Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In our school, there is 1 admit at Middlebury Hamilton Wellesley level of LAC each. Zero ED admits for all top LAC. About 6-8 goes to SWAP level in the RD round.

Wellesley and Middlebury are in the top tier of LACs.

Wellesley yes, Middlebury no.

Anonymous wrote:In our school, there is 1 admit at Middlebury Hamilton Wellesley level of LAC each. Zero ED admits for all top LAC. About 6-8 goes to SWAP level in the RD round.

Wellesley and Middlebury are in the top tier of LACs.

Anonymous wrote:agree, most of LAC spaces go to athletes (recruited or tip), questbridge and FGLI.

it's much better to use your ED on a bigger place (NYU, Emory, Chicago, Tufts, etc.) depending on profile/interest.

I feel like we wasted ED1 for DD on a top LAC.

Agreed.

Also agree with PP who said Northwestern or Cornell make more sense than a top LAC if you have a strong profile.

Anonymous wrote:agree, most of LAC spaces go to athletes (recruited or tip), questbridge and FGLI.

it's much better to use your ED on a bigger place (NYU, Emory, Chicago, Tufts, etc.) depending on profile/interest.

I feel like we wasted ED1 for DD on a top LAC.

Northwestern, and Cornell if in-state.

agree, most of LAC spaces go to athletes (recruited or tip), questbridge and FGLI.

it's much better to use your ED on a bigger place (NYU, Emory, Chicago, Tufts, etc.) depending on profile/interest.

I feel like we wasted ED1 for DD on a top LAC.

In our school, there is 1 admit at Middlebury Hamilton Wellesley level of LAC each. Zero ED admits for all top LAC. About 6-8 goes to SWAP level in the RD round.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED at most top LACs is a waste because while they do have a higher accept rate than RD, it's mostly accounted for by recruited athletes, ED athletes and Questbridge.

+1000 - Waste for all top 30 SLACs

You won't think that when your kid gets shut out. These schools are tiny.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not true. It makes a huge difference, obvious in our school’s naviance data. ONLY students who apply ED get into Midd, for example. Students with near perfect stats are rejected RD. There are many schools like this. From our school these students admitted ED are almost never athletes.

Same at our private.

Same. Kid1 was told of the LACs he liked best, ED was his best shot. However, his first choice school didn't have an ED, so he didn't ED anywhere: rejected from all the LACS on his list, even though above 75th percentile for several. They just don't have a lot of seats to offer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW the unhooked white girls I know at Williams got in ED.

Legacy, major, family wealth, famous, first gen, geographic diversity, WOW, lower-income high school, no contact with any coaches whatsoever, even as a likely walk on. If any of these, they were indeed hooked. It is also possible they had these but you did not know.

Or maybe they were just lucky to overcome the admissions disadvantage. Doubt it, though.

Nope, UMC white girls, unhooked, whose families I know well. There aren’t that many Williams admits from our school and those there are tend to be ED.

Musical or artistic talent, supported by an arts supplement, can also be a hook for Williams.

Anonymous wrote:ED at most top LACs is a waste because while they do have a higher accept rate than RD, it's mostly accounted for by recruited athletes, ED athletes and Questbridge.

+1000 - Waste for all top 30 SLACs

ED at most top LACs is a waste because while they do have a higher accept rate than RD, it's mostly accounted for by recruited athletes, ED athletes and Questbridge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't advise people EDing at a LAC unless that school is his absolute first choice.
There are a number of schools where ED makes a real difference. These include Chicago, Northwestern, and Duke.

Please! Don't ED at LACs. If you really prefer LACs, and you don't have a dream school, just RD so that you are not limited to one single choice. When you have acceptance from several LACs, your kid can then compare and visit to make a decision.

You shouldn't apply ED anywhere unless it is your absolute first choice.

And if you have an absolute first choice and it is affordable and they offer ED, you should apply ED.

No reason to make it more complicated.

Not how game theory works, so follow this 10-20 years passed advice, and you hurt your chances.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused why it would be a disadvantage

Some schools have early admissions tailored around attracting athletes/questbridge/legacy, which means a normal applicant might actually have a lower acceptance rate chance of admission than regular decision.

Most try to have ED represent their overall class in percentage of categories listed above, but recruitment of athletes is larger in ED. Means very few spots left for those not in category listed above and an unhooked application might have the same or less of a change in ED. But most are not less of a chance. Also, generally speaking ED applications are usually very strong. The kids who can get it together and are ready to apply then tend to be strong academically, the pool you are compared against might be higher.

Anonymous wrote:That's dog crap. Acceptance rate at Davidson jumps from 14% (RD) to 35% (ED). Bates from 13% to 42%. Bucknell from 29% to 50%.

ED can make a huge difference at many selective LACs.

+1

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't advise people EDing at a LAC unless that school is his absolute first choice.
There are a number of schools where ED makes a real difference. These include Chicago, Northwestern, and Duke.

Please! Don't ED at LACs. If you really prefer LACs, and you don't have a dream school, just RD so that you are not limited to one single choice. When you have acceptance from several LACs, your kid can then compare and visit to make a decision.

The data says differently - in particular for competitive LACs