The debate over early admissions has reached a fever pitch in recent weeks, in light of the decision by Harvard University, Princeton University and most recently the University of Virginia to end their respective programs.
After requesting numerical breakdowns for differences in the early and regular decision pools last week, the Office of Admissions and Financial Aid released specific statistics to The Dartmouth on Friday.
These statistics for the members of Dartmouth's Class of 2010 reflect strong numerical disparities between the early and regular decision pools.
The most drastic difference in representation between the two pools is in minority matriculants; 19 percent of matriculants from the early decision pool are racial minorities, whereas 40 percent of those accepted in the regular pool are considered minorities.
Thirty-eight percent of matriculants admitted to the Class of 2010 through early decision are receiving need-based financial aid, compared to 57 percent of regular decision matriculants.
Nine percent of students accepted early are the first in their families to attend college. In comparison, 14 percent of students accepted from the regular decision pool are first-generation college students.
The recent actions by Harvard, Princeton and UVA to abandon early admissions stem from arguments that such programs are under-utilized by minorities and low-income students. Critics also say that these policies limit the options of students needing financial aid by not allowing them to compare different financial aid awards.
Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid Karl Furstenberg has maintained, however, that the College will likely continue early admissions in the near future.
"My own view is that early admission programs have an appropriate place and role in admissions," Furstenberg said. "We know that they work well for Dartmouth and we have been judicious in managing the early decision program."
UVA President John Casteen III said that the university's binding early decision program was an identified barrier to qualified low-income students.
"It is a logical next step in the ongoing effort to remedy flaws in the national and state systems of financial aid for needy students," Casteen said in a statement about UVA's Sept. 25 decision to do away with early admissions.
At UVA the data on low income students are the most striking with only two percent of those accepted early to the Class of 2010 having applied for financial aid, according to John Blackburn, dean of admission at UVA.
UVA's statistics broke down minority student applications further than those provided by Dartmouth's Office of Admissions. Minority students comprised different shares of the early and regular admissions pools at UVA. Black students made up 3.1 percent of students admitted early, compared to 9.7 percent in the regular pool.
3.1 percent of students admitted from UVA's early pool were Hispanic, compared to 4.6 percent from those accepted from the regular pool. The numbers jumped from 1.7 percent to 7.3 percent between the two pools for international students admitted.
The percentages were flip-flopped for white students with 75.3 percent of the admitted students from the early pool identified as Caucasian, compared to 59.7 percent in the regular pool.
Unlike Harvard and Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania, which for the last six years has accepted 48 percent of its incoming classes from the early decision pool, is adamant about continuing its early decision program.
The Dartmouth made attempts to ascertain comparable statistics from other Ivy League institutions. These numbers, however, for institutions such as Princeton, Harvard and Penn were unavailable.
"There is no question based upon the data that the two pools are different in terms of diversity," Furstenberg said. "But ultimately what's important is who you decide to admit."
Furstenberg says he has seen little evidence that early decision programs themselves are to blame for the lower percentage of early applicants from these backgrounds. Rather he points to the lack of previous knowledge about Dartmouth, poor counseling in high schools and lack of financial resources to begin the college application process during summer.
Opponents of early admission, however, cite similar evidence for their arguments.
"Students from more sophisticated backgrounds and affluent high schools often apply early to increase their changes of admission, while minority students and students from rural areas, other countries and high schools with fewer resources miss out," Harvard Interim President Derek Bok told The Harvard Gazette when the school's decision was first announced.
Recent years have shown increased diversity in the early decision pool at Dartmouth as a result of extensive outreach to disadvantaged students through summer enrichment programs, college counseling and financial aid workshops, campus visitation programs and work with community-based organizations beyond high schools, Furstenberg said.
Furstenberg also noted that the early decision pool at Dartmouth and other selective colleges has a large representation of recruited athletes and legacies, who are less likely to be from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Schools that have eliminated their early admissions programs have argued that such programs preclude students from comparing financial aid packages for multiple schools.
While Dartmouth currently offers a binding early decision program, Furstenberg points out that Dartmouth offers need-blind admissions and extremely attractive financial aid awards to early applicants. All admitted students are also encouraged to appeal the financial aid award if they feel it is not adequate, Furstenberg said.
"In recent years, only a tiny handful of early decision students have been unable to attend for financial reasons," Furstenberg said. "No student admitted to Dartmouth through early decision is 'locked in' and unable to receive the best financial aid package."
In addition, some universities have claimed that early admissions programs contribute to the admissions frenzy by putting pressure on students to commit to one college early.
"These programs distort the high school experience by forcing both students and colleges to commit prematurely, based only upon the record at the end of the student's junior year," said Jeremy Knowles, interim dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard.
Furstenberg, however, believes that early programs in some ways help to reduce the pressure on students and admissions offices.
"If early programs were eliminated altogether it is entirely plausible that applications for regular decision would skyrocket," Furstenberg said. "This would not only heighten the frenzy and uncertainty felt by students, but would surely compress the time in which colleges and universities would have to carefully evaluate these applications."
Instead of eliminating early programs altogether, Furstenberg proposes schools limit the percentage of the entering class they admit through early admission to about 30 percent.
"This would allow for the benefits of early decision to be maintained while preserving the majority of admissions spaces for regular decision," Furstenberg said.
Dartmouth admits approximately 35 percent of its classes early, compared to Harvard, Princeton and Penn who admit about 50 percent of their classes early, according to Furstenberg.
"There does not seem to be anything inherently wrong with having an admission program for students that have a clear first choice college," Furstenberg said. "Many of us believe that early programs help to build a community of committed and enthusiastic students on our campuses."
Furstenberg believes that this issue will be resolved by the end of this academic year, his last year as acting dean of admissions and financial aid at Dartmouth.
