Did your DC apply to a LAC with ED (or ED1)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Agree. Indicating the school is your clear first choice offers a boost, even if a relatively small one. I've posted elsewhere that my DC applied ED to a WASP. They got in, and the 13 kids who applied RD did not. The stats were there but otherwise unhooked, so who knows if they would have been among the 1-2 typically admitted if in the larger RD pool.

Is the desired outcome to get into only one school? Or is the desired outcome to get into a great school? If the desired outcome is to get into only one school, the chances of getting into a great school are lowered exponentially. If kid is OK with this outcome, i.e. the 98% rejection chance, suffering the vagaries of the ED round, and cool with the likelihood of attending a low target or safety, then so be it. But what you will often find is that the kid is definitely not OK with that but, like many posters on this thread, have not thought about it/think the risks are far different than they actually are.

during ED round, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Thank you for putting your ignorance on full display.

PP's logic is sound. If there's no clear #1 and you weren't going to shoot your shot anywhere in ED round except for WASP LAC, you don't hurt yourself by appying ED to a LAC to bank a slightly easier admission rate. It's not much higher than RD, but it is even if you take out athletes etc.

You seem unnecessarily combative with strangers.

Math is not your friend. Do the math out. Male RD rate for unhooked applicant is much lower at Williams, but believe what you will. Your logic is flawed. You seem unnecessarily ignorant and you are leading “strangers” astray because of it. Not cool.

I have made one comment on this thread and several other posters have replied similarly in their comments - how am I "leading strangers astray"??

RD admit rate. Williams. Unhooked. Much higher than ED. You posted the opposite. I guess you are not leading strangers astray if everyone sees that you are wrong. Point taken.

?? ED rate at Williams is 26.6%, RD is 7.3%. Even if we assume that ED is as much as 66% of the pool derived from recruited athletes plus other hooks, that's still an acceptance rate of 9% versus 7%.

And I doubt 66% of the ED pool is recruited athletes plus other hooks.

No, it is higher.

how much higher? athletes, legacy, donors, FGLI, URM combined.

249 admits ED. Recruited athletes alone are 30% of entire class, and they all apply ED (this percentage is much higher, but I will be super conservative to make the point. Entire class is around 560. Conservatively that is 168 athletes alone in the ED round (probably closer to 200).

Conservatively, 81 ED spots left for everyone else. Let’s say almost 1/2 are going to Questbridge, Posse and the like, donor legacy VIPs, fly-in program admittees not falling into the above categories.

45 slots left for unhooked (probably much less, but I am being conservative). 964 ED applicants -168 = 796.

45/796 =0.0565

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/early-decision-enrollment/

When do you admit you are wrong? Just wondering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Agree. Indicating the school is your clear first choice offers a boost, even if a relatively small one. I've posted elsewhere that my DC applied ED to a WASP. They got in, and the 13 kids who applied RD did not. The stats were there but otherwise unhooked, so who knows if they would have been among the 1-2 typically admitted if in the larger RD pool.

Is the desired outcome to get into only one school? Or is the desired outcome to get into a great school? If the desired outcome is to get into only one school, the chances of getting into a great school are lowered exponentially. If kid is OK with this outcome, i.e. the 98% rejection chance, suffering the vagaries of the ED round, and cool with the likelihood of attending a low target or safety, then so be it. But what you will often find is that the kid is definitely not OK with that but, like many posters on this thread, have not thought about it/think the risks are far different than they actually are.

during ED round, yes.

Just be honest with your kid. Dear Johnnie, you have a 3% chance of going to your one, dream school. And a 90% chance, because of the choices you are making, of ending up at a low target or a safety.

Or, you can have a 20% chance of going to this great school, and a 2% chance of going to your dream school still, if you don’t get into the great school, and a 70% chance of ending up at a low target or a safety.

What is your choice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Thank you for putting your ignorance on full display.

PP's logic is sound. If there's no clear #1 and you weren't going to shoot your shot anywhere in ED round except for WASP LAC, you don't hurt yourself by appying ED to a LAC to bank a slightly easier admission rate. It's not much higher than RD, but it is even if you take out athletes etc.

