Note that if you apply EA to MIT, it is not restricted, so you can apply early to any other non-restricted EA school.
2 Likes
This is an issue. If REA has little to know impact, why do you need to? If you are looking for the more traditional universities, then why Cal Tech? Those on the website with experience note that it’s grad focused, totally research focused and you are sort of left alone. It sounds miserable, the way it’s described, for those who want a traditional university.
I would know where I want to attend before I applied. That’s me. I’m not a believer in “gaming” and I’m guessing at most schools the decision will be the same regardless of the when.
This is a four year decision - visit, get comfortable, truly fall in love with the location (urban Boston) vs. suburban NJ vs. Pasadena, etc.
No one has to apply early. And in your case, you shouldn’t - at least in my opinion.
Good luck.
peace of mind, mostly! I’m applying to all my public schools EA so it makes sense to choose one of my top choices for a potential (even tiny) admissions boost
thanks! I’m positive MIT theoretical physics is extremely excellent, but I know they also place a huge emphasis on “maker” culture which isn’t necessarily a priority for me.
as for EA, i want some peace of mind in december, lol… and my application will be ready by november either way
harvard is definitely on my list!! but from what i’ve heard, Harvard places a ton of emphasis on leadership/change/impact which is not the strongest part of my research-heavy application… which leads me to think my chances at harvard are slimmer…
thanks for the advice!! this is my complete list:
Caltech, MIT, Princeton, UC Berkeley, Harvard, Yale, UMich, UChicago, Johns Hopkins, Cornell, University of Washington, CU Boulder, UW Madison, Oregon State University, UCSB, University of Arizona
1 Like
great advice, thanks! honestly, if I got an early offer from ANY of these schools, I wouldn’t apply anywhere else. the pros are just too good to pass up… things like weather/campus are worth sacrificing IMO
thank you for the advice!
great advice!! thank you!!
“slightly less of a fit” comes from my (perhaps incorrect) thought that caltech values independent research/theory more and mit values a more collaborative/maker culture. while i have good math coursework, Olympiads are not my thing, and I know MIT really likes amc/aime/usamo. I may be wrong of course, as all this info comes from online/personal anecdotes
Let me ask you this - you are full pay but do you have a budget?
U of Arizona is top notch for physics. If it’s half the price or less of your top three, might your parents push you there? You’re a gimme admissions wise. CU will cost more out of state - they are stingy.
Not sure where Oregon State came from but if you’re from the West, it’s WUE and inexpensive - so if it’s 35 or 40% of the cost of the others, will they direct you there?
Budget is always the first question. They may be ok spending $400K (or plus) but if you can go for $160-200K at others on your list, might they direct you to one of them? If you are from CA (not sure), I’d also add Santa Cruz as strong in your major.
Good luck.
Personally, I think you have three distinct schools so I hate to think you’d choose for an advantage vs. one you clearly want.
1 Like
Yes, that was incorporated in my opinion.
1 Like
Where are you getting your information? In my experience that is not true about Harvard (“emphasis on leadership/change/impact”). A music supplement will help a lot with Harvard and your pilot experience stands out.
Selective schools with holistic admissions are assembling a class and want an interesting mix of talents and interests. Imagine a whole class of leaders! 
2 Likes
The notion of “easier to get into” has no relevance to any of these three colleges. In fact, I would argue that Caltech’s pool of applicants is perhaps the most competitive as it’s much less a “throw the hat in the ring” school than the other two. Not many people are applying to Caltech just to see if they can get lucky.
7 Likes
So I will gently suggest that doesn’t seem to make much sense to me given your current state of thinking.
Like suppose you pick Caltech for EA. You don’t seem to know yet you prefer Caltech to Princeton. So even if admitted early to Caltech, why wouldn’t you still apply to Princeton? Then if you got an offer from Princeton as well, you could make a final choice as admitted students to both.
Of course if you already knew you would rather be at Caltech, then fine. But if so, you presumably wouldn’t be asking this question, you would already know what to do.
