ED is used primarily to increase yield. Then it issued to lock in students while making a school appear more selective by artificially lowering interest rates. Nothing has changed.

You view is not incorrect; you are describing the weeds, while I am portraying the forest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From College Transitions (2023 edition):

Colleges offer an ED 2 option primarily to improve their yield rates (i.e. the percentage of accepted students who attend)--an important indicator ...that can have significant influence on a college's ranking.

From another source (google why colleges use ED 2):

ED II is most often found at private liberal arts colleges.

From another source (google search why colleges use ED 2):

Offering two rounds of Early Decision allows the college to control its acceptance rate and increase its yield rate.

This source continued:

Bates College, for example, admits 81% of their freshman class through ED 1 & @ cycles; Grinnell, Pitzer, and Middlebury bring in 65%+ of their first years this way.

Not sure why SLAC supporters do not know & understand the primary reasons for ED 1 & ED 2.

Wrong again

https://edreformnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/The-Future-of-Fair-Admissions-Report-1-Early-Decision.pdf?utm_campaign=Next%20newsletter%20sample%20campaign&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=232662680&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8cg__C02GQqQkSvuk_1MmUlIbSyn68Aq1ywODQPOb7LZrXCTnFO_n1kzIjse9WVfBi8lsClZyR4vreMSrFcTyYkoCYCA&utm_content=232662680&utm_source=hs_email

You do not understand your own sources.

Drive down admission rates is clearly listed as a primary reason that colleges use ED.

Lock in students.

And lock in tuition revenue from wealthy families.

Again, you misunderstand ED and you get caught up in sub-categories while missing the big picture.

Actually you seem to be the one focused only on what you want to see. You originally argued (wrongly) that ED is primarily used to increase yield. That is one reason but not the only. That's why the link was posted. Now you turn around and argue what was originally posted. You also argue that it is mainly LACs that use ED (1 or2) - wrong again.

You are entitled to your own opinion, just not your own facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From College Transitions (2023 edition):

Colleges offer an ED 2 option primarily to improve their yield rates (i.e. the percentage of accepted students who attend)--an important indicator ...that can have significant influence on a college's ranking.

From another source (google why colleges use ED 2):

ED II is most often found at private liberal arts colleges.

From another source (google search why colleges use ED 2):

Offering two rounds of Early Decision allows the college to control its acceptance rate and increase its yield rate.

This source continued:

Bates College, for example, admits 81% of their freshman class through ED 1 & @ cycles; Grinnell, Pitzer, and Middlebury bring in 65%+ of their first years this way.

Not sure why SLAC supporters do not know & understand the primary reasons for ED 1 & ED 2.

Wrong again

https://edreformnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/The-Future-of-Fair-Admissions-Report-1-Early-Decision.pdf?utm_campaign=Next%20newsletter%20sample%20campaign&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=232662680&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8cg__C02GQqQkSvuk_1MmUlIbSyn68Aq1ywODQPOb7LZrXCTnFO_n1kzIjse9WVfBi8lsClZyR4vreMSrFcTyYkoCYCA&utm_content=232662680&utm_source=hs_email

You do not understand your own sources.

Drive down admission rates is clearly listed as a primary reason that colleges use ED.

Lock in students.

And lock in tuition revenue from wealthy families.

Again, you misunderstand ED and you get caught up in sub-categories while missing the big picture.

With the number of schools people are applying to increasing, early programs seem to make more sense from the colleges' perspective than they did even 5-10 years ago. I guess they could just WL a ton of people!

Anonymous wrote:
https://edreformnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/The-Future-of-Fair-Admissions-Report-1-Early-Decision.pdf?utm_campaign=Next%20newsletter%20sample%20campaign&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=232662680&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8cg__C02GQqQkSvuk_1MmUlIbSyn68Aq1ywODQPOb7LZrXCTnFO_n1kzIjse9WVfBi8lsClZyR4vreMSrFcTyYkoCYCA&utm_content=232662680&utm_source=hs_email

I like the idea in that paper that schools offering ED should meet demonstrated financial need.

