Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mom of HS freshman here, and much of this discussion is new to me. Have been googling to read more about this and it seems that if you apply to a top private REA/SCEA, you may still apply to any university - public or private - via rolling admissions, presumably because they are not considered competition for the top privates.

So am thinking that if a kid has a rolling admissions school or three that they like and apply in late August/early September, they could potentially get an early acceptance before hearing from the REA/SCEA school. Correct?

Yes, and that’s a good strategy, but there are relatively few rolling admissions schools left (and fewer every year, it seems) and of those, only a portion that a student who considers themselves a serious candidate for an SCEA school would be happy to attend. I know there are exceptions, and I am not an expert on Rolling Admissions, but I do realize there are some good options. Pitt is one that has become very popular as a likely option, and I believe some of big Southern Schools (Auburn, Clemson?) have become really popular in recent years and still have rolling admissions. On the other hand, there are many private EA schools that a student would be unlikely to choose over their SCEA schools but they might be happy to attend. In RD it can get more difficult to get in to those schools, which in some cases have already admitted a large number of applicants in EA. Add the complication that more and more EA schools seem to be adding ED as well, and RD just gets harder.

When my DS 17 graduated HS, Tulane and Michigan still had rolling admissions, and that feels like a million years ago.

Anonymous wrote:Not this year, but a previous one.

In mid-Sept, our public school counseling department told the kids to apply early (Ed, REA, SCEA) due to the “advantage”. My kid really did not want to apply REA but REA’d to Stanford to keep counselor happy. 1600/4.0/standout ECs (national TV), was denied without even an interview. Oh well, applied RD to MIT and Harvard and was admitted to both.

So I would not advise a kid to REA to Stanford unless they are an athlete or legacy, and/or live in CA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find REA to be obnoxious on the schools part. Yes, you can still apply EA to state schools. But not to other private schools that offer EA. My DC applied ED and was able to still apply EA to schools like MIT and Case. You can’t do that if apply REA. But if it’s your kid’s first choice and that’s what they offer, then that’s what it is. At some schools it gives an advantage, at others it doesn’t.

Those schools with REA don't have ED to severely limit your choices.
That's the point.

NP. Yes, but by not allowing any non-public EA choices, it eliminates a lot of safeties for those students and feels more restrictive than ED, where it least you can get some likely acceptances under your belt. I don’t understand why someone applying SCEA to Harvard can’t apply to a middle to low ranked EA, but they can apply to Michigan, Virginia, Wisconsin, etc. even if they are out of state, which further causes those schools EA numbers to go up and up, which leads to more deferrals, etc. Then SCEA students who are rejected or deferred have no acceptances for months on end which leads to the stress ytou often see on this board. I can see it both ways, but the schools who have SCEA do it because they are selective enough and prestigious enough to know that the vast majority of kids accepted will view it as binding. I know, not everyone, but their yields are still extremely high. And none of my kids went the SCEA route. It just seems as tilted in favor of the schools as ED is.

Depending on their school choices, kids may not find it all that restrictive. The only private school on DC's list that even offered EA was Macalaster. Definitely wished their ED school had offered REA instead.

True, and that’s entirely different topic! I think too many schools offer ED when EA would be fairer to students and better for the schools because stronger applicants would apply earlier, but like I said, that is a whole different thread.

Not really. You're saying REA feels more restrictive than ED. That's not necessarily the case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find REA to be obnoxious on the schools part. Yes, you can still apply EA to state schools. But not to other private schools that offer EA. My DC applied ED and was able to still apply EA to schools like MIT and Case. You can’t do that if apply REA. But if it’s your kid’s first choice and that’s what they offer, then that’s what it is. At some schools it gives an advantage, at others it doesn’t.

Those schools with REA don't have ED to severely limit your choices.
That's the point.

NP. Yes, but by not allowing any non-public EA choices, it eliminates a lot of safeties for those students and feels more restrictive than ED, where it least you can get some likely acceptances under your belt. I don’t understand why someone applying SCEA to Harvard can’t apply to a middle to low ranked EA, but they can apply to Michigan, Virginia, Wisconsin, etc. even if they are out of state, which further causes those schools EA numbers to go up and up, which leads to more deferrals, etc. Then SCEA students who are rejected or deferred have no acceptances for months on end which leads to the stress ytou often see on this board. I can see it both ways, but the schools who have SCEA do it because they are selective enough and prestigious enough to know that the vast majority of kids accepted will view it as binding. I know, not everyone, but their yields are still extremely high. And none of my kids went the SCEA route. It just seems as tilted in favor of the schools as ED is.

