Axed policy finds support online

The University's decision to abandon early admissions has triggered mixed but impassioned reviews from students. Some praised the University for eliminating an unfair advantage for wealthy, private school applicants, while others said the University axed an opportunity for committed students to show their love.

"By removing this option, we are placing Princeton in the ranks of the ordinary schools, and that is a realm to which the school should not relegate itself," Powell Fraser '06 said. "Princeton is extraordinary and should act as such."

Two Facebook groups opposing the removal of early admission sprung up just days after the University made its decision. No groups supporting the move currently exist, though many students expressed enthusiasm about the change.

Sarah Dabby '07 said that abandoning early admissions was "only fair."

Dabby, who was admitted early, said that misconceptions about financial aid and worries about the binding nature of Princeton's Early Decision program may have scared off less affluent applicants.

"Even though a student might not be 100 percent bound if their financial aid package isn't right, [the threat of binding admission] still acts as a deterrent for many students because they don't know that," she said.

Isaiah Soval-Levine '09, the creator of the smaller of the two Facebook groups in opposition to the change, said the removal of early admission was "just another attempt to remain on the cutting edge," and that the Office of Admission "didn't think it through fully."

"The way I see it, early admission is for people who have done their homework, looked into what kind of campus they want," Soval-Levine said. "They decided Princeton is the one for them and they've made some effort to find the Princeton application, and written their essays, and they're ready to commit."

Like Soval-Levine and others critics of the decision, Fraser described the average early applicant as not necessarily part of the advantaged elite, but simply sold on the school.

"I love Princeton because other people love Princeton, and I want it to be full of as many people who love Princeton as possible," he explained.

Other critics were disappointed to see Princeton "following the leader," in the words of the University of Pennylvania's student newspaper, The Daily Pennsylvanian.

"I'm not sure that's good," Roby Sobieski '10 said. "It's good to be the first person to follow Harvard rather than the second, but on the other hand, that's saying that we're trailing behind Harvard, which we're not."

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Dean of Admission Janet Rapelye said in an earlier interview with The Daily Princetonian that the University may have to sacrifice its number one ranking in the annual U.S. News & World Report list because of its decision to end early admissions.

Sobieski admitted losing the title "would bother me a little," but said he would not be fazed by even a major dip in the rankings. "Personally," he said, "I would still love Princeton for what it is."