I can understand being against ED (especially with the need for some to weigh financial aid and merit options). However, you have to recognize that ED2 is simply smart for colleges and universities if you are not entirely against ED generally. The ED1 versus 2 distinction doesn't matter for purposes of supporting such a program. If anything, the later ED2 would be at least slightly better than 1 because it allows more time for students to research what they are truly looking for and find an ideal match (a common complaint about ED1 and its fall application deadlines that do require a lot of planning ahead). Why would a school not want qualified students who signal that they clearly prioritize attending? There is more that goes into a college wanting to take students ED1/2 than juicing yield numbers. Yield isn't even a part of the US News formula now, is it? https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/ranking-criteria-and-weights

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have made the last few posts in this thread.

SLACs & LACs do not need to be so defensive. I love big schools and am not a fan--but a graduate of--a rural LAC. Yet, even I recognize that many LACs offer a tremendous education and educational experience for one who desires a small, intimate rural setting with its attendant lack of privacy. Not for me. But that is me--not you.

No one can deny the benefits for attending Williams, Amherst, Pomona, Swarthmore, Claremont McKenna and several other LACs. Just know what you are getting into. That's all. If it suits you, then great. If not, then beware as small communities do not offer the freedom, diversity, and multitude of options available at larger schools. Not a criticism--just an observation. Some folks like small town life, while most prefer cities.

Pomona and Claremont McKenna are part of a consortium of 8,500 students and a one-hour train ride or 45-minute car ride to Los Angeles. Amherst and Swarthmore are also part of a consortium and Swarthmore is easily accessible to Philadelphia.

Yes, that is why I used those examples.

You believe Claremont CA is remotely “small town life”? That’s the last way I’d describe that area. It’s not LA, but it’s not remotely rural.

Anonymous wrote:From College Transitions (2023 edition):

Colleges offer an ED 2 option primarily to improve their yield rates (i.e. the percentage of accepted students who attend)--an important indicator ...that can have significant influence on a college's ranking.

From another source (google why colleges use ED 2):

ED II is most often found at private liberal arts colleges.

From another source (google search why colleges use ED 2):

Offering two rounds of Early Decision allows the college to control its acceptance rate and increase its yield rate.

This source continued:

Bates College, for example, admits 81% of their freshman class through ED 1 & @ cycles; Grinnell, Pitzer, and Middlebury bring in 65%+ of their first years this way.

Not sure why SLAC supporters do not know & understand the primary reasons for ED 1 & ED 2.

Wrong again

https://edreformnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/The-Future-of-Fair-Admissions-Report-1-Early-Decision.pdf?utm_campaign=Next%20newsletter%20sample%20campaign&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=232662680&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8cg__C02GQqQkSvuk_1MmUlIbSyn68Aq1ywODQPOb7LZrXCTnFO_n1kzIjse9WVfBi8lsClZyR4vreMSrFcTyYkoCYCA&utm_content=232662680&utm_source=hs_email

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have made the last few posts in this thread.

SLACs & LACs do not need to be so defensive. I love big schools and am not a fan--but a graduate of--a rural LAC. Yet, even I recognize that many LACs offer a tremendous education and educational experience for one who desires a small, intimate rural setting with its attendant lack of privacy. Not for me. But that is me--not you.

No one can deny the benefits for attending Williams, Amherst, Pomona, Swarthmore, Claremont McKenna and several other LACs. Just know what you are getting into. That's all. If it suits you, then great. If not, then beware as small communities do not offer the freedom, diversity, and multitude of options available at larger schools. Not a criticism--just an observation. Some folks like small town life, while most prefer cities.

Pomona and Claremont McKenna are part of a consortium of 8,500 students and a one-hour train ride or 45-minute car ride to Los Angeles. Amherst and Swarthmore are also part of a consortium and Swarthmore is easily accessible to Philadelphia.

