OP here. It would be so, so much appreciated if we stick to experiences. I fully understand FA place in decisions but I am trying to avoid a thread takeover about one's HHI and how one's kid did or did not have a hook, DCUM style.

TIA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please share your experience with EA vs Ed vs RD, and if there were any regrets.

This is not a discussion about financial aid (though that can play a role), full pay, or test scores, please.

Just a discussion whether you think you should've or not have done EA or ED and waited to do RD.

But all these things - whether to do EA, ED, RD, SCEA/REA - are intertwined with FA/merit/stats...etc. Talking about without the other, you lose context.

Everyone else didn't have a problem commenting nor did they lose context.

No, they assumed a context -- one where money isn't an issue. Advice/strategy changes if it is, in which case stats come into it because they shape whether an applicant is dependent solely on FA or solely on merit or whether s/he might be eligible for both.

I have 2 kids who have already graduated from college. Both applied ED to highly competitive colleges (different schools) and were deferred. Ultimately, neither were accepted to that school during regular decision. My lesson learned: thinking that ED would increase their chances. BTW, both got into very good schools so they had choices in April. EA wasn't ever on the table for us, rolling decision is nice because it lets you sleep at night without worrying that your kid won't have any options.

Anonymous wrote:First kid, no EA or ED anywhere. I know you don't want to discuss scores, etc., but that kid needed senior year grades and also didn't want to apply to the traditional EA schools (i.e. large state universities). They did apply ED2 and got deferred before ultimately getting into that school RD. 2nd kid going through this right now. Applied to a SCEA school and was deferred. No EA schools so, yes, it has been a long wait. OTOH - that kid didn't have another EA school they wanted to apply to. I can't force that. Just got into 'safety' school, so greatly relieved. I don't like the whole ED thing; it forces kids to make decisions based on fear rather than desire and it forces them to do it too early.

Agree wholeheartedly! No decisions should be made based on fear.

Anonymous wrote:At this time (tomorrow and the day after may be another story), DC has decided to roll the dice and do EA non-binding for MIT, UChicago, UMD, and Michigan for this December notification. RD for everything else.

At least DC will have some idea out of those four if there will be a seat (or not) while waiting for spring '17 results.

This is a fantastic strategy! The best of both worlds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please share your experience with EA vs Ed vs RD, and if there were any regrets.

This is not a discussion about financial aid (though that can play a role), full pay, or test scores, please.

Just a discussion whether you think you should've or not have done EA or ED and waited to do RD.

But all these things - whether to do EA, ED, RD, SCEA/REA - are intertwined with FA/merit/stats...etc. Talking about without the other, you lose context.

This is DCUM, bolded doesn't count...

First kid, no EA or ED anywhere. I know you don't want to discuss scores, etc., but that kid needed senior year grades and also didn't want to apply to the traditional EA schools (i.e. large state universities). They did apply ED2 and got deferred before ultimately getting into that school RD. 2nd kid going through this right now. Applied to a SCEA school and was deferred. No EA schools so, yes, it has been a long wait. OTOH - that kid didn't have another EA school they wanted to apply to. I can't force that. Just got into 'safety' school, so greatly relieved. I don't like the whole ED thing; it forces kids to make decisions based on fear rather than desire and it forces them to do it too early.

Anonymous wrote:My big observation seeing my son and his friends go through the process this year is that Early Action gives a negligible bump, if any at all, to an applicant's candidacy, while binding Early Decision gives a very significant bump.

One kid was outright rejected from HYP in SCEA and then accepted by Vanderbilt in ED II. Almost across the board, the EA kids were deferred and the ED applicants got in. Obviously the SCEA schools are the most selective, but going ED boosted a lot of kids into next tier schools they probably otherwise wouldn't have gotten into - Duke, Vandy, etc.

Another interesting dynamic has been seeing the stress of the SCEA kids. They're used to being at the top of the class and now they're left on the sidelines, waiting for RD, while so many other classmates are already all set for next year.

I have a different take on this scenario. My high stats DC was one of the kids deferred SCEA to HYP, but accepted EA to several flagship state universities. Considered ED to one of the Ivies, but felt that the bump in ED was not worth the price in feeling restricted to one institution (which was not DC's top choice), and not being able to compare FA packages. We were very realistic about slim SCEA chances, and, given the extra time, DC put in the strongest applications in the RD round. Waiting for the RD results (without stress)and grateful that flagship unis (that DC would be very happy to attend) are in the pocket. My sense is that some of the students that were accepted ED, settled for less than they capable of, but I guess we'll never know for certain. I'm astounded by the number of people that 'just want to get this process over with'. We've all worked so hard, for so long not to see it through to the end. Although the ED kids already have comfort in knowing where they will be going next year, the SCEA kids will do just fine!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please share your experience with EA vs Ed vs RD, and if there were any regrets.

