Using ED / EA outcomes to calibrate RD tier fit

[Anonymous]

Have you seen it work for calibrating RD tier fit?

I think rejection may not mean too much. Rejection from a t20 doesn't necessarily mean they will be rejected at all t20.

Does a deferral at a school that only selectively defers (e.g., less than 20%) indicate taht you are on the right rung? For example, would a T10 selective deferral cofirm that having T20s as reach schools is appropriate, with the understanding that it doesn't answer whether you will get in.

[Anonymous]

The better proxy is your EA admits with merit. That’s how you know you’re competitive for T20.

But remember major. It matters in RD. If you’re a “cusp” candidate in am oversubscribed major, be strategic with RD apps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have you seen it work for calibrating RD tier fit?

I think rejection may not mean too much. Rejection from a t20 doesn't necessarily mean they will be rejected at all t20.

Does a deferral at a school that only selectively defers (e.g., less than 20%) indicate taht you are on the right rung? For example, would a T10 selective deferral cofirm that having T20s as reach schools is appropriate, with the understanding that it doesn't answer whether you will get in.

You have to look at the whole picture. You have to look at who you’re competing against in your school and how you rank compared to them in RD.

You have to look at major. You have to look at gender. You have to look at other potential institutional priorities that certain candidates might bring.

Nothing is in a vacuum. And you were always first and foremost, compared against your peers at your own high school and then within your own region.

It’s why standing out matters so much much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The better proxy is your EA admits with merit. That’s how you know you’re competitive for T20.

But remember major. It matters in RD. If you’re a “cusp” candidate in am oversubscribed major, be strategic with RD apps.

Disagree: There are many case western admits with merit but didn't get into T20 every year.
Agree: major matters. Stats are important for T20 but not sufficient, needs something more. That's why EA admits (more about stats) are not a better proxy.

[Anonymous]

Major matters more in RD than ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The better proxy is your EA admits with merit. That’s how you know you’re competitive for T20.

But remember major. It matters in RD. If you’re a “cusp” candidate in am oversubscribed major, be strategic with RD apps.

Disagree: There are many case western admits with merit but didn't get into T20 every year.
Agree: major matters. Stats are important for T20 but not sufficient, needs something more. That's why EA admits (more about stats) are not a better proxy.

Case is no where near T20. USC with merit? Now we’re talking.

[Anonymous]

Last year my daughter used a EA admit to change her RD list significantly. She cut off all the safety and target schools that she didn’t want to attend as much as the EA accepted school. And she decided to throw in another reach application (she didn’t get in).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The better proxy is your EA admits with merit. That’s how you know you’re competitive for T20.

But remember major. It matters in RD. If you’re a “cusp” candidate in am oversubscribed major, be strategic with RD apps.

Disagree: There are many case western admits with merit but didn't get into T20 every year.
Agree: major matters. Stats are important for T20 but not sufficient, needs something more. That's why EA admits (more about stats) are not a better proxy.

Case is no where near T20. USC with merit? Now we’re talking.

Agree with this one. USC with merit means there are other acceptances on the way or already received from T20s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:would a T10 selective deferral confirm that having T20s as reach schools is appropriate, with the understanding that it doesn't answer whether you will get in

yes --with the understanding that it doesn't answer whether you will get in.

It means you've correctly assessed that your profile is lottery-ticket-worthy.

Anonymous wrote:The better proxy is your EA admits with merit. That’s how you know you’re competitive for T20.

Depends which EA admits and how much merit -- but this is great info, as well.

Anonymous wrote:You have to look at the whole picture. You have to look at who you’re competing against in your school and how you rank compared to them in RD.

You have to look at major. You have to look at gender. You have to look at other potential institutional priorities that certain candidates might bring.

Nothing is in a vacuum.

yes, and also: Look at what the universities themselves have to say following ED/EA announcements. For example Vandy last year (?) announced that 100% of ED applicants held major leadership roles or had won major awards. So, if your student hasn't won any awards or held major leadership roles, you'd best be looking elsewhere for RD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The better proxy is your EA admits with merit. That’s how you know you’re competitive for T20.

But remember major. It matters in RD. If you’re a “cusp” candidate in am oversubscribed major, be strategic with RD apps.

Disagree: There are many case western admits with merit but didn't get into T20 every year.
Agree: major matters. Stats are important for T20 but not sufficient, needs something more. That's why EA admits (more about stats) are not a better proxy.

Case is no where near T20. USC with merit? Now we’re talking.

Agree USC merit is a good indicator.

Absent EA USC, you will have to rely on your ED deferral directly. Stanford/Yale/Brown deferral is a lot more meaningful, not so much if it's Georgetown deferral or USC deferral. HP defer a lot.

[Anonymous]

I can’t say it enough. Use the scatterplots. Ours give 5 years of data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t say it enough. Use the scatterplots. Ours give 5 years of data.

Scatterplot contains only stats, no ECs, no majors. Everyone has the stats but not everyone gets in. This is stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t say it enough. Use the scatterplots. Ours give 5 years of data.

Scatterplot contains only stats, no ECs, no majors. Everyone has the stats but not everyone gets in. This is stupid.

I agree. Also *every* single year a student gets admitted to a university in which we have no recent acceptances. Shoot your shot - so long as your stats are in line with the college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t say it enough. Use the scatterplots. Ours give 5 years of data.

Scatterplot contains only stats, no ECs, no majors. Everyone has the stats but not everyone gets in. This is stupid.

I agree. Also *every* single year a student gets admitted to a university in which we have no recent acceptances. Shoot your shot - so long as your stats are in line with the college.

If you want to "shot your shot" then sure, do it. But scatterplots are extremely helpful for people who want to ED somewhere likely, not a pipedream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have you seen it work for calibrating RD tier fit?

I think rejection may not mean too much. Rejection from a t20 doesn't necessarily mean they will be rejected at all t20.

Does a deferral at a school that only selectively defers (e.g., less than 20%) indicate taht you are on the right rung? For example, would a T10 selective deferral cofirm that having T20s as reach schools is appropriate, with the understanding that it doesn't answer whether you will get in.

Yes. My DC only did 4 EA/SCEA and no early decision because there were a couple programs of interest. Accepted to state flagship and one T20, deferred from the other two T20. Dropped all schools potentially interesting that were lower interest than the accepted schools. Applied to 4 Ivies, accepted at 3, declined at 1. Of the 2 deferrals, one was decline and the other waitlist in RD. DC ended up choosing the T20 EA acceptance.