You seem unnecessarily combative with strangers.

Math is not your friend. Do the math out. Male RD rate for unhooked applicant is much lower at Williams, but believe what you will. Your logic is flawed. You seem unnecessarily ignorant and you are leading “strangers” astray because of it. Not cool.

I have made one comment on this thread and several other posters have replied similarly in their comments - how am I "leading strangers astray"??

RD admit rate. Williams. Unhooked. Much higher than ED. You posted the opposite. I guess you are not leading strangers astray if everyone sees that you are wrong. Point taken.

?? ED rate at Williams is 26.6%, RD is 7.3%. Even if we assume that ED is as much as 66% of the pool derived from recruited athletes plus other hooks, that's still an acceptance rate of 9% versus 7%.

And I doubt 66% of the ED pool is recruited athletes plus other hooks.

No, it is higher.

how much higher? athletes, legacy, donors, FGLI, URM combined.

249 admits ED. Recruited athletes alone are 30% of entire class, and they all apply ED (this percentage is much higher, but I will be super conservative to make the point. Entire class is around 560. Conservatively that is 168 athletes alone in the ED round (probably closer to 200).

Conservatively, 81 ED spots left for everyone else. Let’s say almost 1/2 are going to Questbridge, Posse and the like, donor legacy VIPs, fly-in program admittees not falling into the above categories.

45 slots left for unhooked (probably much less, but I am being conservative). 964 ED applicants -168 = 796.

45/796 =0.0565

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/early-decision-enrollment/

When do you admit you are wrong? Just wondering.

Where did you get this number?
why 30%?
How many athletes on campus per year?
What percentage of the athletes are walk on vs recruited?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Thank you for putting your ignorance on full display.

PP's logic is sound. If there's no clear #1 and you weren't going to shoot your shot anywhere in ED round except for WASP LAC, you don't hurt yourself by appying ED to a LAC to bank a slightly easier admission rate. It's not much higher than RD, but it is even if you take out athletes etc.

You seem unnecessarily combative with strangers.

Math is not your friend. Do the math out. Male RD rate for unhooked applicant is much lower at Williams, but believe what you will. Your logic is flawed. You seem unnecessarily ignorant and you are leading “strangers” astray because of it. Not cool.

I have made one comment on this thread and several other posters have replied similarly in their comments - how am I "leading strangers astray"??

RD admit rate. Williams. Unhooked. Much higher than ED. You posted the opposite. I guess you are not leading strangers astray if everyone sees that you are wrong. Point taken.

?? ED rate at Williams is 26.6%, RD is 7.3%. Even if we assume that ED is as much as 66% of the pool derived from recruited athletes plus other hooks, that's still an acceptance rate of 9% versus 7%.

And I doubt 66% of the ED pool is recruited athletes plus other hooks.

No, it is higher.

how much higher? athletes, legacy, donors, FGLI, URM combined.

249 admits ED. Recruited athletes alone are 30% of entire class, and they all apply ED (this percentage is much higher, but I will be super conservative to make the point. Entire class is around 560. Conservatively that is 168 athletes alone in the ED round (probably closer to 200).

Conservatively, 81 ED spots left for everyone else. Let’s say almost 1/2 are going to Questbridge, Posse and the like, donor legacy VIPs, fly-in program admittees not falling into the above categories.

45 slots left for unhooked (probably much less, but I am being conservative). 964 ED applicants -168 = 796.

45/796 =0.0565

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/early-decision-enrollment/

When do you admit you are wrong? Just wondering.

What is the FGLI percentage reported by Williams? Does it match with your numbers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Thank you for putting your ignorance on full display.

PP's logic is sound. If there's no clear #1 and you weren't going to shoot your shot anywhere in ED round except for WASP LAC, you don't hurt yourself by appying ED to a LAC to bank a slightly easier admission rate. It's not much higher than RD, but it is even if you take out athletes etc.

You seem unnecessarily combative with strangers.

Math is not your friend. Do the math out. Male RD rate for unhooked applicant is much lower at Williams, but believe what you will. Your logic is flawed. You seem unnecessarily ignorant and you are leading “strangers” astray because of it. Not cool.

