Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely not. Someone has to pay tuition.

This. They need at least 50-60% full pay for the math to work.

Or your $90K schools will go up to $110K (or some higher number)

Yes, it's full pay kids who allow other kids to get more FA/merit/etc. Eliminate the full pay students and overall tuition will go up for everyone (except those on Full FA---100% FA).
Don't think that is what most Donut hole parents actually want. If you can't afford 90K, well you certainly wont be affording $110K+

Raising prices isn’t going to fly with the demographic drop in the number of college students that is only going to get worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s she unfair but benefits the wealthy so won’t go anywhere.

So did legacy!

There is a difference between legacy and ED. Legacy is "we will admit you, at the bottom of our student profile or slightly lower because someone paid $10M+ to the school" (because just being legacy isn't a thing, you have to pay big bucks.

ED is "we want you to attend, you are a great candidate, and you are most likely full pay so lets wrap this up and guarantee you will come, so we can manage yield and ensure we have X students enrolled in the fall". ED is admitting a highly qualified candidate

Hint: life is never fair. Apply for a job where the other top candidate knows the entire team already, and plays golf with 2 of them every weekend. Odds are slim to none that you are getting the job. Connections in life matter, they always will. Life will never be 100% fair. Someone will always "have it better than you"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely not. Someone has to pay tuition.

This. They need at least 50-60% full pay for the math to work.

Or your $90K schools will go up to $110K (or some higher number)

Yes, it's full pay kids who allow other kids to get more FA/merit/etc. Eliminate the full pay students and overall tuition will go up for everyone (except those on Full FA---100% FA).
Don't think that is what most Donut hole parents actually want. If you can't afford 90K, well you certainly wont be affording $110K+

Anonymous wrote:Definitely not. Someone has to pay tuition.

+1

You will never make the entire college process "completely fair". ED benefits some students, but mostly the universities. College A needs X students to matriculate for Fall. It's yield game. More they get from ED, the less room for error in the calculation

Nothing in life will ever be 100% fair to everyone.

If you can afford it, you get to ED. If your parents have not saved enough to afford college A, then you might not be able to do ED. Just like if you can afford it, you can choose to send your kid to an elite private HS, if not, your kid uses the Public School for where you reside.
If you can afford it, you drive a luxury car, if not, you drive a kia or Hyundai.

In reality, ED only really affects ~50 out of 2000+ universities in the USA. There are still plenty of excellent schools to choose from. And you can apply RD/EA

For every person against ED, there is a chorus of people who want it. Colleges get a lot of pressure from alumni and politicians on this.

I hope so. It's unfair and exploits students and families who feel vulnerable. It let's ADs and Colleges obtain a manipulated higher yield at our expense, at the expense of us getting to see all our options and make a fully informed choice.

Anonymous wrote:They needed legacy donors too, but…

As someone who was a FGLI student, I couldn't agree more. I wish people would leave institutional priorities alone altogether. These schools would not be as desirable long-term if it ultimately came down to test scores.

I think the opposite will happen. UChicago added an additional early ED for those who attend their summer program. Schools want students who want them as well. It's not going away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most selective colleges will never willingly give up ED. It’s far too advantageous for them. It’s not even for the full pay students. High endowment schools will make it work for nearly every family. It’s because they can craft much of their class with students that both really want to be there and meet their institutional needs - athletes, engineers, vip, Pell grant, English majors, international etc. Every student has a box and ED allows the schools to fill these boxes as they see fit.

The most selective colleges don’t have ED.

Of course they do. What a silly comment.

https://www.ivycoach.com/the-ivy-coach-blog/early-decision-early-action/schools-with-early-decision/

Depends on what you mean by "most selective". But the top 5 schools (Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, and MIT) do not have early decision.

Semantics. They have Single Choice Early Action, which is effectively the same thing. But agree that applying early to HYSMP doesn't make a difference for unhooked students. But ED does confer advantages at Duke, Penn, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Brown, Columbia, Rice, Northwestern, Chicago, and Cornell. Only a deeply out of touch person would regard them as less than "most selective." Ironically, it's often the ED rejects that end up at HYPSM in the RD round.

It’s not semantics, single choice early action is not binding on the student.

