<p>My son applied and was accepted to a prestigious LAC that we considered “a reach” in terms of average SAT’s for reading and writing. Since he was not applying for aid, this was definitely done to help increase his chance of admittance. If he didn’t apply ED or if he applied ED and indicated he was applying for aid, I’m not sure he would have been accepted into this school. Once he was accepted, I was worried that he wouldn’t be able to do well since it was “a reach” for him. I was concerned he wouldn’t have a high enough GPA to get accepted into graduate school.</p>
<p>Anyway, upon receipt of the ED acceptance letter, my son informed the other schools he applied to for early action to withdraw his applications. At that time, my son already received a deferral letter from one of the top SUNY schools. To our surprise, he subsequently received an acceptance letter from the same SUNY school he was originally deferred from. We felt horrible that some other student, who really wanted to go there, may have received a rejection letter when they could have received my son’s spot. My son called again to find out why this was done and was told that this is their policy/process. In other words, even though they were informed by my son that he was accepted ED somewhere else, they didn’t withdraw his application. I guess they were hoping the ED acceptance didn’t work and and that he would accept their acceptance into their SUNY school. </p>
<p>Has anyone ever heard this happen? I wonder what would have happened if he withdrew his ED offer to attend the state school. Shouldn’t state school be obligated to withdraw the application after being informed of the ED acceptance? </p>
<p>We also wanted to receive the decisions from all the other schools he had already applied to (and paid an application fee) but we felt it was selfish. I was curious what merit packages might have been offered. This was because my daughter will be applying soon and it was informational purposes only. I recognize other applicants may have been rejected or deferred as a result.</p>
<p>I admit this the ED process is unfair to those applying for aid. On the other hand, we will be paying a substantial amount of money to a private college for four years. This will allow the college to accept students who can’t afford to pay their way and want to attend a private school rather than a state school. I have to thank my parents for their extremely hard working ethic and his dedication to saving and sacrificing for this privilege.</p>
<p>“We felt horrible that some other student, who really wanted to go there, may have received a rejection letter when they could have received my son’s spot.”</p>
<p>It doesn’t work that way. With years of experience, schools know what percentage of acceptances (both ED and RD) will be declined, so they plan for it by offering spots to more than they expect will accept the offer. Don’t feel bad! :)</p>
<p>So are you saying that once kids are accepted ED, students shouldn’t be obligated to inform all the other schools they applied to withdraw their applications? I seem to remember seeing a letter from the school he was accepted to stating him to do so. Are you saying students who are accepted ED shouldn’t be obligated to attend if a better offer is received? For us, the school he attends was clearly his #1 choice. We visited the state school on the way home from visiting the school he was accepted ED and it was a no brainer despite the state school costing significantly less. However, I can see how financially, one can decide to not attend the ED school.</p>
<p>that happened to my S a few years back. He received a personal letter from a UC Dean in March, stating something to the effect, ‘we know that you were accepted ED and requested that your app be withdrawn, but we are writing to make you an offer anyway with merit scholarship, research stipend, etc.’</p>
<p>Didn’t even tempt Da Boy who responded, ‘that would be going against my word that I already gave to xx…’ (I like to think I taught him one thing in life.)</p>
<p>Wow - that’s pretty blatant. Glad your son was mature enough to understand the commitment he made. I hope my son appreciates what was handed to him on a silver platter and that the financial investment is worth it in the long run.</p>
<p>And Cooper, a withdrawed acceptance means that a spot will open up on the waitlist for another student, unless the yield rate is higher than what the university anticipated.</p>
<p>Yes, you are correct, it is not a legally binding contract. </p>
<p>I also have to agree that sharing lists to catch people does seem unethical and vindictive. </p>
<p>This is a difficult area because you are talking about young people who are making big decisions about their own futures. Certainly, they should have some leeway in doing that. </p>
<p>I don’t think it is wise to apply ED unless you fully intend to attend that school, but I can see how circumstances may change in the months after being accepted that affect your original decision.</p>
<p>Please explain to me how it is unethical when the ED agreement in the CommonApp includes this statement: “I also understand that with an Early Decision offer of admission, this institution may share my name and my Early Decision Agreement with other institutions.” The applicant, his or her parent and his or her guidance counselor sign their names under that statement. You don’t like the terms, don’t sign. Simple as that. </p>
