Early decision seems like a scam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except if you ED to a school that doesn't want you then you are out of luck. They get to reject you and you dont get to ED to your 2nd and 3rd favorite school.

Obviously! But you can still EA/RD to those schools. That is how it works. pick your top choice, and apply ED. If yo udon't get in, then you can apply ED2 to your 2nd choice (if they offer it) Or choose to wait for EA/RD. You don't get to ED to more than 1 school at a time, then it's not ED as you are not guaranteing you Will attend. Sort of missing the purpose of ED

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

Why not?!?!?! If ED isn't for you, then you simply apply EA/RD. Like literally 85% of those applying to college do. You are not ready to commit, so ED is not for you. Hint: if a school is not affordable ED, it's not affordable in EA/RD either. So what you are really saying is "we cannot really afford this, UNLESS my kid doesn't get into anything decent that gives a lot more money. But if they dont' then we will find a way to pay". So you can "afford it" you just want choices. And that is what RD/EA is for

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

And? How is that relevant?

The point is that candidates who may otherwise be admitted cannot try because ED'ing means taking the risk of committing to a school they can't afford.

No one is entitled to admission, either.

And if you cannot afford it with ED, you still can NOT afford it in RD. Nothing changes, you still wont be able to attend. So I'm not sure how it helps you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

No one is entitled to pay less than $1000 for tooth floss, but it doesn’t happen because we have a free market for tooth floss with competition based on price. ED is a way of stifling competition so schools don’t have to compete on price as much as they otherwise would. That is why I think it should not be allowed even though my kids are exactly the kids who will benefit.

That makes no sense at all!

The people who can still afford to pay $95K+ for schools will still make up a given % at each school. Those who cannot will still not be able to afford it if their kid somehow gets accepted. What does change is the school cannot manage yield as well without ED as they don't know which students really want to attend. So they might end up with X+an extra 400 students when they only want X/can only support X freshman. So your kid will be in a double that is now a forced triple and in classes without seats for them during lectures. Or the school will only get X minus 400 students as freshman matriculation, and they are in financial trouble so tuition next year goes up by 10%+ instead of 3-5%. And now you cannot afford to attend after freshman year.
Schools are businesses. Their goal is to fill their freshman class with X students and not vary too much. If they mess that up, there are huge consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

No one is entitled to pay less than $1000 for tooth floss, but it doesn’t happen because we have a free market for tooth floss with competition based on price. ED is a way of stifling competition so schools don’t have to compete on price as much as they otherwise would. That is why I think it should not be allowed even though my kids are exactly the kids who will benefit.

That makes no sense at all!

The people who can still afford to pay $95K+ for schools will still make up a given % at each school. Those who cannot will still not be able to afford it if their kid somehow gets accepted. What does change is the school cannot manage yield as well without ED as they don't know which students really want to attend. So they might end up with X+an extra 400 students when they only want X/can only support X freshman. So your kid will be in a double that is now a forced triple and in classes without seats for them during lectures. Or the school will only get X minus 400 students as freshman matriculation, and they are in financial trouble so tuition next year goes up by 10%+ instead of 3-5%. And now you cannot afford to attend after freshman year.
Schools are businesses. Their goal is to fill their freshman class with X students and not vary too much. If they mess that up, there are huge consequences.

Yes, assuming the price of college is fixed and non-negotiable, this is correct.

The part where ED induces you to believe, falsely, that the price of college is fixed and non-negotiable? That’s the scam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

And? How is that relevant?

The point is that candidates who may otherwise be admitted cannot try because ED'ing means taking the risk of committing to a school they can't afford.

No one is entitled to admission, either.

NPCs are accurate and you can back out if the offer is less than suggested by the NPC. Nobody should be surprised by the cost when applying ED.

DP. I've always been curious about this. When you do the NPC, does the college save the result? How do you "prove" what the NPC offered later, if offered admission at a higher tuition than what the NPC showed? Take a screenshot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

My daughter doesn't fit into the first two categories, but I don't think we were suckers: we are full pay, she knew without a doubt what SLAC she wanted to get into, so for her ED was a great way to just get the whole college search out of the way by December.

I don't feel like anyone gamed us at all; rather, we benefitted from the 4+ months of peace of mind it offered.

Non-binding rolling or EA admissions can offer that same peace of mind. Adding "binding" to the package and calling it "ED" benefits only the school.

It benefits the student because the student likely has a better chance of getting in ED than they would EA. The student is competing against fewer classmates in ED, because most of those classmates have other colleges as their top choices. But if the college had EA, all those classmates could apply, and the student would be competing against all of them. For a kid who knows where they want to go, ED is a valuable way to show that to the school. In that way it adds a tiny bit of efficiency to college admissions, which is a horribly inefficient process.

A. Only for the wealthy.

B. Does it really add any efficiency? Most of the kids I know who ED don't ED to their actual top choice, they ED to the school where they think they'll get the biggest boost.

A + B = Wealthy kids snapping up (and committing to) slots that they only kinda want and that then are not available for kids who really want them but lack the resources to play the ED game.

And the other drawback: ED schools are now full of the kind of status-obsessed wealthy kids who are willing to settle for slots they only kinda want. And these charming people are academically weaker than the students who might have been admitted RD.

