When the admissions staff at elite colleges have to examine an ever increasing number of applications without the benefit of more time, it comes as no surprise that applications are rejected more quickly. With that in mind, here are some items that can be perceived as red flags when they review applications:
As a follow-up to the previous post, here are examples of the difference in acceptance rates between the two application phases.
| Early acceptance rate | Regular acceptance rate | |
| Brown University | 14.6% | 3.6% |
| Columbia University | 10.3% | 3% |
| Dartmouth College | 21.3% | 4.7% |
| Duke University | 21% | 4.6% |
| Harvard University | 7.9% | 2.3% |
| Yale University | 12.1% | 3.2% |
Yes. The ultra-competitive nature of admissions to elite colleges means that to succeed, applicants should grab every advantage possible. In this case, applying through early action shows enthusiasm. There are 3 kinds of early action:
In our opinion, no. As it is, getting admitted is going from difficult to very, very difficult. Perversely, the test optional movement may have contributed to that phenomenon, by significantly increasing the number of applications. In turn, acceptance rates plummet since the number of available spots did not increase accordingly (if at all). Low acceptance rates make elite colleges look more exclusive and it is easy to see how the cycle of increasing difficulty keeps going. One could argue that the elite colleges are the big winners. We believe that applicants should take the ACT (skip the essay) and the SAT, especially now that all testing centers are back in operation. Otherwise, a very compelling substitute narrative would be required.
The admission interview is not a decisive factor in determining the outcome, but in a hyper-competitive environment, it can put an applicant over the top when handled exceptionally well. This is where an applicant can enhance his/her profile by sharing information beyond submitted materials.