I will also suggest that if you even might prefer Princeton to Caltech, there are very likely other colleges more like Princeton than Caltech you might also prefer to Caltech. And vice-versa, if you end up preferring Caltech to Princeton, there very likely will be other colleges more like Caltech you might prefer to Princeton.
Again, the nice thing about non-binding EA is you don’t have to decide any of this now. And in fact, you don’t need to decide any of this if you get an EA offer either. You can wait until the actual decision deadline.
So my point was more something like this. Caltech is the most Caltechy school there is, so even if you are unsure whether you prefer a school like that versus Princeton, if admitted early to Caltech, you could at least rationally apply to no more Caltechy schools. MIT, which we shouldn’t neglect, is also the most MITesque school, so plausibly choosing MIT for EA would allow you to eliminate all of the other MITesque schools from your list. And same deal with Princeton and Princetony schools (although it sounds to me like you don’t actually necessarily feel that way about Princeton yet, like you might actually want to consider Harvard if admitted).
Anyway, I would use non-binding EA like this–an early offer can eliminate the need to apply to very similar schools you think you would not like as much. But it doesn’t have to eliminate applications to different sorts of schools you are still considering as well.
2 Likes
So I would observe you currently have a mix of midsize private research universities and large public research universities, plus then a very small tech-focused college with Caltech. Which of course is fine.
However, it appears to me your midsize private research universities are all super-reachy, and Caltech is your only small tech-focused college. What might be called your Targets and Likelies are all large publics.
It is up to you, but I would think you might want to consider some Target or Likely midsize private research universities, and perhaps some more smaller tech colleges as well.
And I note if you are concerned about cost, the sorts of people who are competitive for your Reaches are also typically competitive for merit. So, carefully-chosen private Targets and Likelies can sometimes produce offers that are financially competitive with public Targets and Likelies, even for full pay students.
So let us know if you would like some suggestions along those lines, including whether merit would be of possible interest.
2 Likes
Other issues to consider:
–In another post you state you had chronic health issues which caused you to miss much of 11th grade. Are those fully resolved? If not, do you want to stay close to your family and doctors for continued support (if needed)?
-Your other post also shares your concern about possibly not getting strong LORs due to missed school junior year. If that is the case and if you will be able to better attend and participate senior year, consider doing no EA/REA applications (other than safety/match schools). This way you may be able to get strong LORs from senior year teachers by December. Only use EA/REA for reaches if you think your application is as strong as possible.
-Again, these three colleges are ALL reaches for any unhooked applicant.
1 Like
The math, econ, poli sci, linguistics, management and cog sci majors at MIT would question your view that it’s a “maker space” place. Yes, ME at MIT is very receptive to tinkerers and has terrific resources for that. But that is one slice of a big institution.
I think you’ve got similarly narrow views of the other colleges on your REA list which suggests to me that you haven’t done enough research to figure out if one of these is your “best fit” school (and therefore an appropriate REA target) and which one potentially is a poor fit.
Or toss a coin.
This looks like a fine list. There has been some discussion about whether or not to apply EA. Should you decide to apply to MIT EA which is unrestricted, you could apply EA to another school that allows it (your favorite non-Ivy+ option), but just because you can doesn’t mean that you should, especially if it’s not truly your top choice. That other school could be an in-state school option which you may see more as a fallback default option. In general, I advise people not to apply early to schools to game an admissions process.
I really think you should visit the two types of schools you are prioritizing. Maybe one visit each if it is not feasible or affordable to visit more. You can of course apply to both/all options and decide later, but since you are “torn” I think a visit or two would be helpful.
I agree. It would be a mistake to focus solely on the majoring in physics part, that’s only 50% of the degree. Each one of these schools offers a completely unique & distinct undergraduate experience. Also like relying too heavily on ranking lists: the #1 ranked school isn’t going to be necessarily offer a better experience than the #5 ranked school for you.
2 Likes