So we can agree that these 134 students are terrific, but what about the early decision system that helped them get here? Many are questioning both the prudence and fairness of the system. In an interview on Dec. 12, 2001, Richard C. Levin, the president of Yale University, sent shockwaves through the ranks of college admissions officers and high school guidance counselors everywhere by announcing his wish to eliminate the early decision option. "If we all got rid of it, it would be a good thing," he said. "It pushes the pressure of thinking about college back into the junior year of high school and the only one who benefits is the admissions officers." This is the first time that the president of an Ivy League institution has come out against the policy. All I can do is breathe a sigh of relief and say, "Finally."
Finally, the all-powerful people in charge at college admissions offices are beginning to show some genuine concern for the applicants whose fates they control. So fierce is the competition in college admissions today that the most selective schools, including both Yale and Amherst, have been able to demand essentially whatever they want from high school seniors. In order to even be considered for admission, students must accumulate perfect or near-perfect grades and test scores, a long list of extracurricular activities, leadership positions, AP classes and other credentials. At many high schools, including my own, such pressure leads to tremendous stress. So much stress, in fact, that the experience left me with serious doubts as to whether getting into a selective college was worth it.
Early decision programs represent yet another burden placed on applicants. Many believe that their chances of success are greater if they apply early, because by doing so they supposedly indicate their first choice college. This means that in order to get this advantage, applicants must decide on their first choice and commit to it in October of their senior year. Whoever does not apply early must take his chances with colleges that have sometimes filled over 40 percent of their freshman classes with early applicants. The existence of the early decision option hurts everyone involved. If you apply early, you might be making a binding decision that you're not ready to make. If you apply regular, you're at a disadvantage because of the large number of spots given to early applicants. Even colleges face significant risks in offering early decision. First, rushing students to decide where they want to go to school only increases the likelihood that they will make the wrong choice and want to transfer. Second, by accepting so many students early, colleges may have to deny admission to well, and often equally qualified regular applicants who otherwise would have been admitted. Clearly, the system is a significantly flawed one.
Fortunately, influential figures aside from Levin are noticing these problems, and seeking to abandon early admission. Here at Amherst, Dean Parker has spoken out against the policy. On Dec. 13, 2001, Parker was quoted in The New York Times: "With some of the elite schools taking higher and higher percentages of their students early decision, a growing number of kids are strategizing about where to apply, rather than looking for the place that is right for them." He went on to say that the first question asked by applicants is usually, "'Are my chances enhanced by applying early decision?' rather than 'What are you guys all about educationally?' That is very discouraging." Parker and Levin both believe that early decision must go, but not until a number of the elite colleges agree to abolish it simultaneously. In Levin's words, if Amherst or Yale alone were to drop early decision, they "would be seriously disadvantaged relative to other schools."
I would like to applaud both Parker and Levin for recognizing the defects of early decision. Their words have certainly forced many of their colleagues in the college admissions business to take a closer look at the policy. At the same time, however, I would like Parker and Levin not to wait for other selective schools to do away with early decision. I encourage Amherst and Yale admissions to exhibit a quality that they value in their applicants: leadership. I challenge both schools to take the lead themselves and eliminate early decision now. Even if this means that Amherst and Yale would be at a disadvantage, someone needs to draw the line on the unreasonable stresses and demands heaped on students who apply to the top colleges. Doing so would send a strong and badly needed message to everyone involved in the college admissions process. By dropping early decision, Amherst and Yale would be taking a step towards indicating true concern for their applicants. And that, perhaps, is one of the important things that students should look for in a college.