How would you do differently if DC is only interested in SLACs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First, LACs are very small. Applying to five LACs is roughly equivalent to applying to one large national university: our school sends about ten students a year to Cornell, but typically only one to Williams. Additionally, the school limits how many applications each student can submit. I am not sure if it's wise to apply to LACs exclusively. Second, most SLACs do not offer an ED advantage—Middlebury is one notable exception. At the moment, Middlebury is not DC's dream school. So there is no ED strategy. I am also wondering if there is any consultant specialized in LACs.

This is just wrong wrong wrong. I don't know of a single SLAC that doesn't have an ED advantage. You can run the data and see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, LACs are very small. Applying to five LACs is roughly equivalent to applying to one large national university: our school sends about ten students a year to Cornell, but typically only one to Williams. Additionally, the school limits how many applications each student can submit. I am not sure if it's wise to apply to LACs exclusively. Second, most SLACs do not offer an ED advantage—Middlebury is one notable exception. At the moment, Middlebury is not DC's dream school. So there is no ED strategy. I am also wondering if there is any consultant specialized in LACs.

This is just wrong wrong wrong. I don't know of a single SLAC that doesn't have an ED advantage. You can run the data and see.

If not hooked ED at WASP does almost nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most LACs outside of the top ones have big boosts for ED, even after counting athletes. There’s not many spots left after this. ED I to somewhere at the level of Bowdoin and then ED II to somewhere at the level of Kenyon.
Apply to safety LACs EA.

Check ED acceptance rates though. It used to help to apply ED to Bowdoin, was around 37% acceptance rate for a long time. But they've moved away from ED, down to a 17% acceptance last time I checked. After athletes and other institutional priorities, it's now one of the toughest ED LAC admits. I think only Pomona is lower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, LACs are very small. Applying to five LACs is roughly equivalent to applying to one large national university: our school sends about ten students a year to Cornell, but typically only one to Williams. Additionally, the school limits how many applications each student can submit. I am not sure if it's wise to apply to LACs exclusively. Second, most SLACs do not offer an ED advantage—Middlebury is one notable exception. At the moment, Middlebury is not DC's dream school. So there is no ED strategy. I am also wondering if there is any consultant specialized in LACs.

This is just wrong wrong wrong. I don't know of a single SLAC that doesn't have an ED advantage. You can run the data and see.

If not hooked ED at WASP does almost nothing.

That may often be the case, but my unhooked kid got into a WASP school ED. In RD they would have been one of 15 applying. Who knows if they would have been the 1 (typically) admitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most LACs outside of the top ones have big boosts for ED, even after counting athletes. There’s not many spots left after this. ED I to somewhere at the level of Bowdoin and then ED II to somewhere at the level of Kenyon.
Apply to safety LACs EA.

Check ED acceptance rates though. It used to help to apply ED to Bowdoin, was around 37% acceptance rate for a long time. But they've moved away from ED, down to a 17% acceptance last time I checked. After athletes and other institutional priorities, it's now one of the toughest ED LAC admits. I think only Pomona is lower.

Pomona is almost impossible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, LACs are very small. Applying to five LACs is roughly equivalent to applying to one large national university: our school sends about ten students a year to Cornell, but typically only one to Williams. Additionally, the school limits how many applications each student can submit. I am not sure if it's wise to apply to LACs exclusively. Second, most SLACs do not offer an ED advantage—Middlebury is one notable exception. At the moment, Middlebury is not DC's dream school. So there is no ED strategy. I am also wondering if there is any consultant specialized in LACs.

This is just wrong wrong wrong. I don't know of a single SLAC that doesn't have an ED advantage. You can run the data and see.

Below WASP and Bowdoin, that's generally true. Huge advantage for Midd and Colby, who admit up to 80% of their classes ED.

[Anonymous]

If trying to maximize ED boost, you might want to consider schools that have stopped legacy admissions and/or schools with lower levels of athletes. (Typically students hoping for a legacy or athletic bump are advised to apply ED.)

Here’s a list of schools that has stopped legacy admissions:

https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/legacy-admissions-bans/

Here’s a site that can be used to find % NCAA athletes on a campus:

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

Carleton is an example of a school with comparatively low (20%) NCAA athletes and no legacy admission bump. There are others.

Reed has no varsity sports (so not listed at all on the ope site) but I believe still considers legacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If trying to maximize ED boost, you might want to consider schools that have stopped legacy admissions and/or schools with lower levels of athletes. (Typically students hoping for a legacy or athletic bump are advised to apply ED.)

Here’s a list of schools that has stopped legacy admissions:

https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/legacy-admissions-bans/

Here’s a site that can be used to find % NCAA athletes on a campus:

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

Carleton is an example of a school with comparatively low (20%) NCAA athletes and no legacy admission bump. There are others.

Reed has no varsity sports (so not listed at all on the ope site) but I believe still considers legacy.

Quit telling people that there is a huge ED advantage at Midd, it will give the wrong impression.The unhooked ED rate at Midd is about 14% so it is a huge advantage relative to RD which is about 7%. But it is still a very tough admit and nothing like to 40% that some people seem to believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If trying to maximize ED boost, you might want to consider schools that have stopped legacy admissions and/or schools with lower levels of athletes. (Typically students hoping for a legacy or athletic bump are advised to apply ED.)

Here’s a list of schools that has stopped legacy admissions:

https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/legacy-admissions-bans/

Here’s a site that can be used to find % NCAA athletes on a campus:

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

Carleton is an example of a school with comparatively low (20%) NCAA athletes and no legacy admission bump. There are others.

