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

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

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

My DC (non-legacy, non-athlete, stats within WASP range) was ED admitted to WASP. If you want to help DC, you shouldn't jump to conclusions. Your biases will hurt more than help.

Let's start with "DC is only interested in SLACs". Make a target list of SLACs DC is interested in, weed that list using Naviance data for your school. (For example, if that one Williams admit had significantly higher GPA/SAT than DC, assess whether you should remove Williams from your list.). If you do a good job you should be able to come up with a list of 4-6 SLACs to apply to including some target, some reach, some safety.

Add to the list some larger schools DC is interested in, including your state flagship. Use Naviance to judge probability of admission. You should be able to add 4-6 larger schools to apply to.

Your assumption that ED does not have advantage at SLACs is wrong. Check out the CDS, the data is in there and it shows a significant advantage for ED. Naysayers will argue "but ED includes athletic recruits". Despite the influence of legacy and athletic recruits, ED still provides a measurable advantage for most applicants at WASP colleges.

Across selective SLACs, ED acceptance rates are consistently higher than RD rates. For example, at Williams College, the ED acceptance rate for the Class of 2028 was approximately 27%, compared to an overall acceptance rate of around 8%. At Swarthmore, ED rates have historically been around 20-25%, while RD rates hover near 6-7%. These gaps reflect institutional incentives to admit ED applicants who are guaranteed to enroll, reducing uncertainty in class composition.

While legacy and athletic recruits contribute to the ED pool, they don’t fully account for the higher acceptance rates. Colleges like WASP aim to fill roughly 40-50% of their class through ED, leaving room for non-legacy, non-recruited applicants. Even with legacy and athletic preferences, colleges prioritize a balanced class. Non-legacy, non-recruited ED applicants who align with institutional goals (e.g., academic excellence, diversity, unique talents) benefit from the ED boost, as their commitment signals genuine interest, a factor admissions offices weigh heavily.

The naysayer argument assumes legacy and athletic recruits dominate the ED advantage, but this overlooks the broader admissions strategy. WASP colleges aim for diverse, well-rounded classes, and ED is a tool to achieve this, not just a mechanism for admitting privileged groups. While legacy and athletic recruits may have higher admission rates, they don’t negate the ED boost for others.

[/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