Reply to Why would you not apply ED?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Why would you not apply ED? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I actually wonder if it’s harder for an unconnected kid without any hooks to get in ED.[/quote]

It isn't (generally).  See the book referenced elsewhere in this thread which provides evidence and data.

If a school is need-aware, ED is a pretty solid hook.[/quote]

I think it depends a lot on the school. For the most competitive schools, I’m not sure how much of an advantage ED gives if you don’t have any hooks. For less competitive schools, ED absolutely gives an advantage. Obviously there is a huge range and there are likely a lot of variables at play. [/quote]

But my kid won't need an advantage at less competitive schools. Neither will many others.

And for the person who likes the book, can you provide any data? [/quote]

From the amazon page:

[i]Applying to an elite college through an early-admissions program can improve students' chances of getting in by as much as 50 percent over their odds during the regular admissions cycle, a difference that is the equivalent of scoring 100 points higher on the SAT...Based on an analysis of admission data at top colleges, as well as interviews with over 400 college freshmen [The Early Admissions Game] challenges the official line of college admissions deans, who have long held that applying early does not give prospective students an advantage over regular applicants. But the research confirms what many high-school counselors already suspected, and it is likely to fuel debate over whether early-admissions programs favor wealthy and well-connected students and should be eliminated or reformed.
--Jeffrey R. Young, Chronicle of Higher Education[/i][/quote]

That's not data. That's a blurb trying to sell a book. [/quote]

Also, it says it *can* be the equivalent of 100 pts on an SAT--which likely means that's the most extreme example--not the most typical case.[/quote]

Yeah that makes sense.

No, wait, it doesn’t.  Because you didn’t read the effing book, and the guilt writing the blurb did, and I did too.

It is the average boost overall.  Read the damn book and then you can dispute it.  Try your local library.[/quote]

No, wait look at the blurb:
Applying to an elite college through an early-admissions program can improve students' chances of getting in [b]by as much as 50 percent over their odds during the regular admissions cycle, a difference that is the equivalent of scoring 100 points[/b] higher on the SAT

"By as much as"  pretty much indicates that it's as much as---which they equate to 100 SAT points.  Plus earlier you said 150 and the blurb 
says 100, so you're not really a trustworthy reporter on it...or the blurb is wrong which puts it as kind of not that trustworthy with data either...
I'm the PP who mentioned an earlier study that on average ED confers 1-2 percent, so I basically KNOW it's not the average overall too.
[/quote]

You know whose analysis is untrustworthy?  Yours.  You haven't read the book.  Most important, you haven't supported your claim that it is "likely means that's the most extreme example", because it isn't.

And you don't seem to understand math much either, because of course the boost depends on where you are starting. They use difference examples.  I'm holding my copy of the book.  Here's what it says on the bottom of page 234, where they list a formula for a specific set of stats: "Table 7.1 suggests that applying early to Notre Dame increases your chances of admission from 67 to 81 percent".  The equivalent of which in RD is a student with 100 more SAT points for the same chance of admission.  And no, that is not an outlier, the tables has all the boost and all the ranges, would you would know IF YOU HAD READ IT.

That's just one reference I pulled from the book's index of SAT.  Read the book please and come back and argue your point. You're just wrong.  This is a Harvard economist and a Harvard professor and a Wesleyan admissions Dean analyzed 500,000 application data points they were given special access to, and spent years doing this on a book that keeps getting updated and remains in print.  [i]They [/i]are telling you that you are wrong, not me.

What kind of person argues about a book they haven't read?  This is insane.  I am out.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics