Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Some college needs to offer a course based on game theory of college admissions. (A paper probably exists somewhere, but I don’t have time to find it).
Game theory does not work for college admissions, unfortunately. At all. Mostly because you can't have the reasons for the outcomes so you can't judge real odds, and also because admissions are independent events from college to college. But this book is informative and helpful regarding ED, even though it's a few years old now
https://www.amazon.com/Early-Admissions-Game-Joining-chapter/dp/0674016203
A summary:
- Applying ED gives a huge bump in changes to the applicant, especially at need aware schools
- Despite this bump the advantages of ED to the school far outweigh those of the applicant
- The authors conclusion is ED is unfair (which I partially, but not totally, agree with)
It's well worth a read and there are used copies out there cheap.
that help calm my nerves. Good luck to all of our kids in the crazy process.Anonymous wrote:Some college needs to offer a course based on game theory of college admissions. (A paper probably exists somewhere, but I don’t have time to find it).
Anonymous wrote:My kid is at a private, fwiw.
The Sidwellz example is a good reminder to myself that perhaps I am not being fair: I could see a kid who loves the open curriculum at Brown take a look at those odds and decide Amherst is a better shot, which would be a strategy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What would be the point of strategizing to increase odds of going to school that wasn’t his first choice?
That was my thinking (and his too). But other threads mention changing ED based on other kids applying and needing to ask for recs super early to get best teachers (my kid just picked his favorite teachers) and working harder for teachers who write recs (my kid has to work hard in all his classes).
Thanks for the reassurance that our family isn’t the only ones out there thinking like this.
My kids are at top privates and that poster sounds unhinged to me. Private does sometimes provide opportunities to know the teachers better, but the machinations described don’t match our experience and seem unlikely to matter in the end,
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What would be the point of strategizing to increase odds of going to school that wasn’t his first choice?
That was my thinking (and his too). But other threads mention changing ED based on other kids applying and needing to ask for recs super early to get best teachers (my kid just picked his favorite teachers) and working harder for teachers who write recs (my kid has to work hard in all his classes).
Thanks for the reassurance that our family isn’t the only ones out there thinking like this.
My kids are at top privates and that poster sounds unhinged to me. Private does sometimes provide opportunities to know the teachers better, but the machinations described don’t match our experience and seem unlikely to matter in the end,
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What would be the point of strategizing to increase odds of going to school that wasn’t his first choice?
That was my thinking (and his too). But other threads mention changing ED based on other kids applying and needing to ask for recs super early to get best teachers (my kid just picked his favorite teachers) and working harder for teachers who write recs (my kid has to work hard in all his classes).
Thanks for the reassurance that our family isn’t the only ones out there thinking like this.
Anonymous wrote:I think strategy might matter more in a smaller private school where you know that the other kids applying are all legacies, for instance. In that case it might be dumb to ED there too. But whatever—run your own race.
Anonymous wrote:What would be the point of strategizing to increase odds of going to school that wasn’t his first choice?