Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am fine with Tulane doing this. Seriously, all the kid had to do was make up some reason and send it via email. I wish there is a way for the kid to be punished too.
+1 Same here. It's not like this Colorado private school can't have its kids accepted at all. It's just that they can't apply ED. For 1 year. This is hardly a tragedy. The NYT article even talks about how the guidance counselor is advising students to say "I would have applied ED if I could" in their essays. So they don't have the binding constraint of ED but can still claim it's their "first choice."
Yes, but if you know anything about Tulane admissions, you know that kids rarely get in unless they ED1 or ED2. There are something like 50 or fewer RD admits in a class of about 2000.
About two-thirds of the more than 1,800 freshmen in the class were admitted through early decision, and only 106 with regular decisions, according to a report by Inside Higher Ed. (Others got in through early action, a preferential way to apply without committing to enrolling.)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am fine with Tulane doing this. Seriously, all the kid had to do was make up some reason and send it via email. I wish there is a way for the kid to be punished too.
+1 Same here. It's not like this Colorado private school can't have its kids accepted at all. It's just that they can't apply ED. For 1 year. This is hardly a tragedy. The NYT article even talks about how the guidance counselor is advising students to say "I would have applied ED if I could" in their essays. So they don't have the binding constraint of ED but can still claim it's their "first choice."
Yes, but if you know anything about Tulane admissions, you know that kids rarely get in unless they ED1 or ED2. There are something like 50 or fewer RD admits in a class of about 2000.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am fine with Tulane doing this. Seriously, all the kid had to do was make up some reason and send it via email. I wish there is a way for the kid to be punished too.
+1 Same here. It's not like this Colorado private school can't have its kids accepted at all. It's just that they can't apply ED. For 1 year. This is hardly a tragedy. The NYT article even talks about how the guidance counselor is advising students to say "I would have applied ED if I could" in their essays. So they don't have the binding constraint of ED but can still claim it's their "first choice."
Anonymous wrote:I am fine with Tulane doing this. Seriously, all the kid had to do was make up some reason and send it via email. I wish there is a way for the kid to be punished too.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.
Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.
No, Tulane is stating that this HS doesn't follow the rules (it's the counselors who allow that to happen), so they won't be considering this school for ED for the future. The entire point of ED is that someone is 100% committed.
The counselor didn't do this, nor did the parents, the student did. I posted this story a few months back but this board denied it happened. Kid kept in applications to the UC's which don't accept/require transcripts for senior year so there was nothing required from the counselor who had no way of knowing that the student hadn't withdrawn applications.
Can you repost your thread/links?
Anonymous wrote:I've heard rumors of students keeping in EA applications for Ivies while also applying ED to the Tulanes of the world who fill 50% of their class ED so they get the advantage. If Tulane caught someone breaking their early decision agreement, I'm fine with them taking action transparently and sending a message to those who seek to game the system.
It's too bad they couldn't call the university where the rule breaking student was admitted to tell them the student had already committed to Tulane, but I assume they had a reason for banning Colorado Academy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Abolish ED, limit everyone to 10 applications, limit SAT/ACT sittings to 2, get rid of the “commitment” system for Division III athletics, and maybe that can go some ways in making the process the way it was circa 1990- not perfect but much more transparent (even without internet!) and less stressful.
Nope!! ED is a good thing, and helps ensure schools fill their freshman class exactly (not over, not under---both are bad for the school for the next 4 years)
If you don't like ED, don't do it. Just like you don't buy a BMW if you can only afford a KIA. It's a choice
It’s amazing how much all of you get off on thinking the people objecting aren’t as wealthy as you. You are showing your true and nasty colors.
Maybe you should actually read and grasp the posts?
The NPC tells you how much aid you can expect. That number does not change, regardless of whether a kid applies ED or RD. My DC applied ED and received financial aid, the same amount he would have received had he applied RD. The school was his first choice, so he applied. Why is that difficult to understand, or unfair? We ruled out ED schools that indicated we would receive no aid. You are free to do the same.
+1 I'm not sure why there is such a poor understanding of how financial aid works. You qualify for the same need-based aid regardless of when you apply. The NPC gives you the number. ED or not, the number does not change.
I am doubtful that your financial skills are as sharp as you think since your reading skills are so poor. Who do you think you are arguing with and what are they saying? The only people talking about financials affecting decision in this rolled up responses are the people patting themselves on the back.