I have made one comment on this thread and several other posters have replied similarly in their comments - how am I "leading strangers astray"??

RD admit rate. Williams. Unhooked. Much higher than ED. You posted the opposite. I guess you are not leading strangers astray if everyone sees that you are wrong. Point taken.

?? ED rate at Williams is 26.6%, RD is 7.3%. Even if we assume that ED is as much as 66% of the pool derived from recruited athletes plus other hooks, that's still an acceptance rate of 9% versus 7%.

And I doubt 66% of the ED pool is recruited athletes plus other hooks.

No, it is higher.

how much higher? athletes, legacy, donors, FGLI, URM combined.

249 admits ED. Recruited athletes alone are 30% of entire class, and they all apply ED (this percentage is much higher, but I will be super conservative to make the point. Entire class is around 560. Conservatively that is 168 athletes alone in the ED round (probably closer to 200).

Conservatively, 81 ED spots left for everyone else. Let’s say almost 1/2 are going to Questbridge, Posse and the like, donor legacy VIPs, fly-in program admittees not falling into the above categories.

45 slots left for unhooked (probably much less, but I am being conservative). 964 ED applicants -168 = 796.

45/796 =0.0565

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/early-decision-enrollment/

When do you admit you are wrong? Just wondering.

Where did you get this number?
why 30%?
How many athletes on campus per year?
What percentage of the athletes are walk on vs recruited?

https://jvlone.com/sportsdocs/VarsityAthletesAtTopColleges2019.pdf

Scroll down for SLACS . . .

[Anonymous]

OK back to original scheduled programming!

Middlebury
DD
3.75, SAT 1500
Major: French

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Thank you for putting your ignorance on full display.

PP's logic is sound. If there's no clear #1 and you weren't going to shoot your shot anywhere in ED round except for WASP LAC, you don't hurt yourself by appying ED to a LAC to bank a slightly easier admission rate. It's not much higher than RD, but it is even if you take out athletes etc.

You seem unnecessarily combative with strangers.

Math is not your friend. Do the math out. Male RD rate for unhooked applicant is much lower at Williams, but believe what you will. Your logic is flawed. You seem unnecessarily ignorant and you are leading “strangers” astray because of it. Not cool.

I have made one comment on this thread and several other posters have replied similarly in their comments - how am I "leading strangers astray"??

RD admit rate. Williams. Unhooked. Much higher than ED. You posted the opposite. I guess you are not leading strangers astray if everyone sees that you are wrong. Point taken.

?? ED rate at Williams is 26.6%, RD is 7.3%. Even if we assume that ED is as much as 66% of the pool derived from recruited athletes plus other hooks, that's still an acceptance rate of 9% versus 7%.

And I doubt 66% of the ED pool is recruited athletes plus other hooks.

No, it is higher.

how much higher? athletes, legacy, donors, FGLI, URM combined.

249 admits ED. Recruited athletes alone are 30% of entire class, and they all apply ED (this percentage is much higher, but I will be super conservative to make the point. Entire class is around 560. Conservatively that is 168 athletes alone in the ED round (probably closer to 200).

Conservatively, 81 ED spots left for everyone else. Let’s say almost 1/2 are going to Questbridge, Posse and the like, donor legacy VIPs, fly-in program admittees not falling into the above categories.

45 slots left for unhooked (probably much less, but I am being conservative). 964 ED applicants -168 = 796.

45/796 =0.0565

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/early-decision-enrollment/

When do you admit you are wrong? Just wondering.

You forgot to subtract the 40 you said were admits from Questbridge & Co. from the denominator. Should be 45/756 not 45/796.

Also, RD rounds do have some FGLI and donor kids competing. Not all FGLI and donor/development kids have their act together to apply by 11/1. So the RD rate for unhooked is lower than 7-ish % at Williams.

Finally, is Questbridge even included in ED or is that considered separate round?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK back to original scheduled programming!

Middlebury
DD
3.75, SAT 1500
Major: French

Good luck PP! They have a great language program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Agree. Indicating the school is your clear first choice offers a boost, even if a relatively small one. I've posted elsewhere that my DC applied ED to a WASP. They got in, and the 13 kids who applied RD did not. The stats were there but otherwise unhooked, so who knows if they would have been among the 1-2 typically admitted if in the larger RD pool.