DP. Now I've heard it all. Look, it's clear you have an enormous chip on your shoulder. Why on earth would you claim ED students are weaker than others? Of that they are somehow settling for a school they really didn't want? If a student has a dream school/first-choice, and they know they would attend that school over all others, then why shouldn't they have a way to express that to the adcom? I only wish ALL schools offered ED, for this very reason. And we're not even wealthy. Our kid just knows the school they want to attend and we'd like to apply and get it over with. That would benefit HIM.

[Anonymous]

I don't really see how scam applies here. DD needed heavy financial aid, and schools are generous during the ED period, because you are exchanging your spot to improve their yield, so they want you to come. Plus, they haven't given out financial aid to the other half of the class, so they are able to promise you a bit more. DD only pays 2k for a top school, an absolute bargain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

No one is entitled to pay less than $1000 for tooth floss, but it doesn’t happen because we have a free market for tooth floss with competition based on price. ED is a way of stifling competition so schools don’t have to compete on price as much as they otherwise would. That is why I think it should not be allowed even though my kids are exactly the kids who will benefit.

That makes no sense at all!

The people who can still afford to pay $95K+ for schools will still make up a given % at each school. Those who cannot will still not be able to afford it if their kid somehow gets accepted. What does change is the school cannot manage yield as well without ED as they don't know which students really want to attend. So they might end up with X+an extra 400 students when they only want X/can only support X freshman. So your kid will be in a double that is now a forced triple and in classes without seats for them during lectures. Or the school will only get X minus 400 students as freshman matriculation, and they are in financial trouble so tuition next year goes up by 10%+ instead of 3-5%. And now you cannot afford to attend after freshman year.
Schools are businesses. Their goal is to fill their freshman class with X students and not vary too much. If they mess that up, there are huge consequences.

This is the biggest lie!
Of course they can. USC never had ED until this year they managed it so well.

[Anonymous]

ED is fine except that making public employees agree not to perform their basic duties in the service of limiting children’s major life choices in what are usually nonrational ways is kind of gross. I don’t see why school districts agree to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

And? How is that relevant?

The point is that candidates who may otherwise be admitted cannot try because ED'ing means taking the risk of committing to a school they can't afford.

No one is entitled to admission, either.

NPCs are accurate and you can back out if the offer is less than suggested by the NPC. Nobody should be surprised by the cost when applying ED.

DP. I've always been curious about this. When you do the NPC, does the college save the result? How do you "prove" what the NPC offered later, if offered admission at a higher tuition than what the NPC showed? Take a screenshot?

Take a screenshot, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

No one is entitled to pay less than $1000 for tooth floss, but it doesn’t happen because we have a free market for tooth floss with competition based on price. ED is a way of stifling competition so schools don’t have to compete on price as much as they otherwise would. That is why I think it should not be allowed even though my kids are exactly the kids who will benefit.

That makes no sense at all!

The people who can still afford to pay $95K+ for schools will still make up a given % at each school. Those who cannot will still not be able to afford it if their kid somehow gets accepted. What does change is the school cannot manage yield as well without ED as they don't know which students really want to attend. So they might end up with X+an extra 400 students when they only want X/can only support X freshman. So your kid will be in a double that is now a forced triple and in classes without seats for them during lectures. Or the school will only get X minus 400 students as freshman matriculation, and they are in financial trouble so tuition next year goes up by 10%+ instead of 3-5%. And now you cannot afford to attend after freshman year.
Schools are businesses. Their goal is to fill their freshman class with X students and not vary too much. If they mess that up, there are huge consequences.

Yes, assuming the price of college is fixed and non-negotiable, this is correct.

The part where ED induces you to believe, falsely, that the price of college is fixed and non-negotiable? That’s the scam.

Exactly. If keeps colleges from having to compete on merit aid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action for the rich.

Not true, at least for the elite schools that don't give merit. You run the NPCs and see what you can afford. We eliminated some colleges from our list that indicated no aid, and focused on narrowing down our list based on the ones that did. From everything I've heard (and from limited experience) NPC estimates are pretty accurate.

Some schools are likely to give merit to high stats kids whether they apply ED or RD, like Oberlin, Grinnell, and Case.

Yes, the NPC figures apply whether you apply ED or RD. You can compare college approximate "offers" before you even apply.

Not so for merit aid, at least not at all such schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

And? How is that relevant?

The point is that candidates who may otherwise be admitted cannot try because ED'ing means taking the risk of committing to a school they can't afford.

No one is entitled to admission, either.

NPCs are accurate and you can back out if the offer is less than suggested by the NPC. Nobody should be surprised by the cost when applying ED.

NCs are not always accurate and in any case, you can't back out because you didn't get the merit aid you need in order to attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

My daughter doesn't fit into the first two categories, but I don't think we were suckers: we are full pay, she knew without a doubt what SLAC she wanted to get into, so for her ED was a great way to just get the whole college search out of the way by December.

I don't feel like anyone gamed us at all; rather, we benefitted from the 4+ months of peace of mind it offered.

Non-binding rolling or EA admissions can offer that same peace of mind. Adding "binding" to the package and calling it "ED" benefits only the school.

Huh? It benefits the students too.