Reply to The ED debate: is it really easier to get in for a non-athlete?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "The ED debate: is it really easier to get in for a non-athlete?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My instincts on getting gypped always fire on this topic.

RD vs ED: this is a wrong statistical argument. RD invites hail-marry applicants. ED invites traditional plays that should score.

The statistical number describing the acceptance rate for the ED crowd is a sub-set of the RD crowd. So, I don't buy into ED has a 10% acceptance rate and RD has a 5%. Your chances are not doubled.

ED incentivizes to wait-list kids to RD then accept (which keeps the acceptance rate to ED lower). RD incentivizes to wait-list those that wont likely accept admission. The kids that say I got wait-listed for WASP but got into an Ivy - I'm sure this is what is happening.  It's all about exclusivity. 
[/quote]

I was always told ED is for hooks: athletes, legacy, and donors/special interest candidates. That’s why the numbers are higher. My kid didn’t ED. He did really well RD when acceptance rates went down to 3% at some of those ED/SCEA schools, it did make us question if the SCEA that WL him RD would have accepted if he had applied there early. He chose a lower ranked school because we were discouraged from doing early rounds at the Ivies. I think if they were test required he would have gotten in—too many applicants with test optional. [/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