Forums

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I did, before I responded.

• Several educators said only a university with Harvard’s reputation could take the risk involved with eliminating early admission because it will continue to be the first choice for so many top students.

The unfairness that results from early admission is that the acceptance rate is higher. To some degree that's because more qualified students apply early. And to some degree it's because the school is willing to offer admission to someone who's willing to commit to that school (although Harvard doesn't require that). The second certainly could be biased against disadvantaged students who don't know what their first choice is, or whose first choice might be affected by financial aid offers. So, why can't Harvard dial back its admission of people early, leave more spaces for disadvantaged folks in the regular application pool, and give them more of a preference in recognition of the hurdles they need to overcome?

No, what Harvard is doing is self-interested. It knows it's the market leader. But it's worried because so many other schools have expanded their early decision programs that are binding. So, people are applying left and right to Princeton, Yale, Bucknell, etc., and locking into those schools because of the nature of their programs. Harvard is unwilling to change to early decision (with lock-in), and instead will now push everyone else to eliminate their programs so Harvard will start getting those applicants again.

Sneaky, sneaky Harvard.