(Early Admission = Early Decision + Early Action) To those familiar with the college admissions Early Admission process, am just curious, how does a school benefit from the Early Action Program? I know that the school benefits tremendously from the “lock-in” principle involved in the Early Decision Program, which generally prohibits students from applying to more than one school and obligates students to attend if they’re admitted (too bad for these students if they don’t get a good financial aid package). Early Action, on the other hand, allows students to apply to as many schools as they want, without any ‘commitment to attend’ required even if they’re accepted (like Early Decision, results are released in December or January). Students don’t even have to reply until May 1st, pretty much the same reply deadline for those who went through the regular admissions process. So, Early Action is really just a matter of students doing their applications earlier than usual (submit all applications -- say, to all the five schools that students want -- in November instead of in December, January, or February). The process doesn’t tell schools that they’re the students’ first choice and neither does it bind students to attend if they’re admitted. So other than reducing the amount of applications that the admissions office has to read during the regular application months of December, January or February and spreading out the paperwork to the November preceding that period, what do schools really get out of doing Early Action? There must be something because there are said to be more than 300 schools (most of them the top schools) doing either Early Decision or Early Action, or both, nowadays… Thanks!
Let's see here. Early Decision binds the student to attend if accepted. Both Early Decision and Early Action spread the paperwork out over four months rather than three. Why would either of these be such small matters? It could simply be a marketing and customer service thing. If the student wants Early Decision, he/she is bound to commit and, in the case of Early Action (non-binding), the student may still be more likely to commit. Your students (customers) are happy getting to know the results of their college application sooner. They spend their money with you. Simple as that.
Thanks. Maybe I'm just too suspicious about the schools' motives (it's just too good to be true for students), 'coz if I were a student applying to five schools through Early Action (the same schools I would have applied to if I did Regular Admission), if I got admitted by all schools in January instead of March, the fact that I did everything through Early Action instead of Regular Admission wouldn't make a difference in me picking one school over the other. It still wouldn't give one school an edge over the others in my decision-making since only the timeline has been changed (moved up a few months ahead), so I suspect I'm missing something here. But you're right, the spreading out of applications is a big matter to admissions offices and could be a significant factor.
Okay. With Early Decision (binding), you can only apply to one because if you have two binding acceptances, you've got a problem. But then, even if you're rejected on your Early Decision application, there's still time for the regular application season. Maybe the Early Action (nonbinding) decisions are designed to convince the students to commit to schools that will give an early decision vs. those that don't. I'm convinced that traditional schools will eventually become more like non-traditional schools with year-round admissions and full offerings during the summer term. The idea of Fall Term being the only "correct" start date and limited to non-existent Summer Term offerings is based on the needs of a nineteenth century agrarian society where, by cracky, you go back and work on Daddy's farm during the summer, like it or not. Eventually, traditional schools will take notice that such a paradigm is no longer relevant.