Is the desired outcome to get into only one school? Or is the desired outcome to get into a great school? If the desired outcome is to get into only one school, the chances of getting into a great school are lowered exponentially. If kid is OK with this outcome, i.e. the 98% rejection chance, suffering the vagaries of the ED round, and cool with the likelihood of attending a low target or safety, then so be it. But what you will often find is that the kid is definitely not OK with that but, like many posters on this thread, have not thought about it/think the risks are far different than they actually are.

during ED round, yes.

Just be honest with your kid. Dear Johnnie, you have a 3% chance of going to your one, dream school. And a 90% chance, because of the choices you are making, of ending up at a low target or a safety.

Or, you can have a 20% chance of going to this great school, and a 2% chance of going to your dream school still, if you don’t get into the great school, and a 70% chance of ending up at a low target or a safety.

What is your choice?

any kid with a 1600 coming out of a private school is not Williams or ... else Denison. Sorry, that's not happening. At our school, they waltz right into Georgetown or Middlebury and live happy lives. And didn't learn to be cautious in their dream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Thank you for putting your ignorance on full display.

PP's logic is sound. If there's no clear #1 and you weren't going to shoot your shot anywhere in ED round except for WASP LAC, you don't hurt yourself by appying ED to a LAC to bank a slightly easier admission rate. It's not much higher than RD, but it is even if you take out athletes etc.

You seem unnecessarily combative with strangers.

Math is not your friend. Do the math out. Male RD rate for unhooked applicant is much lower at Williams, but believe what you will. Your logic is flawed. You seem unnecessarily ignorant and you are leading “strangers” astray because of it. Not cool.

I have made one comment on this thread and several other posters have replied similarly in their comments - how am I "leading strangers astray"??

RD admit rate. Williams. Unhooked. Much higher than ED. You posted the opposite. I guess you are not leading strangers astray if everyone sees that you are wrong. Point taken.

?? ED rate at Williams is 26.6%, RD is 7.3%. Even if we assume that ED is as much as 66% of the pool derived from recruited athletes plus other hooks, that's still an acceptance rate of 9% versus 7%.

And I doubt 66% of the ED pool is recruited athletes plus other hooks.

No, it is higher.

how much higher? athletes, legacy, donors, FGLI, URM combined.

249 admits ED. Recruited athletes alone are 30% of entire class, and they all apply ED (this percentage is much higher, but I will be super conservative to make the point. Entire class is around 560. Conservatively that is 168 athletes alone in the ED round (probably closer to 200).

Conservatively, 81 ED spots left for everyone else. Let’s say almost 1/2 are going to Questbridge, Posse and the like, donor legacy VIPs, fly-in program admittees not falling into the above categories.

45 slots left for unhooked (probably much less, but I am being conservative). 964 ED applicants -168 = 796.

45/796 =0.0565

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/early-decision-enrollment/

When do you admit you are wrong? Just wondering.

You forgot to subtract the 40 you said were admits from Questbridge & Co. from the denominator. Should be 45/756 not 45/796.

Also, RD rounds do have some FGLI and donor kids competing. Not all FGLI and donor/development kids have their act together to apply by 11/1. So the RD rate for unhooked is lower than 7-ish % at Williams.

Finally, is Questbridge even included in ED or is that considered separate round?

DP. My understanding is that QB has a separate (earlier) admission process, but the number is included in the ED round.

[Anonymous]

neither QB nor posse are included in ED numbers.

and all athletes are not recruited athletes at these schools.

it's a tough admit in either round

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:neither QB nor posse are included in ED numbers.

and all athletes are not recruited athletes at these schools.

it's a tough admit in either round

That doesn't make any sense.
Williams reports how many are admitted through ED and RD respectively, which add up to 100% of the class.
Is QB included in Williams RD numbers?

Other schools like Dartmouth. When they report ED results, mention how many QB admits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:williams
1600 SAT
humanities male.
v good but in-school EC
v good but not perfect transcript (9th grade mostly)

Williams must be the dream school.