Reed has no varsity sports (so not listed at all on the ope site) but I believe still considers legacy.

Quit telling people that there is a huge ED advantage at Midd, it will give the wrong impression.The unhooked ED rate at Midd is about 14% so it is a huge advantage relative to RD which is about 7%. But it is still a very tough admit and nothing like to 40% that some people seem to believe.

I think you replied to the wrong post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If trying to maximize ED boost, you might want to consider schools that have stopped legacy admissions and/or schools with lower levels of athletes. (Typically students hoping for a legacy or athletic bump are advised to apply ED.)

Here’s a list of schools that has stopped legacy admissions:

https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/legacy-admissions-bans/

Here’s a site that can be used to find % NCAA athletes on a campus:

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

Carleton is an example of a school with comparatively low (20%) NCAA athletes and no legacy admission bump. There are others.

Reed has no varsity sports (so not listed at all on the ope site) but I believe still considers legacy.

Quit telling people that there is a huge ED advantage at Midd, it will give the wrong impression.The unhooked ED rate at Midd is about 14% so it is a huge advantage relative to RD which is about 7%. But it is still a very tough admit and nothing like to 40% that some people seem to believe.

I don't see how a 34% ED acceptance rate translates to 14% unhooked. Please run the numbers for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If trying to maximize ED boost, you might want to consider schools that have stopped legacy admissions and/or schools with lower levels of athletes. (Typically students hoping for a legacy or athletic bump are advised to apply ED.)

Here’s a list of schools that has stopped legacy admissions:

https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/legacy-admissions-bans/

Here’s a site that can be used to find % NCAA athletes on a campus:

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

Carleton is an example of a school with comparatively low (20%) NCAA athletes and no legacy admission bump. There are others.

Reed has no varsity sports (so not listed at all on the ope site) but I believe still considers legacy.

The numbers on NCAA site do not differentiate between recruits and walkons?
Williams 39% athletes I bet a large chunk of it are walkons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If trying to maximize ED boost, you might want to consider schools that have stopped legacy admissions and/or schools with lower levels of athletes. (Typically students hoping for a legacy or athletic bump are advised to apply ED.)

Here’s a list of schools that has stopped legacy admissions:

https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/legacy-admissions-bans/

Here’s a site that can be used to find % NCAA athletes on a campus:

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

Carleton is an example of a school with comparatively low (20%) NCAA athletes and no legacy admission bump. There are others.

Reed has no varsity sports (so not listed at all on the ope site) but I believe still considers legacy.

The numbers on NCAA site do not differentiate between recruits and walkons?
Williams 39% athletes I bet a large chunk of it are walkons.

Correct, it doesn’t differentiate.

Walk-on rates vary a lot by school and sport. At Williams specifically, my guess is 10-20% of the varsity athletes are walk-ons, but schools don’t regularly disclose that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If trying to maximize ED boost, you might want to consider schools that have stopped legacy admissions and/or schools with lower levels of athletes. (Typically students hoping for a legacy or athletic bump are advised to apply ED.)

Here’s a list of schools that has stopped legacy admissions:

https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/legacy-admissions-bans/

Here’s a site that can be used to find % NCAA athletes on a campus:

https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

Carleton is an example of a school with comparatively low (20%) NCAA athletes and no legacy admission bump. There are others.

Reed has no varsity sports (so not listed at all on the ope site) but I believe still considers legacy.

Quit telling people that there is a huge ED advantage at Midd, it will give the wrong impression.The unhooked ED rate at Midd is about 14% so it is a huge advantage relative to RD which is about 7%. But it is still a very tough admit and nothing like to 40% that some people seem to believe.

I don't see how a 34% ED acceptance rate translates to 14% unhooked. Please run the numbers for us.

I don't think that Middlebury breaks out ED1 and ED2 so I'm not sure where they got 14% but it's probably close if you figure 250 athletes, 10 QB, 30-40 Posse plus other DLC candidates all applying ED1. If you subtract the 300 or so (estimate) from 1300 or so ED applications you get 150/160 unhooked kids out of 1000 or so apps so they are in the ballpark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, LACs are very small. Applying to five LACs is roughly equivalent to applying to one large national university: our school sends about ten students a year to Cornell, but typically only one to Williams. Additionally, the school limits how many applications each student can submit. I am not sure if it's wise to apply to LACs exclusively. Second, most SLACs do not offer an ED advantage—Middlebury is one notable exception. At the moment, Middlebury is not DC's dream school. So there is no ED strategy. I am also wondering if there is any consultant specialized in LACs.

This is just wrong wrong wrong. I don't know of a single SLAC that doesn't have an ED advantage. You can run the data and see.

If not hooked ED at WASP does almost nothing.

That may often be the case, but my unhooked kid got into a WASP school ED. In RD they would have been one of 15 applying. Who knows if they would have been the 1 (typically) admitted.

Congrats on that!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most LACs outside of the top ones have big boosts for ED, even after counting athletes. There’s not many spots left after this. ED I to somewhere at the level of Bowdoin and then ED II to somewhere at the level of Kenyon.
Apply to safety LACs EA.

Agree. Every kid at our school who did ED to not tippy top LAC got in. You just have to make the decision not to reach for the reachy reach.

Kids who RD to LACS are really rolling the dice, even when the overall acceptance rate is above 50, but especially when it's below that. In RD, it's a numbers issue and there just aren't many spots left at these tiny schools.