Not really! Those who do not like ED or think it's unfair are typically in one category: Those who want to search for merit but also don't want to miss out on the slight advantage ED might provide.
it is perfectly fine to need to/want to compare merit offers from schools. But you have to be informed about how it works and understand that most T25 schools do NOT offer merit (sure Duke has 10-15 merit scholarships, but that's it for 2K freshman, so in reality, they do not really offer merit). So if the NPC says you owe Full pay that is what you owe. It's the same for ED as well as RD/EA.
So what those people really want is to see if the "next tier" of schools offers their kid good merit, and if it's a "good enough school with good enough merit to make it worthwhile attending" otherwise they are willing to find a way to be Full pay at the T25 that their kid really wants to attend.
Except that is not how ED works. If you want to compare offers then you have EA/RD as an option.
So yes, the only reason someone thinks ED is "unfair" is because of financials. But that is a "you choice". Everyone has the choice to accept the NPC for any school and apply ED (if it's an option). It helps both students and the schools.
Maybe you need to step back here. Colleges (nearly all of them) have non-profit status. This means that they are providing a service to society that justifies not taxing them.
In return, their practices have to be aligned with the goal our society is setting for itself.
A key goal is equality (that's equality before some people renamed it "equity"). It means equal chances for everyone. Creating a separate pool of applicants in ED, only to ensure the university has a leg up in the race to fill their seats, is a blatant violation of equality, and it is not only unethical, but it should be illegal, plain and simple.
If universities wish to engage in private contracts like ED demands, they should (a) write legal contracts with civil penalties and (b) abandon their non-profit status.
Otherwise, they are expected to abide by societal norms.
For the final time, everyone can do ED. It's open to everyone. It's a choice you make to NOT do ED.
That's utterly irrelevant.
Everyone can use the lightning lanes at Disney, too. But we don't give Disney tax exempt status because we recognize that, actually, not everyone can use that lane. Only those able and willing to pay for it.
Anonymous wrote:The counselor, student, and parents signed a binding agreement.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.
Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.
No, Tulane is stating that this HS doesn't follow the rules (it's the counselors who allow that to happen), so they won't be considering this school for ED for the future. The entire point of ED is that someone is 100% committed.
The counselor didn't do this, nor did the parents, the student did. I posted this story a few months back but this board denied it happened. Kid kept in applications to the UC's which don't accept/require transcripts for senior year so there was nothing required from the counselor who had no way of knowing that the student hadn't withdrawn applications.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Abolish ED, limit everyone to 10 applications, limit SAT/ACT sittings to 2, get rid of the “commitment” system for Division III athletics, and maybe that can go some ways in making the process the way it was circa 1990- not perfect but much more transparent (even without internet!) and less stressful.
Nope!! ED is a good thing, and helps ensure schools fill their freshman class exactly (not over, not under---both are bad for the school for the next 4 years)
If you don't like ED, don't do it. Just like you don't buy a BMW if you can only afford a KIA. It's a choice
It’s amazing how much all of you get off on thinking the people objecting aren’t as wealthy as you. You are showing your true and nasty colors.
Maybe you should actually read and grasp the posts?
The NPC tells you how much aid you can expect. That number does not change, regardless of whether a kid applies ED or RD. My DC applied ED and received financial aid, the same amount he would have received had he applied RD. The school was his first choice, so he applied. Why is that difficult to understand, or unfair? We ruled out ED schools that indicated we would receive no aid. You are free to do the same.
+1 I'm not sure why there is such a poor understanding of how financial aid works. You qualify for the same need-based aid regardless of when you apply. The NPC gives you the number. ED or not, the number does not change.
I am doubtful that your financial skills are as sharp as you think since your reading skills are so poor. Who do you think you are arguing with and what are they saying? The only people talking about financials affecting decision in this rolled up responses are the people patting themselves on the back.
Not really! Those who do not like ED or think it's unfair are typically in one category: Those who want to search for merit but also don't want to miss out on the slight advantage ED might provide.
it is perfectly fine to need to/want to compare merit offers from schools. But you have to be informed about how it works and understand that most T25 schools do NOT offer merit (sure Duke has 10-15 merit scholarships, but that's it for 2K freshman, so in reality, they do not really offer merit). So if the NPC says you owe Full pay that is what you owe. It's the same for ED as well as RD/EA.
So what those people really want is to see if the "next tier" of schools offers their kid good merit, and if it's a "good enough school with good enough merit to make it worthwhile attending" otherwise they are willing to find a way to be Full pay at the T25 that their kid really wants to attend.
Except that is not how ED works. If you want to compare offers then you have EA/RD as an option.
