale is different in terms of the situation of each, but A high school counselor calling a school isn’t all that different in general.
What exactly do elite prep school/private school “feeder” relationships have to do with public colleges that have tuition reciprocity with nearby states for rare majors?
Again with the hyperbole. Nobody is forced to make a binding choice. Every year we see the list in May of college’s which are still taking applications. Kid can’t finish their applications by December 31? Terrific. Wait until the list comes out in May.
Little real freedom? NOBODY has to apply early decision. And frankly, nobody has to apply to Tulane or one of the other “we take so many kids ED that if you want to come here you should really apply ED” colleges. Or ANY college that looks at Demonstrated Interest as a factor.
Total freedom. You think Northeastern’s practice of admitting kids to a non-Boston campus is duplicitous? Guess what- don’t apply to Northeastern. You think Case’s practice of waitlisting kids who haven’t fallen over their regional adcom to show interest is obnoxious? Don’t apply to Case.
That’s lots and lots of “real” freedom. Choose your colleges based on what works for YOU, kid.
I have been that physician who is booked months out, treating a disorder that is life altering and sometimes life threatening. All patients, even friends of mine, had to go through the standard triage process like anybody else. I wouldn’t have had it any other way. Gross.
Of course they have to go through all the correct screening and triage procedures, but to get an appointment it was facilitated by a contact. If you had a family member with a challenging situation who was having a hard time getting to see a provider, it would be surprising that you wouldn’t try to help make it happen
Students operate in a system where every rational signal from parents, counselors, peers, and colleges suggests they apply ED, even if they’re uncertain. They’re not coerced outright, but they’re heavily steered, and there are consequences of backing out.
I see more of an illusion of choice. My point is more about the context and pressures around that “freedom.”
No. The appointment was not moved up or in any other way facilitated by knowing me other than that I told them the same intake phone number that was listed on the web page.
Same with my family members. I call the regular line and wait on hold like everyone else and get in line like everybody else.
When something is a sum zero game, for every winner there must be a loser.
Maybe that’s possibly true for a very circumscribed narrow population. For the most part, isn’t it true that probably about 2/3 of students go to college within 50 miles of their home. That’s a different set of limited choices College Proximity Widens Educational Achievement Gap | BestColleges
“Most students attend college close to home. Research tells us the median distance between home and college is 17 miles.
More than two-thirds of students (69%) stay within 50 miles. Among community college students, the vast majority of whom commute and don’t live on campus, 79% attend schools within 25 miles.”
Was talking more about helping with contacts if a patient having trouble getting to see someone else not necessarily you. But no matter. At one point a year or so ago I had some funky thing happened that needed to be looked at by a specialist. I contacted the appointment line for the specialist I wanted to see and the first appointment for a new patient was in September. I was calling in February. I asked if they could send a message through to the office and I started to spell my specialty and my name. They sent it to the office (the provider happened to be someone I used to refer back-and-forth with) and they called me back within 15 minutes and told me to be there in an hour.
Re: the text I bolded above -
100% agree with this. The college where D24 is currently attending is a school we didn’t even know existed until 1 of the counselors mentioned Colleges That Change Lives. 1 of the colleges D26 is applying to is a school that somebody a year or 2 before D24 chose to attend…we heard about it because it was mentioned in a “Rising __ Graders Night” presentation for students & parents and we decided to look into it.
Considering the text I bolded above, the majority of colleges don’t even offer ED. If a student wants more freedom to decide between multiple options, then don’t apply ED. There’s more than 20-30 universities out there providing an excellent education.
The hyper-focus of some applicants can create a sense of false scarcity.