<p>“to waste her EA chances to other colleges”</p>
<p>What does this mean? There would be no linkage applying EA to various schools.</p>
<p>Geez, yall are way more active than the stanford thread…</p>
<p>To vonlost,
Since Harvard has SCEA(Single Choice Early Admission), we cannot go apply other private schools as EA.
If there is no SCEA advantage in Harvard, I rather apply for a couple of other schools which have EA. (not ED.)</p>
<p>^ Good point; SCEA is a different beast from EA.</p>
<p>I think saying applying SCEA has no advantage is a bit short-sighted. Look at the statistics. Yes, the top applicants and the recruited athletes are often accepted and urged to apply in the early round, but there’s no way around it that the acceptance rate is, what, 18%? If you’re a CC’er, you’re more than likely one of those top applicants and you have a statistically increased chance of admission. Maybe it’s so small it’s negligible, but it is undeniably there.</p>
<p>“Maybe it’s so small it’s negligible, but it is undeniably there.”</p>
<p>We could argue this point ad nauseum. I was admitted REA to Stanford, and some of my fellow REA admits feel as if they wouldn’t have been admitted had they applied regular. Though these people could certainly be underestimating themselves, it’s possible that SCEA/REA may help slightly. Data10, a regular poster on the Stanford forum, often cites a study finding that REA and SCEA increase an applicant’s chances by 2-4%. Though this advantage is minimal, it may make the difference in a handful of cases. I’ll try to find the study…</p>
<p>Since the process as a whole is so unpredictable and since there’s no way of knowing for sure if SCEA/EA increase an applicant’s chances, it’s best to simply take the path of least regrets. Would you feel regretful if you did not apply early to Harvard or another school? Frankly, I think you should apply early to the school that is your first choice if your application is as strong as it can be by the November 1 deadline.</p>
<p>Does anyone know when Siemens decisions are made, before November 1?</p>
<p>sooooo0o0o0o0o0 anyone make national merit semifinalist?</p>
<p>I’m sure just about everyone did.</p>
<p>probably lol</p>
<p>I didn’t make it by a long shot, lol, I don’t care, all my other test scores are good.</p>
<p>Didn’t make it, lol…I did make Achievement though!</p>
<p>I am considering applying to Harvard SCEA too.</p>
<p>I don’t totally buy the whole “Early Action is just as hard as regular decision” mantra, because it doesn’t make logical sense. Harvard took about 18% of EA applicants for the class of 2017, and had an overall acceptance rate of about 6%. Thus, the RD pool would have had to have an incredibly low rate (maybe like around 3%) to balance this out. Is the Early Applicant pool really 6x as qualified as the RD pool? In my school, no one is applying to Harvard RD who has no chance of making it. </p>
<p>Now, on the other hand, the people applying EA are those who are forfeiting the admissions advantage of applying ED (maybe to Penn, Cornell, Brown, etc.).
Thus, you might expect a more qualified applicant pool EA since the EA pool consists of EVERYONE who thinks they are good enough to make it worth applying EA over ED. In the regular decision pool, you get everyone applying because no sacrifice is required.</p>
<p>Just presenting two sides of an argument. I think the true answer lies somewhere in the middle—EA is easier, but not THAT much easier.</p>
<p>The EA acceptance rate is so much higher in large part because Harvard (and other Ivies) accept the bulk, if not all, of their athletic recruits in the early pool. This is - correct me if I’m wrong - in the ballpark of 200-some people. There’s no way to tell whether applying SCEA really does have an advantage at all in admissions. Some say there’s a small bump; others chalk the higher rate up to the recruits alone.</p>
<p>^^ No one is chalking “the higher rate up to the recruits alone”. Harvard recruits about 230 athletes a year, it is simple math to back them out and re-calculate the SCEA acceptance rate. I’ll leave it up to you but you will see that it is quite a bit higher than the 3.3% RD rate (or even 5.8% overall rate).</p>
<p>Now, if you also want to back out the development cases, strong legacies, famous kids, geniuses, URM’s etc. to come up with a lower SCEA rate, no one would fault you.</p>
<p>I only have two subject tests done. Do I need three for consideration?</p>
<p>No. 10char</p>
<p><em>Very</em> excited to be turning in my application soon; I’ve been anticipating applying SCEA for a while now! 
</p>
<p>Question, though: if my employer wants to mail in a recommendation letter, how will Harvard identify it as for me (besides the name, as I have a fairly common name)? Should I have her put my Common App ID in the letter or attach some form or something? </p>
<p>Also, how will I confirm that Harvard receives all my sent-in (not online) stuff (mailed-in recommendations, SAT scores, etc.)?</p>
<p>Have employer include your HS and your birthdate. That’ll be sufficient identification.</p>
<p>Bump on @ckfy63a’s question on how to confirm sent-in stuff. I am also wondering the same thing.</p>