Anonymous wrote:My DS was rejected from a small SLAC in ED despite having a very strong application and high stats. DS now thinks it was a waste to put his ED option into a smaller school. Learn from him and use ED for mid-size or larger unis with thousands of seats for your ED and ED2 rounds. Don't do what we did and use it on a small SLAC that only has a few hundred seats to offer. The odds are against you.

Because your son was rejected in the ED round without being deferred to the RD round, there may be a problem with his application package such as a poor teacher recommendations or an essay that offended the admissions officers.

Several LACs offer ED 2 with a submission deadline of January 15th.

OP:Are you willing to name the small LAC which rejected your son's ED application ? Nobody will be able to identify your son & some posters, myself included, might be able to recommend similar schools to consider.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED-ing to the bigger school isn’t a sure bet either. I am also surprised he wasn’t deferred, but better to know now than to “hope” until March. Good luck to your son.

OP: The fact that your son was outright rejected--and not deferred to the RD round--should be your real concern.

At my kid's school, a huge number apply to Johns Hopkins. 3 got in ED, but at least one very high stats kids was flat-out rejected. Who knows why. He seemed to fit the profile of admitted kids just fine.

JHU admissions officers do read both application essays and teacher recommendations. Either source can have a significant impact upon one's candidacy for admission. Same for disciplinary issues.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t really get anyone’s point here. ED is to get an early decision on your top choice. EDing to somewhere that isn’t your top choice is a dumb idea.

+1 You either ED at your top choice, or don't ED and hope you get into your top choice. He would be haunted for life not knowing if he would have gotten into his top choice by ED'ing to a backup school and having to go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS was rejected from a small SLAC in ED despite having a very strong application and high stats. DS now thinks it was a waste to put his ED option into a smaller school. Learn from him and use ED for mid-size or larger unis with thousands of seats for your ED and ED2 rounds. Don't do what we did and use it on a small SLAC that only has a few hundred seats to offer. The odds are against you.

Look at the percent that get in, not the number of seats available. THEN you will understand the odds.

No. ED admit rate does not give you your true odds.

Two schools. Both schools have ED admit rates of 15%.

School A has 1,000 ED applicants. School B has 2,000 ED applicants. That means that School A has 150 ED seats and School B has 300 ED seats.

Both schools also have 105 recruited athletes who have passed a pre-read and have a 100% chance of admission.

After taking out the athletes,
- School A has 895 other students competing for 45 seats (5% admit rate)
- School B has 1,895 other students competing for 195 seats (10% admit rate)

The overall admit rate at both schools is the same, but the odds of a non-athlete being admitted are twice as high at school B.

Convoluted and flawed math. Why assume both schools have 105 recruited athletes when School B is twice as large as A?

Teams are pretty much the same size at every school. Did you think that NESCACs play 5-on-5 soccer and 3-on-3 volleyball? That’s not how this works. All else equal, at a smaller school athletes make up a larger percentage of the student body.

Right. There is some variation based on what sports they offer (e.g., football is a huge team; if the school doesn’t have football, the number of athletes will be much lower) and how many sports they offer, but still we’re talking about a range of 500-1000 athletes across all schools, including the biggest D1 schools. For example, Michigan has 900 athletes, and Williams has 750.

You can look up schools individually here: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search

Recently toured an SLAC with my daughter, who was making an athletic visit. A very high percentage of the students there play a varsity sport, don't recall exactly but somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2. If they all apply ED, then there isn't much ED left for anyone else. As a side note, athletes applying ED have already been through a pre-read, so the admit rate for them is well near 100%.

Anonymous wrote:My DS was rejected from a small SLAC in ED despite having a very strong application and high stats. DS now thinks it was a waste to put his ED option into a smaller school. Learn from him and use ED for mid-size or larger unis with thousands of seats for your ED and ED2 rounds. Don't do what we did and use it on a small SLAC that only has a few hundred seats to offer. The odds are against you.

ED is for recruited athletes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED-ing to the bigger school isn’t a sure bet either. I am also surprised he wasn’t deferred, but better to know now than to “hope” until March. Good luck to your son.

OP: The fact that your son was outright rejected--and not deferred to the RD round--should be your real concern.

At my kid's school, a huge number apply to Johns Hopkins. 3 got in ED, but at least one very high stats kids was flat-out rejected. Who knows why. He seemed to fit the profile of admitted kids just fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS was rejected from a small SLAC in ED despite having a very strong application and high stats. DS now thinks it was a waste to put his ED option into a smaller school. Learn from him and use ED for mid-size or larger unis with thousands of seats for your ED and ED2 rounds. Don't do what we did and use it on a small SLAC that only has a few hundred seats to offer. The odds are against you.

Look at the percent that get in, not the number of seats available. THEN you will understand the odds.

No. ED admit rate does not give you your true odds.

Two schools. Both schools have ED admit rates of 15%.

School A has 1,000 ED applicants. School B has 2,000 ED applicants. That means that School A has 150 ED seats and School B has 300 ED seats.

Both schools also have 105 recruited athletes who have passed a pre-read and have a 100% chance of admission.

After taking out the athletes,
- School A has 895 other students competing for 45 seats (5% admit rate)
- School B has 1,895 other students competing for 195 seats (10% admit rate)

The overall admit rate at both schools is the same, but the odds of a non-athlete being admitted are twice as high at school B.

Convoluted and flawed math. Why assume both schools have 105 recruited athletes when School B is twice as large as A?

Teams are pretty much the same size at every school. Did you think that NESCACs play 5-on-5 soccer and 3-on-3 volleyball? That’s not how this works. All else equal, at a smaller school athletes make up a larger percentage of the student body.

