<p>Hello everyone. Basically, I’m your typical student who’s applying to Stanford but is a little under the norm of acceptance. So how much would applying SCEA vs. regular decision affect my chances?</p>
<p>I’ve heard from some people that it’s harder because you’re competing with better applicants, but then some say its easier.</p>
<p>Just wondering what the true value is…</p>
<p>Thank you!!</p>
<p>Not very much, unless you’re a really strong applicant interested in Stanford.</p>
<p>“interested in Stanford.”
Stanford places no weight on a students “interest”. This is from the admissions office FAQ section.
"Does Stanford show preference in the admission process for students who have demonstrated their interest by visiting, calling and emailing?
Not at all. Contacting the Admission Office is neither a requirement nor an advantage in our admission process. "
They don’t keep track of student visits, and they don’t interview. Acceptance at Stanford is highly competative [ less than 10% of applicants were accepted for the class of 2012] and the strongest students will generally apply SCEA. Unless you stats fall in the 75% of accepted students[ see these recent stats <a href=“http://www.stanford.edu/dept/uga/applying/extras/1_2a6_profile.html][/url”>http://www.stanford.edu/dept/uga/applying/extras/1_2a6_profile.html][/url</a>], or are a nationally recruited athlete who is also a top student, or have some other talents not often found, you are in all likelyhood wasting an application on Stanford, when you SHOULD apply EA at a college you are more likely to be admitted to. There is no nicer feeling than having an acceptance in hand before Xmas.</p>
<p>That is not what I meant at all; I didn’t mean that you had to have interviews and visit campuses nor did I mean that Stanford gave more weight to those types of students who visit their campus more often.</p>
<p>…I meant that if the OP had a STRONG interest in attending Stanford, with strong credentials, it would be wise to apply. Some people just apply to Stanford just for the sake of it, and with no particular interest.</p>
<p>yse, but in reality Stanford really does not care at all how much a student is interested in going there, because they have a surplus of qualified applicants. Even legacies don’t get a leg up, if they are not as qualified academically as a non legacy applicant, it’s that tough these days [ unless you are a DA] .If a Stanford coach is interested in a scholar-athlete, that’s another matter.</p>
<p>…You just repeated exactly what you said. That is totally irrelevant, again, to what I have said.</p>
<p>then pehaps you don’t understand the meaning of the word “interest” from an admissions office standpoint.</p>
<p>LOL. Are you serious? </p>
<p>
All this is pretty obvious. Stanford is very competitive, yes…</p>
<p>It looks like you haven’t really understood anything I have posted as well.</p>
<p>Interest does matter, a little bit. Talk to the reps. They actually note students who impress them particularly during visits/meetings. It’s clearly not that important, but it’s still there, even for Stanford. But those cases are very particular, and you risk just annoying the reps. It’s the only thing they have because they don’t have interviews or the like. Just thought I’d get that out there, because it surprised me that they didn’t have other opportunities to demonstrate interest otherwise.</p>
<p>If you are anything but a top-notch applicant, don’t bother. The Early applicant pools tend to be stronger, so some adcoms are willing to accept a higher percentage. This is mistaken as an “easier way to gain acceptance.” Not so. You will be competing against some of the very best, so if you are not one of them, then I suggest waiting until RD. If you are, then apply early. At selective schools like this, Early is no longer an advantage (ED, yes, but EA, not as much). It is mainly a way to have peace of mind come December, or to realistically reevaluate your application/list if you get bad results.</p>
<p>“if the OP had a STRONG interest in attending Stanford”’ was from your post,
and all I am pointing out, after many years of witnessing it, is how irrelevant how much a student is interested in or WANTS to go to Stanford is to the admissions decision, if they are not academically qualified. There are very few ways to show a STRONG interest in going to Stanford that actually matter to Stanford.</p>
<p>Invoyable is just saying that you should only apply SCEA if you are very interested in Stanford, and have the credentials to back it up. Nothing about how interest affects an admissions office.</p>
<p>“Unless you stats fall in the 75% of accepted students, or are a nationally recruited athlete who is also a top student, or have some other talents not often found, you are in all likelihood wasting an application on Stanford”</p>
<p>I think you’re pushing it a bit. If you’re decently in range for a school, you should apply. The 75th percentile SAT scores for Stanford is 1540/1600, so does this mean if you don’t have over a 1540 and are “unhooked” then you shouldn’t apply? Of course not. Once you are over 700 for all sections, you’re good to go.</p>
<p>All of you must have terrible CR scores…</p>
<p>The OP is saying “i really want to go to stanford…will applying early give me an advantage”</p>
<p>He/she is not asking if they favor interested students.</p>
<p>Sorry OP, i do not know this answer…</p>
<p>@ OP: It only gives you an advantage if you’re competitive with the other applicants (standardized test scores are in range, reasonably good EC’s and resume, etc). Personally, I wouldn’t apply early to Stanford, just because their acceptance rate for early applicants was only 5% or so above their acceptance rate for RD applicants. Are you sure you don’t want to use your early action/early decision advantage on another school?</p>
<p>OP: What are your stats? If you give us those, I think the CCers here can give you better answers as to how applying early to Stanford will affect you.</p>
<p>“I’m your typical student who’s applying to Stanford but is a little under the norm of acceptance. So how much would applying SCEA vs. regular decision affect my chances?”</p>