Depending on their school choices, kids may not find it all that restrictive. The only private school on DC's list that even offered EA was Macalaster. Definitely wished their ED school had offered REA instead.

True, and that’s entirely different topic! I think too many schools offer ED when EA would be fairer to students and better for the schools because stronger applicants would apply earlier, but like I said, that is a whole different thread.

Anonymous wrote:Mom of HS freshman here, and much of this discussion is new to me. Have been googling to read more about this and it seems that if you apply to a top private REA/SCEA, you may still apply to any university - public or private - via rolling admissions, presumably because they are not considered competition for the top privates.

So am thinking that if a kid has a rolling admissions school or three that they like and apply in late August/early September, they could potentially get an early acceptance before hearing from the REA/SCEA school. Correct?

Anonymous wrote:Mom of HS freshman here, and much of this discussion is new to me. Have been googling to read more about this and it seems that if you apply to a top private REA/SCEA, you may still apply to any university - public or private - via rolling admissions, presumably because they are not considered competition for the top privates.

So am thinking that if a kid has a rolling admissions school or three that they like and apply in late August/early September, they could potentially get an early acceptance before hearing from the REA/SCEA school. Correct?

Anonymous wrote:So odd. You kid didn’t get in, so no one else should bother to apply early. Have a bit of perspective. Maybe the kids essay rubbed someone the wrong way. Maybe the Recs were mediocre. You don’t know what was in their heads. But go ahead and assume no one unhooked could ever get in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read that CalTech was going "restrictive early action" and was like huh? Google taught me some but I have a PhD and my head kind of hurts just trying to get my head around this newer option (well really the only option to find out early) for Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton, etc.

Curious to hear anyone's thoughts on it from your own observations, college counseling/advising, or your kid who went through, or is going through the process. Bonus points if you add a little about your socioeconomic background and how it influenced how you think about it.

(For example--we're a donut hole family, which is not the end of the world, but REA seems kind of disadvantageous in some sort of way for...almost everyone except the institutions themselves? Maybe I'm missing something? Like it's supposed to be beneficial for lower/moderate income students, but thinking back to my high school self, which came from a lower SES background, and I don't think I would have liked REA as someone who wanted to consider elite schools but wasn't necessarily deadset on attending one)

Let’s get terms right for this discussion. I know CalTech calls it REA but that’s disingenuous: Cal Tech has SCEA, meaning you can’t apply EA to any other private school. SCEA, which HYPS also has, is downright evil. If you are an unhooked student, you should never go this route. You will not get in, will have foregone ED to a school you might have had a shot at, will not have applied EA to a “safety” such as Macalester, and you will be left with ED2 or RD. ED2 is harder than ED1, so when you apply to one of the few top schools that even have it (Chicago, Johns Hopkins, Swarthmore), you will likely not get in and be left with RD anyhow. In short, falling for the SCEA trap means you will probably be attending a less selective school than if you had avoided it altogether.

REA as a term should be reserved to Notre Dame and Georgetown: apply EA anywhere you want, but not ED. Not only can you then apply to both Georgetown and Notre Dame, then, but Macalester and a host of other private schools.

Then there is good old-fashioned non-restrictive EA. There are 2 kinds here: the EA that tells you in time to apply somewhere else ED2, and the EA that does not. Most state schools do not tell you in time to inform an ED2 decision (Georgia is an exception). Most private EA schools will tell you in time to inform an ED2 decision (Richmond is an exception).

This is is what any unhooked applicant should do: avoid SCEA like the plague. Apply ED1 somewhere (ask yourself if Penn or Columbia or Brown, if a female, are really worth the risk here — they probably aren’t) like Chicago or a top SLAC like Williams or Amherst which has no ED2. Then apply to other private schools EA. In December, you likely have an ED1 rejection and have gotten a sense where you stand in terms of merit aid to some EA schools. Then drop down a rung for ED2 (consider SLACs here; there are more good options).

Yet unhooked kids persist in applying SCEA…

Anonymous wrote:REA is a high risk, high reward option IMHO.
DC went REA to first choice Ivy, fully expecting to be deferred/rejected and prepared applications to go out for RD.
DC did not want to go ED2 and fully understood that they could end up without acceptances at "targets" due to this decision. If your DC is ok with this and will really be ok without having an acceptance in hand before RD, then REA may be the way to go.
DC was very, very lucky and accepted REA.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone we know that got in REA to these elite schools had a big hook. Legacies were also VIP. Everyone else either deferred or rejected....RD outcome for the deferrals remains to be seen.