Larger schools participate in more sports and have more teams but the reality is LACS have a higher percentage of athletes versus larger universities. Lacs typically have 30-35 pct of students as varsity athletes. Ivy League is more like 15-20 pct. It is even more skewed with males who tend to be 40-45 pct of LAC student body but same number of athletes as females. So it is true that athletes take up a lot of ED slots at Lacs (especially after removing dei/first gen candidates) although males probably still have a bit of an edge over females as they try to balance the class as much as possible. The bottom line is that it is hard to get into a SLAC unhooked just as it is hard to get into a t20 national university. Very very qualified applicants get rejected in all rounds from these insanely selective colleges who are to some extent making arbitrary decisions based on very limited slots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason I hate ED is that you feel forced into all sorts of game theory about where and whether to use it.

It can be very simple if you think of ED as something you use only for a clear first-choice school, rather than a way to maximize prestige/selectivity.

+1

Yes, and understand it's a long shot regardless, with lots of good options likely in the RD round if it doesn't work out. But if it gives you an edge for a clear first choice and you're in a position to give up comparing aid packages, it can be a helpful strategic tool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason I hate ED is that you feel forced into all sorts of game theory about where and whether to use it.

It can be very simple if you think of ED as something you use only for a clear first-choice school, rather than a way to maximize prestige/selectivity.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS was rejected from a small SLAC in ED despite having a very strong application and high stats. DS now thinks it was a waste to put his ED option into a smaller school. Learn from him and use ED for mid-size or larger unis with thousands of seats for your ED and ED2 rounds. Don't do what we did and use it on a small SLAC that only has a few hundred seats to offer. The odds are against you.

Look at the percent that get in, not the number of seats available. THEN you will understand the odds.

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS was rejected from a small SLAC in ED despite having a very strong application and high stats. DS now thinks it was a waste to put his ED option into a smaller school. Learn from him and use ED for mid-size or larger unis with thousands of seats for your ED and ED2 rounds. Don't do what we did and use it on a small SLAC that only has a few hundred seats to offer. The odds are against you.

Look at the percent that get in, not the number of seats available. THEN you will understand the odds.

No. ED admit rate does not give you your true odds.

Two schools. Both schools have ED admit rates of 15%.

School A has 1,000 ED applicants. School B has 2,000 ED applicants. That means that School A has 150 ED seats and School B has 300 ED seats.

Both schools also have 105 recruited athletes who have passed a pre-read and have a 100% chance of admission.

After taking out the athletes,
- School A has 895 other students competing for 45 seats (5% admit rate)
- School B has 1,895 other students competing for 195 seats (10% admit rate)

The overall admit rate at both schools is the same, but the odds of a non-athlete being admitted are twice as high at school B.

Convoluted and flawed math. Why assume both schools have 105 recruited athletes when School B is twice as large as A?

Teams are pretty much the same size at every school. Did you think that NESCACs play 5-on-5 soccer and 3-on-3 volleyball? That’s not how this works. All else equal, at a smaller school athletes make up a larger percentage of the student body.

Right. There is some variation based on what sports they offer (e.g., football is a huge team; if the school doesn’t have football, the number of athletes will be much lower) and how many sports they offer, but still we’re talking about a range of 500-1000 athletes across all schools, including the biggest D1 schools. For example, Michigan has 900 athletes, and Williams has 750.

You can look up schools individually here: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/search

Anonymous wrote:One reason I hate ED is that you feel forced into all sorts of game theory about where and whether to use it.

It can be very simple if you think of ED as something you use only for a clear first-choice school, rather than a way to maximize prestige/selectivity.

Anonymous wrote:I would not encourage your kid to continue the kind of thinking that ranks him against his "friends." He has no idea how he compares in the eyes of the university he was accepted to. Maybe his "friend" received much better recommendations because of his excellent character, which your kid may need to work on. Both your and his kind of thinking doesn't reflect well on you. I know it's a stressful time. I have been through it three times, never once did I assume my kid could have gotten in somewhere that another kid that he was "better than" did.

+1 no one knows how LORs and essays compare

Anonymous wrote:ED-ing to the bigger school isn’t a sure bet either. I am also surprised he wasn’t deferred, but better to know now than to “hope” until March. Good luck to your son.

OP: The fact that your son was outright rejected--and not deferred to the RD round--should be your real concern.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS was rejected from a small SLAC in ED despite having a very strong application and high stats. DS now thinks it was a waste to put his ED option into a smaller school. Learn from him and use ED for mid-size or larger unis with thousands of seats for your ED and ED2 rounds. Don't do what we did and use it on a small SLAC that only has a few hundred seats to offer. The odds are against you.

Look at the percent that get in, not the number of seats available. THEN you will understand the odds.

No. ED admit rate does not give you your true odds.

Two schools. Both schools have ED admit rates of 15%.

School A has 1,000 ED applicants. School B has 2,000 ED applicants. That means that School A has 150 ED seats and School B has 300 ED seats.

Both schools also have 105 recruited athletes who have passed a pre-read and have a 100% chance of admission.

After taking out the athletes,
- School A has 895 other students competing for 45 seats (5% admit rate)
- School B has 1,895 other students competing for 195 seats (10% admit rate)

The overall admit rate at both schools is the same, but the odds of a non-athlete being admitted are twice as high at school B.

Convoluted and flawed math. Why assume both schools have 105 recruited athletes when School B is twice as large as A?

Teams are pretty much the same size at every school. Did you think that NESCACs play 5-on-5 soccer and 3-on-3 volleyball? That’s not how this works. All else equal, at a smaller school athletes make up a larger percentage of the student body.

100% correct.