Early admissions eliminated at Harvard, Princeton

Colleges debate drawbacks of early admissions

Rachel Wolff Contributing Editor

On Sept. 12, Harvard University announced the termination of its early admissions program beginning next year. Less than a week after Harvard went public with its decision, Princeton University announced that it too would eliminate its early admissions option.

In explaining their decisions, both Harvard and Princeton cited studies indicating that early admissions programs disadvantage low-income and minority students. These studies indicate that students in wealthier communities tend to interact more frequently with their school guidance counselors and have parents who are more likely to be involved in the college application process.

In addition, Harvard and Princeton stated that doing away with early admissions programs will allow students to compare financial aid packages from various colleges, rather than agreeing to matriculate at a college before receiving such information.
In light of these major changes to admissions policies, Vassar Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid David Borus said that the College will continue to review its own Early Decision (ED) program, but that there are no plans to change or eliminate the option. Rather, Borus said the College is “constantly trying to expand the size of our pool of applicants [and] making sure we pay very close attention to the diversity of the pool when we make our decisions.”

Harvard’s Early Action (EA) program is non-binding; prospective students are able to submit applications to other institutions and opt not to attend. Princeton’s ED option, like Vassar’s, requires a commitment from applicants that they will attend if accepted.

Harvard currently accepts one-third of its freshman class through EA. Vassar accepts approximately 42 percent of its incoming class in two rounds of ED; its regular decision acceptance rate is 29 percent.

Derek Bok, Harvard’s interim president, told The New York Times, “We think this will
produce a fairer process, because the existing process has been shown to advantage those who are already advantaged.”1

Bok called for other institutions to follow suit, telling The New York Times, “We think the more schools abandon this process, the healthier the admissions process will be.”

Princeton President Shirley M. Tilghman had a similar message, saying, “I think it’s important for there to be momentum, because I think it’s the right decision.”2

Borus also pointed out that Harvard and Princeton are in different financial situations than an institution such as Vassar. “The fact of the matter is Harvard has a one-for-one yield on its offers of admission,” said Borus. “It has little practical impact on their admissions program [to eliminate early admission]…their decision is more symbolic than real.”

College President Catherine Bond Hill said in an e-mailed statement, “The [ED] process does seem to me to advantage higher income students. There is existing empirical work on this...But, if an institution is committed to low-income access, there are a variety of things that it can do.”
Early admissions became common at hundreds of colleges in the 1990s, when institutions recognized the advantage of having strong candidates pledge their commitment to a given school. The University of Delaware announced last May that it would be ending its early admission program, but Harvard was the first Ivy League university to abandon the approach.

Although Hill echoed many of the concerns that Bok expressed, she also outlined the importance of considering other actions: “Eliminating [ED] isn’t either necessary or sufficient for dealing with the problem,” said Hill. “With anything that has both benefits and costs, you have to compare them and decide what to do.”

Borus agreed, saying, “I’m not convinced eliminating ED is going to improve diversity. There are many other things we can do.”

Hill expressed an interest in having the Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid look at the early admissions process at Vassar.

1“Harvard Ends Early Admission,” Alan Finder and Karen W. Arenson, The New York Times, Sept. 12, 2006.
2“Princeton Stops Its Early Admissions, Joining Movement to Make Process Faster,” Alan Finder, The New York Times, Sept. 19, 2006.