<p>And vindictive? The threat of exposure gives teeth to an agreement that, as many have noted, has no legal force. Putting this statement into the agreement ought to dissuade people who are not 100 percent confident about their ED choice. If they can’t live with the possibility of exposure if they back out, they shouldn’t sign. Most schools probably don’t bother to “out” those who renege. But they are within their rights to do so if they have this signed statement on file.</p>
<p>Yes, minors are involved. The smart people who designed this process have taken that into account. That’s why a parent and (at least in the case of CommonApp schools) the guidance counselor also have to sign on the dotted line. No one is coerced or misled.</p>
<p>We should remember to separate the two distinct cases: declining when the offered financial aid is insufficient to support attendance vs. reneging for other reasons.</p>
<p>Agreed, vonlost. What I’m reacting to is the idea that schools are being “vindictive” and/or “unethical” if they share lists, which is something they clearly reserve the right to do on the agreement that ED applicants sign (again, this is for Common App schools). I would be surprised if sharing lists is routine, even though there’s evidence some schools do or have done on occasion.</p>
<p>Just because you say you have the right to do something doesn’t make it so, and it doesn’t make it right.</p>
<p>Sharing those lists happens for only one reason - the school doesn’t trust you. It’s punitive. The school already has all the power, they keep the process obfuscated and opaque, you have no idea what the price is going in. Is it any wonder some try to game the system?</p>
<p>The Ivys got smacked down pretty hard a few years ago for sharing FA packages amongst themselves to make sure one school didn’t give a better package than another to the same applicant. The threat of “sharing” is just another aspect of this.</p>
<p>Well if you bail out on ED, it seems they were right in not trusting you. If you stick to your ED agreement, then you have nothing to worry about because your name going to another college doesn’t matter for anything.</p>
<p>I really don’t understand the mentality that, when your rights are being abused and your privacy violated by the gov’t or some other authority, you shouldn’t care because you have nothing to hide or didn’t do anything wrong.</p>
<p>Your rights aren’t being abused. You signed a contract, whether legally binding or not, with the stipulation that the outcome could be shared amongst other institutions. Calling foul after the fact because you didn’t read the paper properly or don’t want it to apply to you doesn’t mean the other party is in the wrong.</p>
<p>If you didn’t want to apply ED you didn’t have to. You chose to get the advantages of an ED application in exchange for giving up choice and allowing the school to share the list. </p>
<p>This is the agreement you and your parents signed when you applied ED.</p>
<p>To make a legally binding contract you have:
offer (special consideration as an ED condidate)
Acceptance (you and your parents signature)
Consideration (waiving the right to apply to other school).</p>
<p>The only argument against it being legally binding is your (possible) status as a minor. No they cannot force you to attend the school, but they could force you to pay for registation fees etc if they wanted to.</p>
<p>No school is going to go that far, what they have told you they will do is tell other schools you might apply to. This is what you agreed to. Plain and Simple.</p>
<p>If I agree to lend you money with your car as collateral, am I being punative for taking your car when you decide not to pay me back? NO - I am simply forcing you to live up to your end of the bargain.</p>
<p>Same thing here. You have a choice - enroll in the school or don’t. If you don’t the cost is that the school shares your info. This is the price you chose to pay.</p>
<p>“I really don’t understand the mentality that…rights are being abused and … privacy violated…”</p>
<p>In the first place, there is no evidence that colleges do in fact share lists. Not even much current anecdotal evidence on cc.</p>
<p>Secondly, if if such sharing does occur, it is much different than the price fixing that the Ivies used to engage in. Price fixing clearly violates the Sherman Antitrust act.</p>
<p>As vonlost notes, it’s an agreement: for an admissions boost and the opportunity to get a decision by mid-December, a student agrees to attend if the financial aid is acceptable.</p>
<p>So, the applicant gains two things by participating: 1) admissions boost; 2) decision by Christmas. For those two items, the applicant forfeits the opportunity – not “right” – to compare financial aid offers.</p>
<p>If a student and his/her family views this situation as win-win for them, they can play. If they view it as ‘all-the-power-being-held-by-the-colleges’ and an “abuse of rights”, they can choose not to play (which in itself is win-win for them).</p>
<p>But to say that ‘all-the-power-residing-in-the-colleges’ means that the acceptee can then break his/her word (their personal ‘bond’) for any reason, is just a justification for unethical behavior. (Two wrongs don’t make it right.)</p>