<p>It won’t affect your chances overall, in the sense that: If you are rejected EA, you would have been rejected RD. If you are deferred EA, you will be put into the RD round and the fact that you applied EA will make no difference whatsoever in your final decision.</p>
<p>“I’ve heard from some people that it’s harder because you’re competing with better applicants, but then some say its easier.”</p>
<p>Yes, the stats for the EA pool is higher and the students that will be accepted are those at the very top of the pool. Think about it, they are only going to accept EA those students that stand out in ANY pool; if you are a good but not great applicant, they are better off deferring you and seeing how you compare to the applicants that they get during RD. The higher acceptance rate during EA does not mean that the acceptance standards are lower, quite the contrary. Students accepted EA will likely be accepted at other very selective schools in the RD round and S wants the extra 3+ months to convince them to attend S. The only sense in which it is easier for the applicant is that for those who are accepted, there is less pressure for RD if they choose to participate.</p>
<p>“Just wondering what the true value is…”</p>
<p>If you don’t have any other schools that you’re interested in apply EA to, then you might as well go SCEA with S, as it won’t hurt you. However, if there are others where you have a better chance for EA acceptance (anywhere except Y ;)??), then you need to weigh the pros and cons of using your single EA card on S.</p>
<p>"I wouldn’t apply early to Stanford, just because their acceptance rate for early applicants was only 5% or so above their acceptance rate for RD applicants. Are you sure you don’t want to use your early action/early decision advantage on another school?’
Exactly! Applying SCEA to Stanford means, with a few exceptions, that you can’t apply EA or ED to other colleges where an early application can and often does give students a big advantage. And remember, Stanford defers only 10% of early applicants to the regular admissions round, so if you don’t get in early, and less than 15% do, you lose your chance of an early acceptance anywhere else, and will have to wait until April to find out your application outcomes. Students should apply early ONLY IF their stats are in the range of accepted students AND they want to risk the 75% chance of being rejected AND lose the opportunity of applying where they would have a higher chance of early acceptance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where is the independently verifiable information about this? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is Stanford’s statement on the matter, but, again, where is the independently verifiable evidence that this is really what is going on? </p>
<p>When Harvard announced that it would end its early action program, Stanford Provost John Etchemendy issued a statement </p>
<p>[Vantage</a> Point: Nonbinding early admission programs are fair](<a href=“You’ve requested a page that no longer exists | Stanford News”>You’ve requested a page that no longer exists | Stanford News) </p>
<p>saying that a nonbinding early action program is fair, and thus Stanford would keep its program. It happens that Etchemendy is a world-famous logician, so we can be assured that his logic is impeccable. But any logician will tell you that is still possible to reach a false conclusion with valid logic from false premises, and I have not seen any independent examination of the premises such as “At Stanford, we actually apply somewhat higher standards to our early pool” in Etchemendy’s statement. That could be true, but whether or not it is true is an empirical matter. </p>
<p>It would actually be a little weird, as a matter of institutional behavior, if a student signals that a particular university is a top-choice university for that student (as applying in a single-choice early round does) and that conferred no advantage. That would be a waste of valuable information. That may be true, but an independent researcher should dig in the admission files and see what is true. </p>
<p>In earlier cases of independent researchers examining admission files </p>
<p>[Amazon.com:</a> The Early Admissions Game: Joining the Elite: Christopher Avery, Andrew Fairbanks, Richard Zeckhauser: Books](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Early-Admissions-Game-Joining-Elite/dp/0674016203/]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/Early-Admissions-Game-Joining-Elite/dp/0674016203/) </p>
<p>it was found that applying early provided an advantage to applicants, which was sometimes a very substantial advantage at certain colleges. The way to know what current practice is in admission offices would be to give independent researchers access to the admission files.</p>
<p>"Where is the independently verifiable information about this? "</p>
<p>Beyond a copious amount of anecdotal evidence? The admissions reps have no need to lie. The schools for which it is advantageous to apply Early in terms of interest in the school are very open about it, even the EA schools. Stanford has always said that its higher acceptance rate correlates with the higher level of achievement/whatever in the early applicant pool. These students got their act together a month before other applications are due, and, the adcoms argue, are generally better. This is very true at my school, although this is obviously not proof that it is overall. But I have no reason to doubt the variety of adcoms I have heard who all say the exact same thing. They may be pulling the wool over our eyes. But I find it much more likely that they are telling the truth. Why? Because it would benefit them more to suggest that applying early when one is truly interested in the school would be an advantage.</p>
<p>[Amazon.com:</a> The Early Admissions Game: Joining the Elite: Christopher Avery, Andrew Fairbanks, Richard Zeckhauser: Books](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Early-Admissions-Game-Joining-Elite/dp/0674016203/]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/Early-Admissions-Game-Joining-Elite/dp/0674016203/) </p>
<p>Read and learn.</p>