I have been active in Alumni Schools work in Louisiana for 30 years, having chaired the Schools Committees of both Louisiana Princeton Alumni Associations. I remember only too well, and not with fondness, the days before Early Decision. Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, students would often apply to all of the Ivies, Stanford and MIT because there was no way to demonstrate which college the applicant preferred. What happened, especially with students who were so-called "academic 1's" but relatively weaker on the nonacademic side, is that they would be admitted everywhere and would invariably choose Harvard. I remember, when I called to talk to such an admit, the parent telling me that "my son was admitted to Harvard, so you can understand that there is nothing to talk about."
Similarly, highly qualified minority students — a group in which Louisiana is particularly strong — who applied and were accepted to Harvard, Princeton and other highly selective schools never matriculated at Princeton. Princeton's name did not resonate with their families the same way Harvard's did.
At the same time, there would be many disappointed applicants — students with excellent credentials, often of a more "well-rounded" nature, who would have given their eye teeth to go to Princeton but who were, because of the number of other Louisiana admits, denied admission. As good as these applicants were, the Admission Office could not justify selecting them over a Westinghouse Science winner or one of the strongest minority students in the country. Our yield here was dismal. We were lucky if one admit who had been accepted to both Harvard and Princeton chose Princeton; Louisiana now has few native alumni from the 1970s and early 1980s.
When former Dean of Admission Fred Hargadon implemented Early Decision, things immediately changed for the better. I no longer worried that an interviewee was using Princeton as a Harvard backup. We sometimes had fewer admits but always had a much higher yield, which created a bond between local alumni and current students. I can imagine how much easier the program made life for admission officers, who no longer had to read hundreds of applications from students intent on going elsewhere. Anecdotally, I can report that that there is more enthusiasm and cohesiveness in the classes admitted since Early Decision than in classes from the earlier period. Recent classes are filled with students who really wanted Princeton instead of students disappointed with their Harvard rejection.
Harvard claims that it is getting rid of Early Action because it harms the disadvantaged. I have never known a case where a disadvantaged applicant to Princeton was denied admission during regular decision because of any effect of Early Decision. Disadvantaged applicants have always been given every consideration, including, if appropriate, fee waivers and an extension of the Jan. 1 deadline. Denying Early Decision to those who are ready to make a commitment merely disadvantages the early commits; it does nothing to spread the word to the disadvantaged. Harvard's cure does not fit the disease. Is Harvard now going to refuse recruited athletes who are willing to commit early — a sign that they may safely forego a scholarship package from a grant-in-aid school? Will Harvard's concern mean that it will not reinstitute its old program by which particularly desirable applicants were recruited early by faculty contacts and told they were "likely" admits?
I am grieved that Princeton is going to end Early Decision not only because of the negative effect this will have on the University's present and future alumni, but also because this action does not benefit any of its constituencies. What Harvard does is not necessarily good, especially for Princeton. I believe the University has had many recent successes because it has had students for whom Princeton is indeed "the best darn place of all." For Princeton, which perhaps not coincidentally outranked Harvard this year in U.S. News & World Report college rankings, the Early Decision system has produced positive results. For Harvard, which is seeing its reputation take a second position to Princeton, the move away from early admissions may really have been a maneuver to best the competition. And Princeton, unfortunately, has swallowed the bait. Marta Richards '73 was a Wilson School major and is president of the Princeton Alumni Association of Baton Rouge. She can be reached at marta73@alumni.princeton.edu.
Read More
Keep academic authority in human hands
Lily Halbert-AlexanderThe Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
The Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
What do we owe society for a Princeton education?
Jia Cheng ShenThe social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
The social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
Notes from a so-called enemy’s classroom
Jennifer JenningsIt wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.
It wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.