My Parents want me to Apply Early at an Ivy

[Data10]

<p>

Does SCEA give an slight advantage? Yes. Does it give an advantage that is predictable from applicant to applicant as you allege? I don’t think so.

At least we are making some progress in that you agree it gives an advantage. I have said that the advantage is only expected to change the decision for a small portion of apps. This is not far from what you wrote. </p>

<p>

I think the most likely explanation is you have no idea what my sample looks like. If you have visited Princeton/been here, you would see and I would accept that perhaps there’s something wrong with my sample. But you keep on making assumptions about my observations and my sample. We’re not going to reach a conclusion here.

Earlier you wrote, “nobody really knows the chances of an applicant.” Now you are saying that I am incorrect in claiming the most likely explanation is you don’t have a good sense of which persons were close to the border between acceptance and rejection. You can’t have it both ways – if nobody knows the chance of an applicant, then you can’t accurately determine who was close to the border between acceptance and rejection, and you need to identify this near-border group to determine whether SCEA has an effect on the group (SCEA is not expected to change admissions decisions outside of the near-border group).</p>

<p>

Not only do I separate those two things by a sentence, but I use “Again” …

I reported data about the 2% and 19%. You mentioned observing data about the 2% and 19% (the number of low stat admits). The obvious conclusion is that you are referring to the 2% and 19% data I reported, even if it is separated by a whole sentence with a punctuation mark. And “again” signifies that you are repeating a point you made earlier in the post with a different type of data.</p>

<p>

The 2011 study looks at the same issues, but with different schools and with a slightly different perspective (ED vs. EA). If you want to validate the Avery study by claiming the sources that cite it, those sources should at least be applicable to Princeton.

The whole cited tangent was originally brought up to confirm that other studies published by researches in peer-reviewed journals take the results seriously and are not “laughed out of the room”, as you wrote. As well as that the cited results were not all unrelated to early action and admissions, as you claimed. The Avery study continues to be cited as a reference for early college admissions, including in expanding the results to more recent data that shows similar conclusions to the Avery data, like the 2011 study did. </p>

<p>One could argue that SCEA is more like ED than EA by the relative effects it has on yield. This can be seen both by the yield rates for SCEA acceptances and how overall yield always has a large jump in the year a selective college implements SCEA, including with Princeton’s recent change to SCEA. I think a fair statement is that the effects of SCEA are expected to be somewhere between the effects of unrestricted EA and fully restricted ED, as I wrote in my first post of the thread. Yes, there is not a study that specifically focuses on the recent class of Princeton students.</p>