Otherwise it's not the best strategy. Williams is test optional and puts a lot more weight on GPA than test score.

Test-optional does not really apply to white or Asian students from affluent zip codes, however. They’ll assume poor test scores if you don’t submit. TO gives them flexibility with athletes and FGLI applicants, allowing them to build the class they want.

Point taken yes for unhooked a good test score must be provided.

Strategically, the inconsistency between gpa and test score doesn't work best for OP at Williams. Of course if Williams is the dream school then go ahead. Scoring at 1500 vs 1600 does not move the needle at Williams.

Here is the thing. That 1600 score may work better at other schools that are test required and value a high score.

Dartmouth comes to mind.

Why would 1500-1600 not move the needle at all in Dartmouth? If the GPA is such where the trajectory is up (PP said lower in grade 9 only) the high SAT score should be validating of his upward GPA trajectory.

Everyone on here is so negative.

* Williams (not Dartmouth). PP here, that was typed by mistake!

Can you read? Williams: 45% of freshmen males are athletes. Connect….dots.

Yes I can read. And I can also do math. 45% is not equal to 100%. I know parents are stressed this time of year with our seniors, but please let's not be rude to each other.

Since you can do math, what percentage of male ED admits is that? And then first gen programs, add those in, and legacy/big donor EDs, and faculty brats. What percentage of slots do you think are left ED? Actually do the math this time.

I did the math, and while ED rates for LACs that heavily recruit athletes are inflated by athletes (and FGLI/Questbridge to a lesser extent), it's still a few per cent higher than RD. If PP's son has no other clear favorite, he has not given up anything by applying to Williams ED rather than RD. If anything, he's putting the odds a few extra per cent in his favor. Unless he had an equally desirable non-LAC he could have EDed to.

Thank you for putting your ignorance on full display.

PP's logic is sound. If there's no clear #1 and you weren't going to shoot your shot anywhere in ED round except for WASP LAC, you don't hurt yourself by appying ED to a LAC to bank a slightly easier admission rate. It's not much higher than RD, but it is even if you take out athletes etc.

You seem unnecessarily combative with strangers.

Math is not your friend. Do the math out. Male RD rate for unhooked applicant is much lower at Williams, but believe what you will. Your logic is flawed. You seem unnecessarily ignorant and you are leading “strangers” astray because of it. Not cool.

I have made one comment on this thread and several other posters have replied similarly in their comments - how am I "leading strangers astray"??

RD admit rate. Williams. Unhooked. Much higher than ED. You posted the opposite. I guess you are not leading strangers astray if everyone sees that you are wrong. Point taken.

?? ED rate at Williams is 26.6%, RD is 7.3%. Even if we assume that ED is as much as 66% of the pool derived from recruited athletes plus other hooks, that's still an acceptance rate of 9% versus 7%.

And I doubt 66% of the ED pool is recruited athletes plus other hooks.

No, it is higher.

how much higher? athletes, legacy, donors, FGLI, URM combined.

249 admits ED. Recruited athletes alone are 30% of entire class, and they all apply ED (this percentage is much higher, but I will be super conservative to make the point. Entire class is around 560. Conservatively that is 168 athletes alone in the ED round (probably closer to 200).

Conservatively, 81 ED spots left for everyone else. Let’s say almost 1/2 are going to Questbridge, Posse and the like, donor legacy VIPs, fly-in program admittees not falling into the above categories.

45 slots left for unhooked (probably much less, but I am being conservative). 964 ED applicants -168 = 796.

45/796 =0.0565

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/early-decision-enrollment/

When do you admit you are wrong? Just wondering.

You forgot to subtract the 40 you said were admits from Questbridge & Co. from the denominator. Should be 45/756 not 45/796.

Also, RD rounds do have some FGLI and donor kids competing. Not all FGLI and donor/development kids have their act together to apply by 11/1. So the RD rate for unhooked is lower than 7-ish % at Williams.

Finally, is Questbridge even included in ED or is that considered separate round?

Make the adjustments you like and, when you do, get back here — and admit you are wrong.

[Anonymous]

18 QB and 0 posse.