Early Action vs. Regular Admission

cptofthehouse
Thu, 16 May 2019 16:22:22 +0000

The scenario I depicted is very much anecdotal, and isolated. However, the Harvard analysis is a strong one IMO.

I look at Rolling Admission and EA like this:

You gotta fill a room. Your job depends upon doing so. Room has always been filled before which is a big plus for you but also something you have to live up to. It’s a big empty room and you are eager and ready to go to it. Most all of the folks who come to the door look pretty danged good. You want a diverse crowd in there, and at first they are all diverse. You haven’t gotten to your umpteenth running fanatic, heard all the challenge in life stories, and you have some athletic and orchestra seats as well as other special requests you need filled. With all the empty space, you can afford to be generous because after all you are an ADMISSIONS officer. You WANT to admit kids.

But then all of a sudden the room is filling up and you have a line around the block. You still have some requests to fulfill but you are also seeing a lot of the same by now. And you are getting tired. That victory after failure story is beginning to sound oldcabd tiresome. You have to start getting stingy about who you give a seat.

AOs are human. (Yup, though they may have ice in their veins). Of course, it’s easier to welcome those who show up when the room is empty and the line is sparser than when it gets crazy and there is a mob out there. Bear in mind that most applicants to these selective schools are often qualified. You often have to find reason to reject.

So, yeah, I do believe earlier gives you a better chance.