Early decision seems like a scam

[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.

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.

Simple: just apply regular decision.

Done.

That’s not how it works. You individually applying RD won’t change the fact that most of the other students at your college will be disgruntled rich kids who were persuaded to apply ED to a school they didn’t really want in order to secure the admissions bump.

Wow that is quite a scenario you are dreaming up. Also in that scenario nobody forced them to apply ED so that is their problem.

[Anonymous]

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.

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

Where on earth do you get that?

Some families- most actually - have a hard ceiling for how much they can afford to pay for college. True fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My unhooked got in ED2. Doesn't feel like a scam.

But did your kid have regrets when they saw where classmates got in RD? If already at college do they have regrets about binding in EDII now?
I ask as I know kids who definitely regret it, more in the EDII group than the EDI.

Zero regrets. He had been wanting that school for 2 years. He actually regretted not doing ED1 there and changed his EA to ED2. Very happy.

I don't understand kids who have ED regrets. They should not be playing games with ED, but rather choosing their top choice, or their top choice they still want to attend (knowing that HCY might not be a real chance). But if you would have regrets, then ED is not for you

The students are 17 year-olds- they aren't the ones playing games, the schools are

No, the schools are not. They are simply picking kids who want to attend and are willing to commit. If you don't want to do that, then don't apply ED. If you want choices, then EA/RD is available.

And yes 17 yo are playing games. Kids pick schools they think they can get into, but often are not their top choice (sometimes not even in their top 3). That is not what ED is for, unless you are willing to accept the result and not "wonder what could have been". It's literally there for students who have a TOP choice and are willing to commit.

Correct. Like my kid. Who applied ED to what would be considered a target with his stats. The target he had been wanting to attend for 2 years. He didn't use ED to chase rankings or whatever.

Sometimes a sure thing is good for both sides. Heh.

[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.

How exactly does ED 'induce' one to believe that? They all have a COA they publish every year. They are all clear that ED is binding assuming the financials work for the applicant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My unhooked got in ED2. Doesn't feel like a scam.

But did your kid have regrets when they saw where classmates got in RD? If already at college do they have regrets about binding in EDII now?
I ask as I know kids who definitely regret it, more in the EDII group than the EDI.

Zero regrets. He had been wanting that school for 2 years. He actually regretted not doing ED1 there and changed his EA to ED2. Very happy.

I don't understand kids who have ED regrets. They should not be playing games with ED, but rather choosing their top choice, or their top choice they still want to attend (knowing that HCY might not be a real chance). But if you would have regrets, then ED is not for you

The students are 17 year-olds- they aren't the ones playing games, the schools are

No, the schools are not. They are simply picking kids who want to attend and are willing to commit. If you don't want to do that, then don't apply ED. If you want choices, then EA/RD is available.

And yes 17 yo are playing games. Kids pick schools they think they can get into, but often are not their top choice (sometimes not even in their top 3). That is not what ED is for, unless you are willing to accept the result and not "wonder what could have been". It's literally there for students who have a TOP choice and are willing to commit.

Lot's of 17 year-olds don't have a first choice, especially not one that is based on much more than ranking, what their parents want for them and often the one their school counselor tells them is where ED will help them get in. Plus since the schools don't disclose how many legacies and recruited athletes are in the ED round they can't actually assess whether there is an advantage or not.

[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.

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.

Yes you can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My unhooked got in ED2. Doesn't feel like a scam.

But did your kid have regrets when they saw where classmates got in RD? If already at college do they have regrets about binding in EDII now?
I ask as I know kids who definitely regret it, more in the EDII group than the EDI.

Zero regrets. He had been wanting that school for 2 years. He actually regretted not doing ED1 there and changed his EA to ED2. Very happy.

I don't understand kids who have ED regrets. They should not be playing games with ED, but rather choosing their top choice, or their top choice they still want to attend (knowing that HCY might not be a real chance). But if you would have regrets, then ED is not for you

The students are 17 year-olds- they aren't the ones playing games, the schools are

No, the schools are not. They are simply picking kids who want to attend and are willing to commit. If you don't want to do that, then don't apply ED. If you want choices, then EA/RD is available.

