Is it better to apply regular decision or early action?

Faced with the choice between regular decision and early action. What are the pros and cons of each? Does one method significantly impact admissions chances or outcomes?

Applying Early Decision (ED) or Early Action (EA) can have several advantages over applying Regular Decision (RD). First, it can show a college that you're highly interested in, demonstrating what is often referred to as "demonstrated interest". Second, knowing your admissions status earlier can help reduce stress and allow you to plan. Third, some colleges have higher acceptance rates for ED or EA applicants than for RD applicants. For EA, the advantage is smaller since you're not obligated to attend if accepted, so there are no yield benefits for the college.

However, there are also some drawbacks to consider. Applying ED is a binding commitment - if you're admitted, you're expected to enroll unless the financial aid award is inadequate. This also means you won't be able to compare financial aid offers from different colleges. On the other hand, EA is not binding, but the applications are typically due earlier, which can be a challenge if you need more time to strengthen your application.

Regular Decision gives you more time to work on your application and can provide flexibility in comparing financial aid packages from multiple schools. However, acceptance rates can be lower, especially at very competitive schools, so this is a factor to keep in mind.

Ultimately, the decision between applying EA/ED or RD should depend on your circumstances. If you have a clear first-choice school and you're ready to commit, Early Decision can be a great choice. Early Action offers some of the benefits of ED without the binding commitment. If you want more time to perfect your application or if you want to compare financial aid offers, Regular Decision could be the better choice for you.