This is not a discussion about financial aid (though that can play a role), full pay, or test scores, please.

Just a discussion whether you think you should've or not have done EA or ED and waited to do RD.

But all these things - whether to do EA, ED, RD, SCEA/REA - are intertwined with FA/merit/stats...etc. Talking about without the other, you lose context.

Everyone else didn't have a problem commenting nor did they lose context.

At this time (tomorrow and the day after may be another story), DC has decided to roll the dice and do EA non-binding for MIT, UChicago, UMD, and Michigan for this December notification. RD for everything else.

At least DC will have some idea out of those four if there will be a seat (or not) while waiting for spring '17 results.

Anonymous wrote:Please share your experience with EA vs Ed vs RD, and if there were any regrets.

This is not a discussion about financial aid (though that can play a role), full pay, or test scores, please.

Just a discussion whether you think you should've or not have done EA or ED and waited to do RD.

But all these things - whether to do EA, ED, RD, SCEA/REA - are intertwined with FA/merit/stats...etc. Talking about without the other, you lose context.

ED didn't come up for us since the only school on DC's list that offered it was her fifth or sixth choice. Since she got into her first choice EA, it was clearly the right move not to do ED.

If your DC applies anywhere (SC)EA, make sure s/he also applies to a public school with EA or rolling admissions (and/or a foreign school if one's under consideration). The kids who were deferred or rejected EA have a long and scary wait if there's no safety already nailed down.

Look at College Confidential to get a sense of both the rates and absolute numbers of EA or ED acceptance and to compare those numbers with RD. Some small schools have depressingly low numbers of ED1 admissions, for example, and your kid needs to know that going in. Otherwise the process could be extremely demoralizing (e.g. Kid thinks he's already lowered his expectations and given himself an edge, but still he's shut out.)

While *you* might think of (SC)EA as largely a strategic, first-stage choice (e.g. Where would placing this chip provide the most benefit?), your DC may come to see the EA school as his/her favorite school and, if admitted, resist considering alternatives. There are lots of ways to address this issue -- just recognize up front that it may emerge.

Listen to (but independently verify) what DC's college counselor has to say about how various schools use EA/ED. There are some ED schools -- Northwestern was one on my DC's long list -- where high stats kids are highly likely to be admitted EA but unlikely to be admitted RD (basically, Northwestern doesn't want to be a safety school and there are more than enough very qualified kids who really want to be there that they can and will select students based on perceived interest). Kinda sucks if interest is genuine (e.g. strong second choice) but it's not the dream school. Sucks even more if the dream school turns out to be out of reach.

Even though everything worked out quickly and well for DC, I hate the whole EA/ED system. It makes an already stressful process even more brutal for some kids and it fosters a mindset ("the one") that is really counterproductive for kids who are applying to highly selective schools. I much preferred the old system where everyone heard everything all at once -- so for each kid the bad was compensated for by the good and all the kids could celebrate together. Instead, I see kids who keep acceptances quiet out of sympathy for their friends who don't know where they're going yet. Which is probably better than the alternative (high-fiving while others are crying), but still not a great dynamic.

My big observation seeing my son and his friends go through the process this year is that Early Action gives a negligible bump, if any at all, to an applicant's candidacy, while binding Early Decision gives a very significant bump.

One kid was outright rejected from HYP in SCEA and then accepted by Vanderbilt in ED II. Almost across the board, the EA kids were deferred and the ED applicants got in. Obviously the SCEA schools are the most selective, but going ED boosted a lot of kids into next tier schools they probably otherwise wouldn't have gotten into - Duke, Vandy, etc.

Another interesting dynamic has been seeing the stress of the SCEA kids. They're used to being at the top of the class and now they're left on the sidelines, waiting for RD, while so many other classmates are already all set for next year.

Did not do ED. We did EA at 3 schools and got into 1, waitlisted at 2. RD was not as fruitful.

DC was applying to really competitive schools and trying to get into engineering programs. It really helps with very competitive programs such as engineering, computer science and business

We did not do ED because there was no one school that really stood out and you sign a contract that if you get in you have to go.

Please share your experience with EA vs Ed vs RD, and if there were any regrets.

This is not a discussion about financial aid (though that can play a role), full pay, or test scores, please.

Just a discussion whether you think you should've or not have done EA or ED and waited to do RD.