It was December of my senior year of high school. I just sent my most important application out a month before and I already had the envelope that held my acceptance to the University in my hands. I loved early decision -- my stress about where to attend college was cut short. But then I talked to some friends who claimed they could not apply early because they had to see what financial aid was available. Then the president of Yale University, Richard Levin, warned the public and encouraged universities across the country to abandon their early decision policies.
That is when I changed my mind. Early decision might have benefited a few of my peers in upper-class suburbia and me, but there is the rest of the country to think about. Early decision plans benefit the universities, but not the students. Accelerating the whole college application process, early decision forces immature students to make mature choices. Additionally, early decision plans convert the college selection process from a buyer's market to a seller's market.
Early decision does a lot more than simply eliminate the college mystery for high school seniors in December through April. In reality, the entire process is set on fast-forward as long as early decision plans increase in popularity. Colleges are forced to emphasize the grades of freshman year. Students that apply early only have three years of grades to show, instead of three and a half.
When Levin expressed his concern about early decision programs, he received calls from guidance counselors, parents and Yale students supporting his announcement. However, fellow competitive universities refused to comment to Levin about the announcement. The universities, including Yale itself, do not want to give up their early decision program.
Here's why: universities have everything to gain and nothing to lose from early decision programs. As much as every university de-emphasizes the U.S. News & World Report rankings, universities are aware of their appeal to applying students. Since most measures of the magazine's rating system are not easily changeable (e.g. reputation, alumni giving, graduation rate, etc.) colleges rely on admission practices to quickly shoot up a school's score. Early decision plans benefit universities by raising a school's selectivity rating. By accepting more students through early decision, a university can increase its selectivity by sending out fewer acceptance letters during the regular decision process.
Some universities will defend early decision, saying it provides more space for students actually planning to attend the university, and limits the amount of acceptance letters to students who would rather attend elsewhere. A university naturally wants students enthusiastic about attending, but early decision is not the best way to encourage these students to enroll.
Just because a prospective student does not apply early decision does not mean he or she is not excited about the university. Applying early requires an applicant to have financial security, a firm belief in his or her college choice and a comprehensive knowledge of other potential schools. This is far from the typical student, but the University accepted 18.7 percent of the first-year class through the early decision process.
The most alarming danger of early decision is not that it pressures students to apply too hastily, but that students who are not as financially well off cannot benefit from it and are therefore at a disadvantage in the admissions process. The University deserves praise for providing financial aid estimates for those applying early decision. However, at many universities, especially private schools, much of the financial aid process involves haggling, and the competitive nature between schools trying to convince prospects to attend their school. Students sometimes need to rely on this competition to get the financial aid needed to attend the school they wish to attend. Not allowing the less wealthy to participate in the early decision process is the danger of a college seller's market, and no benefit to a university can justify this exclusion in an era when a college education is becoming more and more necessary.
But just because the University does its best to include less wealthy applicants, it still has no need to retain its early decision program. Non-binding early action provides more justice for the student and the University. With this, motivated high school seniors can show their dedication as well as know where they will attend school by December. Moreover, the University can still detect and provide for the more enthusiastic students without shutting out a percentage of applicants.
As a highly selective institution, the University has the potential to encourage more schools to reject early decision programs. Yale spoke out against early decision, but will not alter its own policy. Yale needs support from its fellow competitors. Therefore, the University should rise above the competition and eliminate its early decision system to look out for its most valuable asset: its students.
(Patrick Harvey's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at pharvey@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