So yes, the only reason someone thinks ED is "unfair" is because of financials. But that is a "you choice". Everyone has the choice to accept the NPC for any school and apply ED (if it's an option). It helps both students and the schools.
Maybe you need to step back here. Colleges (nearly all of them) have non-profit status. This means that they are providing a service to society that justifies not taxing them.
In return, their practices have to be aligned with the goal our society is setting for itself.
A key goal is equality (that's equality before some people renamed it "equity"). It means equal chances for everyone. Creating a separate pool of applicants in ED, only to ensure the university has a leg up in the race to fill their seats, is a blatant violation of equality, and it is not only unethical, but it should be illegal, plain and simple.
If universities wish to engage in private contracts like ED demands, they should (a) write legal contracts with civil penalties and (b) abandon their non-profit status.
Otherwise, they are expected to abide by societal norms.
For the final time, everyone can do ED. It's open to everyone. It's a choice you make to NOT do ED.
That's utterly irrelevant.
Everyone can use the lightning lanes at Disney, too. But we don't give Disney tax exempt status because we recognize that, actually, not everyone can use that lane. Only those able and willing to pay for it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.
Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.
Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.
Oh Lord. No one including you knows exactly what happened. What if the kid's financial situation changed and could no longer afford the tuition? What if the kid is sick or got injured and needs to take a gap year; or whatever reasonable reason that we don't know about? At the end of the day, it was Tulane who decided to punish an entire class of innocent kids and families which is practically extortion. Stop blaming the HS counselor for that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.
Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.
Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Abolish ED, limit everyone to 10 applications, limit SAT/ACT sittings to 2, get rid of the “commitment” system for Division III athletics, and maybe that can go some ways in making the process the way it was circa 1990- not perfect but much more transparent (even without internet!) and less stressful.
Nope!! ED is a good thing, and helps ensure schools fill their freshman class exactly (not over, not under---both are bad for the school for the next 4 years)
If you don't like ED, don't do it. Just like you don't buy a BMW if you can only afford a KIA. It's a choice
It’s amazing how much all of you get off on thinking the people objecting aren’t as wealthy as you. You are showing your true and nasty colors.
Maybe you should actually read and grasp the posts?
The NPC tells you how much aid you can expect. That number does not change, regardless of whether a kid applies ED or RD. My DC applied ED and received financial aid, the same amount he would have received had he applied RD. The school was his first choice, so he applied. Why is that difficult to understand, or unfair? We ruled out ED schools that indicated we would receive no aid. You are free to do the same.
+1 I'm not sure why there is such a poor understanding of how financial aid works. You qualify for the same need-based aid regardless of when you apply. The NPC gives you the number. ED or not, the number does not change.
I am doubtful that your financial skills are as sharp as you think since your reading skills are so poor. Who do you think you are arguing with and what are they saying? The only people talking about financials affecting decision in this rolled up responses are the people patting themselves on the back.
Not really! Those who do not like ED or think it's unfair are typically in one category: Those who want to search for merit but also don't want to miss out on the slight advantage ED might provide.
it is perfectly fine to need to/want to compare merit offers from schools. But you have to be informed about how it works and understand that most T25 schools do NOT offer merit (sure Duke has 10-15 merit scholarships, but that's it for 2K freshman, so in reality, they do not really offer merit). So if the NPC says you owe Full pay that is what you owe. It's the same for ED as well as RD/EA.
So what those people really want is to see if the "next tier" of schools offers their kid good merit, and if it's a "good enough school with good enough merit to make it worthwhile attending" otherwise they are willing to find a way to be Full pay at the T25 that their kid really wants to attend.
Except that is not how ED works. If you want to compare offers then you have EA/RD as an option.
So yes, the only reason someone thinks ED is "unfair" is because of financials. But that is a "you choice". Everyone has the choice to accept the NPC for any school and apply ED (if it's an option). It helps both students and the schools.
Maybe you need to step back here. Colleges (nearly all of them) have non-profit status. This means that they are providing a service to society that justifies not taxing them.
In return, their practices have to be aligned with the goal our society is setting for itself.
A key goal is equality (that's equality before some people renamed it "equity"). It means equal chances for everyone. Creating a separate pool of applicants in ED, only to ensure the university has a leg up in the race to fill their seats, is a blatant violation of equality, and it is not only unethical, but it should be illegal, plain and simple.
If universities wish to engage in private contracts like ED demands, they should (a) write legal contracts with civil penalties and (b) abandon their non-profit status.
Otherwise, they are expected to abide by societal norms.
For the final time, everyone can do ED. It's open to everyone. It's a choice you make to NOT do ED.