Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's literally a scam in an anti-trust way:
https://www.highereddive.com/news/32-colleges-accused-of-using-early-decision-to-drive-up-costs/757337/
Zero chance of this suit succeeding.
DP the practice is discriminatory against the students. It is an anticompetitive monopolization. The binding decision is illegal. Independent entities who are in competition can not form a cartel to reduce competition between them. Restricting the number of schools that can be applied to and making the decision binding places the students at a competitive disadvantage.
Look at a place like Stanford. Restrictive Early Action admissions is 8-10% and regular admission is 3-5%. A student with the grades and test scores that match the profile of accepted students at Stanford would also have similar chances at Harvard, Yale, MIT, Brown, etc. If Stanford does not accept this student REA, the students now has to apply regular admission to Harvard, Yale, MIT, Brown, etc with a much lower acceptance rate.
Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action for the rich.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's literally a scam in an anti-trust way:
https://www.highereddive.com/news/32-colleges-accused-of-using-early-decision-to-drive-up-costs/757337/
Zero chance of this suit succeeding.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.
My daughter doesn't fit into the first two categories, but I don't think we were suckers: we are full pay, she knew without a doubt what SLAC she wanted to get into, so for her ED was a great way to just get the whole college search out of the way by December.
I don't feel like anyone gamed us at all; rather, we benefitted from the 4+ months of peace of mind it offered.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.
And for kids who know exactly what they want.
+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.
Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.
But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.
Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.
My daughter doesn't fit into the first two categories, but I don't think we were suckers: we are full pay, she knew without a doubt what SLAC she wanted to get into, so for her ED was a great way to just get the whole college search out of the way by December.
I don't feel like anyone gamed us at all; rather, we benefitted from the 4+ months of peace of mind it offered.
Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.
And for kids who know exactly what they want.
+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.
Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.
But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.
Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.
And for kids who know exactly what they want.
+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.
Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.
And for kids who know exactly what they want.
+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.
Anonymous wrote:Except if you ED to a school that doesn't want you then you are out of luck. They get to reject you and you dont get to ED to your 2nd and 3rd favorite school.