And yes 17 yo are playing games. Kids pick schools they think they can get into, but often are not their top choice (sometimes not even in their top 3). That is not what ED is for, unless you are willing to accept the result and not "wonder what could have been". It's literally there for students who have a TOP choice and are willing to commit.

Lot's of 17 year-olds don't have a first choice, especially not one that is based on much more than ranking, what their parents want for them and often the one their school counselor tells them is where ED will help them get in. Plus since the schools don't disclose how many legacies and recruited athletes are in the ED round they can't actually assess whether there is an advantage or not.

Well the bolded is not the fault of the universities. If that happens it is all due to the insanity created by parents and counselors with eyes on T50 or whatever.

Schools do not release any of the info you mentioned in any of the rounds so that is moot too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

People say this but is doesn’t happen. The school will send your final transcript.

[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.

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.

There is no contract, of course you can back out. I know a kid who backed out of Vassar when Northeastern offered her a pile of money in RD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How exactly does ED 'induce' one to believe that? They all have a COA they publish every year. They are all clear that ED is binding assuming the financials work for the applicant.

It is an idle and unenforceable threat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Yes you can.

No, you can't. If you don't get the expected FA, then yes, you can't back out. But if you don't apply for FA but need merit aid, and don't get it? You are stuck.

[Anonymous]

DC is EDing to their first choice school that while selective in their major, has the stats and experience to have a chance at a spot.

The rest of their list are all EA schools with a couple RD exceptions so they aren’t blocking themselves from another potential ED2.

Their first choice is the one they really want and if they get it, will happily pull their apps and be thrilled to be wrapped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
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?

For schools that host their NPC at College Board (i.e., clicking NPC on school XYZ's website brings you to https://npc.collegeboard.org/app/XYZ), when the NPC result is shown at the final step, a hyperlink to this result is also included which allows the student/parents to later revisit the inputs/result and "prove" the numbers. A screenshot includes only the result but not the inputs (unless you screenshot everything from start to finish). Unfortunately, from my experience only roughly half of the top schools host their NPC at College Board; the rest either use other companies or have their own homemade NPC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How exactly does ED 'induce' one to believe that? They all have a COA they publish every year. They are all clear that ED is binding assuming the financials work for the applicant.

It is an idle and unenforceable threat.

This points to a real antitrust issue with ED. It is said that schools will communicate amongst themselves about kids who break ED agreements, thus placing their acceptances at other schools at risk, including the one the kid has decided to attend instead.

There is a word for this: collusion. It is anti-competitive.

There is also the related issue that schools with low acceptance rates, many of whom are defendants in this lawsuit, experience no damages when a kid breaks an ED agreement. The admissions office need only log into the list of applicants, pick the next qualified one, and electronically send an acceptance letter.

Takes about 2 minutes of staff time.

If necessary, the office can even sort the list to create one of full pay applicants to select the next admitted applicant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How exactly does ED 'induce' one to believe that? They all have a COA they publish every year. They are all clear that ED is binding assuming the financials work for the applicant.

It is an idle and unenforceable threat.

This points to a real antitrust issue with ED. It is said that schools will communicate amongst themselves about kids who break ED agreements, thus placing their acceptances at other schools at risk, including the one the kid has decided to attend instead.

There is a word for this: collusion. It is anti-competitive.

There is also the related issue that schools with low acceptance rates, many of whom are defendants in this lawsuit, experience no damages when a kid breaks an ED agreement. The admissions office need only log into the list of applicants, pick the next qualified one, and electronically send an acceptance letter.

Takes about 2 minutes of staff time.

If necessary, the office can even sort the list to create one of full pay applicants to select the next admitted applicant.

It is said is not the same at it happening. Who is saying this? To me that has always sounded like made up stuff from parents. That said, I guess a lawsuit may reveal if that happens.