OPINION: The inequity of early decision
By Stella Dombrow ‘25
Courtesy of Ila Reynolds-Kienbaum ‘27
Every fall many Catlin Gabel School (CGS) seniors rush to submit an early decision (ED) application. While this has become a norm for CGS students, ED is unfeasible for many students across the US creating unfairness in college admissions.
For those unfamiliar with the college admissions process, many schools across the US–specifically prestigious universities–offer ED programs. ED is a binding contract, meaning if someone is accepted to the college, they must attend. Additionally, they will get their admissions decision earlier, typically in December.
The concept was first introduced in the 1950s by the Seven Sisters, a group of small liberal arts colleges in the Northeast dedicated to women’s education. During the 1950s, most top-ranked schools only accepted men or a small percentage of women, so the Seven Sisters were considered elite schools for women.
Each year many women would apply to each of the Seven Sisters schools. This made it difficult for the admissions committees at each school to predict the number of accepted applicants who would attend their school. So, in 1959, the schools developed the concept of an early binding application.
The new program was successful, as the admissions committees were better equipped to predict what students would join their incoming class. Currently, 204 institutions in the US offer ED programs.
While ED is beneficial for colleges, when predicting yield, it can also benefit students. One CGS senior said, “It’s a really good option for people who want to show commitment to a singular school.”
Furthermore, at many schools, ED increases your chances of being accepted. For example, for the class of 2028 at Dartmouth University, the ED acceptance rate was 17% compared to an overall acceptance rate of 5.4%. A CGS senior who applied ED this past fall said, “I knew it was probably my only chance to get into that school because it had such a low acceptance rate.”
While ED might appear like a great deal for students and colleges, many students don’t have the opportunity to participate, making ED inequitable. When someone applies ED to a school, they are committing to attend that school regardless of cost. Because of this, usually, only students who come from wealthy families can take advantage of this program.
According to Education Reform Now, based on a study done in 2021,“applicants from the wealthiest ZIP codes were twice as likely to apply ED than all other applicants were.”
CGS College Counselor Joanna Frady said for families with financial aid needs, “It makes students feel as though they are either pushed out of any process where they might have an advantage or they have to make difficult financial choices earlier in the process than their family is ready to.”
Additionally, those who apply ED are more likely to have access to resources such as well-trained college counselors. Research conducted by Teachers College at Columbia University found that “private college counseling was the strongest predictor of enrolling due to early admissions.”
In addition to acceptance rates raised at many colleges for ED applicants, for some colleges ED admits take up a large portion of their student body, decreasing the regular decision acceptance rate.
In 2022, at Tulane University in New Orleans, 70% of its class were ED applicants, with a 68% ED acceptance rate. This was significantly less selective than their flaunted overall acceptance rate of 11.5%, making the institution appear more selective than it is.
Overall, ED admissions favor wealthy students with greater access to resources that support their college admissions process. Despite the acknowledgement of its unfairness, its future is uncertain.
On the one hand, ED is likely to continue because it benefits colleges as they can better predict their incoming class. However, some colleges might eliminate it to appear more equitable.