It does prevent you from applying to other ED schools, so there's a huge opportunity cost.

Not really, most of the schools with high ED acceptance rate would not be the first choice of a kid aiming for T15.

For most families considering T20 schools, they pay attention to the differential between ED and RD acceptance rates. Vanderbilt for instance is 15.2 vs 3.7 percent. Duke is 12.92 vs 4.1 percent. Brown is 14.38 vs 3.9 percent. Rice is 15.3 vs 3.9 percent.

Choose.

They really aren't safeties for those gunning for Stanford or Harvard. The RD round is brutal for most top students. That's when it really becomes a lottery. Most of the Harvard or bust students end up at state schools or getting merit somewhere disappointing.

But go ahead with the la-di-dah thinking.

I have a college sophomore so have already been through the process once. She wasn’t shooting for H/Y/P, but her friends who did anpply SCEA and weren’t admitted all wound up at other T25 privates.

Anonymous wrote:I really thought that after the SC case, legacy would drop. Seems shameful to keep it while getting rid of AA. And then I thought athletics would be trimmed down - losing sailing and squash, etc.

But the spotlight has moved off them, and I dont see legacy even moving now.

The SCOTUS case said nothing about legacy. But, meanwhile, the Commonwealth of VA has made legacy illegal in all public schools. And Calif is trying to do away with it in both public and private.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely not. Someone has to pay tuition.

This. They need at least 50-60% full pay for the math to work.

Agree. The fully pay people subsidize students who aren't full pay. Also, a very important revenue stream for universities.

[b]


That's why most are "need aware" not "need blind"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely not. Someone has to pay tuition.

This. They need at least 50-60% full pay for the math to work.

Agree. The fully pay people subsidize students who aren't full pay. Also, a very important revenue stream for universities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most selective colleges will never willingly give up ED. It’s far too advantageous for them. It’s not even for the full pay students. High endowment schools will make it work for nearly every family. It’s because they can craft much of their class with students that both really want to be there and meet their institutional needs - athletes, engineers, vip, Pell grant, English majors, international etc. Every student has a box and ED allows the schools to fill these boxes as they see fit.

The most selective colleges don’t have ED.

Of course they do. What a silly comment.

https://www.ivycoach.com/the-ivy-coach-blog/early-decision-early-action/schools-with-early-decision/

Depends on what you mean by "most selective". But the top 5 schools (Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, and MIT) do not have early decision.

Semantics. They have Single Choice Early Action, which is effectively the same thing. But agree that applying early to HYSMP doesn't make a difference for unhooked students. But ED does confer advantages at Duke, Penn, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Brown, Columbia, Rice, Northwestern, Chicago, and Cornell. Only a deeply out of touch person would regard them as less than "most selective." Ironically, it's often the ED rejects that end up at HYPSM in the RD round.

It’s not semantics, single choice early action is not binding on the student.

It does prevent you from applying to other ED schools, so there's a huge opportunity cost.

Not really, most of the schools with high ED acceptance rate would not be the first choice of a kid aiming for T15.

For most families considering T20 schools, they pay attention to the differential between ED and RD acceptance rates. Vanderbilt for instance is 15.2 vs 3.7 percent. Duke is 12.92 vs 4.1 percent. Brown is 14.38 vs 3.9 percent. Rice is 15.3 vs 3.9 percent.

Choose.

They really aren't safeties for those gunning for Stanford or Harvard. The RD round is brutal for most top students. That's when it really becomes a lottery. Most of the Harvard or bust students end up at state schools or getting merit somewhere disappointing.

But go ahead with the la-di-dah thinking.

Many families face this dilemma and it can be hard to know what to do. But if we are honest, the reason for the dilemma is that Harvard is the real top choice but the student also wants the boost from telling Vanderbilt that it is the top choice.

I really thought that after the SC case, legacy would drop. Seems shameful to keep it while getting rid of AA. And then I thought athletics would be trimmed down - losing sailing and squash, etc.

But the spotlight has moved off them, and I dont see legacy even moving now.

Anonymous wrote:It seems to favor full-pay students who are more likely to discover their #1 pick—can afford multiple visits (hotels, airfare, etc). Equity issue that could ultimately go the way of legacy admissions?

Nothing goes right for full pay families. I feel bad for them.