Yes, that is why I used those examples.

HAHA., You don't know LA traffic

Anonymous wrote:From College Transitions (2023 edition):

Colleges offer an ED 2 option primarily to improve their yield rates (i.e. the percentage of accepted students who attend)--an important indicator ...that can have significant influence on a college's ranking.

From another source (google why colleges use ED 2):

ED II is most often found at private liberal arts colleges.

From another source (google search why colleges use ED 2):

Offering two rounds of Early Decision allows the college to control its acceptance rate and increase its yield rate.

This source continued:

Bates College, for example, admits 81% of their freshman class through ED 1 & @ cycles; Grinnell, Pitzer, and Middlebury bring in 65%+ of their first years this way.

Not sure why SLAC supporters do not know & understand the primary reasons for ED 1 & ED 2.

So what?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's a good reason to go to a SLAC: if your child is interested in STEM or a quantitative discipline but is not a prodigy, they would receive more resources and attention from faculty at a SLAC than at a HYPS where there are many prodigies. You can call this underachieving if you want but it works. Why join the #1 team if you're going to be on the bench the whole time?

I see what you're saying although I don't necessarily agree that all great non-HYPS colleges (NUs or LACs) are fallback schools for excellent students.

I wouldn't say that either, but someone who has been in the Romanian national math program from elementary school up, or a student who took calculous in 8th grade and had been taking college level math through high school, is not ending up at a SLAC. I knew both kinds of people at HYPS. And that's a GOOD thing from an average-excellent student's perspective.

From College Transitions (2023 edition):

Colleges offer an ED 2 option primarily to improve their yield rates (i.e. the percentage of accepted students who attend)--an important indicator ...that can have significant influence on a college's ranking.

From another source (google why colleges use ED 2):

ED II is most often found at private liberal arts colleges.

From another source (google search why colleges use ED 2):

Offering two rounds of Early Decision allows the college to control its acceptance rate and increase its yield rate.

This source continued:

Bates College, for example, admits 81% of their freshman class through ED 1 & @ cycles; Grinnell, Pitzer, and Middlebury bring in 65%+ of their first years this way.

Not sure why SLAC supporters do not know & understand the primary reasons for ED 1 & ED 2.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have made the last few posts in this thread.

SLACs & LACs do not need to be so defensive. I love big schools and am not a fan--but a graduate of--a rural LAC. Yet, even I recognize that many LACs offer a tremendous education and educational experience for one who desires a small, intimate rural setting with its attendant lack of privacy. Not for me. But that is me--not you.

No one can deny the benefits for attending Williams, Amherst, Pomona, Swarthmore, Claremont McKenna and several other LACs. Just know what you are getting into. That's all. If it suits you, then great. If not, then beware as small communities do not offer the freedom, diversity, and multitude of options available at larger schools. Not a criticism--just an observation. Some folks like small town life, while most prefer cities.

Pomona and Claremont McKenna are part of a consortium of 8,500 students and a one-hour train ride or 45-minute car ride to Los Angeles. Amherst and Swarthmore are also part of a consortium and Swarthmore is easily accessible to Philadelphia.

Yes, that is why I used those examples.

Anonymous wrote:Here's a good reason to go to a SLAC: if your child is interested in STEM or a quantitative discipline but is not a prodigy, they would receive more resources and attention from faculty at a SLAC than at a HYPS where there are many prodigies. You can call this underachieving if you want but it works. Why join the #1 team if you're going to be on the bench the whole time?

I see what you're saying although I don't necessarily agree that all great non-HYPS colleges (NUs or LACs) are fallback schools for excellent students.

Here's a good reason to go to a SLAC: if your child is interested in STEM or a quantitative discipline but is not a prodigy, they would receive more resources and attention from faculty at a SLAC than at a HYPS where there are many prodigies. You can call this underachieving if you want but it works. Why join the #1 team if you're going to be on the bench the whole time?