Yes, I know of many as well, but many who didn’t as well. I think the lack of conversation here says a lot.
3 Likes
Are spring scholars kept off the books so to speak, so that they don’t impact’s a school’s admit stats? I genuinely don’t know.
Yup
1 Like
with the EA deadline being 11/15 I don’t get how they can make decisions on that many apps in such a short amount of time. makes me see how that 1/10 date while way later than usual for them, gave them time to holistically make decisions. it stinks when schools rush EA decisions and you see everyone deferred with reason being “we had too many to go through” (Michigan is so guilty of this). while I want a decision sooner I respect any transparency up front regarding a specific date to get the job done without a pile of deferrals.
You’re assuming that they don’t evaluate as they come in.
You’re also assuming that mathematically, some apps aren’t quickly put into the no pile.
I don’t know their method but I assume they’re set up to give the proper responses within the time they allow.
no, I get all that but I just don’t love how a school with ED can read EA apps simultaneously.
They are separate pools and should be read without getting influenced by reading an EA app at the same time. kudos to anyone that can be that objective. if they have separate readers for the pools, ok but then what’s the point of the regional rep - what real role do they have in the decisions? do they just take notes from readers to committee? we’ll never really know how this school does it unless an AO chimes in with the details and the likelihood of that happening is --. some schools are very transparent that they do not start reading earlier than the deadline.
This would be my assumption as well. With a $0 application fee they are going to have a lot of apps that are “easy no”. The “maybe’s” they put in the deferred bucket.
Not saying its still not a monumental task to get through 10’s of thousands of applications in 4-8 weeks.
They do it every year
2 Likes
it’s just sus imo when there are separate pools. because kids apply ed to just be compared to those in the ed pool. wonder how often an ed kid’s app gets read and then a better ea app gets read and then they realize hey - this one is a better fit for our school now that i’ve seen what i’ve needed to see. kudos to anyone who can absolutely stay fair throughout the process because it is hard with human nature in the mix.
Kids in the ED pool aren’t just getting compared to kids in the ED pool. Its not like they have a quota if X kids from each pool so they draw lines blindly like the other pools don’t exist.
1 Like
One is a guaranteed butt in seat. Likely different criteria.
3 Likes
Tulane knows what they are doing. They want qualified students who want to be there. Nothing SUS about that.
9 Likes
The sus pertains to one’s ability to fairly score ED and EA apps simultaneously. ED applicants are trusting they are only being compared to those in their pool. When apps are read simultaneously from diff pools it starts to muddy the waters of ones judgement.
Do you know they are read simultaneously? There are probably 1,200 ED1s and 10,000 EAs (just a SWAG)
Hmm…I never assumed that ED applicants are only compared to ED and EA only compared to EA. I would actually assume the opposite…that they compare all applicants to each other. They may be more likely accept ED compared to EA and, especially RD. But it never occurred to me that anyone would have thought they don’t compare them all.
1 Like
The adv of ED is to only be compared to that pool and saying you will attend no matter the price.
It’s exactly why people agree to sign that agreement.
ED applicants end up being looked at/compared to other pools when they are deferred.
I think there is a common misconception that ED is a smaller pool so therefore it’s easier to get in ED vs RD or EA. This simply isn’t true. Statistically, yes it’s easier, but colleges don’t lower their standards for ED because they know someone will definitely come. Most have plenty of good applicants from which to choose. So, I think when evaluating applications, they are building a class and schools evaluate each application on its merits.
Schools will clearly state that the applicant pools are smaller and helps to gain admission.
Not all schools are that transparent but plenty do in fact come out and state that this is a clear reason to apply during that round.
It helps a strong applicant stand out - they state this explicitly.
Sure this is where the legacies often apply and the verbally committed athletes but the remainder are looking to be compared among a smaller pool of applicants to show their hand and additionally say they will enroll if accepted.
There is a statistical advantage with ED because fewer students apply through the ED round which tends to net out at a higher acceptance rate. This provides an advantage to students who are academically prepared to stand out in the applicant pool. So 100%, the standards are not lowered but the applicant is being compared to a smaller amount of applicants.
1 Like
If you scroll up this thread at one point I listed out the application pool numbers for Tulane. The ED Pool is SUBSTANTIALLY smaller than EA/RD.
But 100% agree with you that colleges don’t lower their standards for ED just because they know someone will definitely come.
Tulane heavily weighs in demonstrated interest - and there’s no higher form of DI than ED.
1 Like
You can find all the ED & EA/RD numbers within each schools published common data set.
Tulane tends to be skewed a bit heavily towards ED (yes, we keep hear they’re going to move away from that but until the data proves it out it’s just conjecture). For some schools ED acceptance rate is close to the EA/RD acceptance rate.
5 Likes