Under Early Action college admissions policies, students apply at the beginning of their senior year to receive a non-binding decision by mid-February. They may be accepted, rejected, waitlisted, or deferred. While early notification is meant to reduce stress, it often exacerbates anxiety as students face tight deadlines.
Early Action (EA) decisions are intended to simplify the college admissions process, but in reality, they create unnecessary complications, leaving students confused and uneasy.
While EA theoretically provides an early answer, its widespread adoption has diminished any significant admissions advantage. Thousands of students apply Early Action each year, only to submit numerous Regular Decision applications, raising a critical question: what is the true purpose of EA?
Mamaroneck High School (MHS) Counselor Cathryn Quackenbush notes, “EA is so common now, and it really offers no advantage about acceptance rates.” While a majority of students are aware that EA does not provide a significant admissions boost at most schools, they still feel pressured to apply early because their peers are doing so and because of the perceived idea that applying EA demonstrates a higher commitment level to a specific school.
A fundamental flaw of EA is the disparity in resources available to students. The process requires careful planning and early preparation.
Those with access to college counselors and financial support are guided through the process, while students without such support are at a disadvantage, as they may not even be aware of these EA opportunities. Mara Hektor (‘25) highlights that “communities like ours have resources available throughout the year” that provide students with “the advantage of counselors proof [reading] the essays they submit.” This early access to support gives them a competitive edge, while students lacking it are often left behind. In consequence, colleges may inadvertently disadvantage qualified applicants by reserving substantial portions of their incoming class for EA admits, limiting opportunities for Regular Decision applicants.
The timing of decisions enhances uncertainty for students. EA results are not always available before Regular Decision deadlines, leaving students in limbo. As a result, uncertainty drives students to apply to even more schools as a safety net. Universities are then flooded with applications, fueled by students’ panic.
Even those accepted to their top-choice schools rarely withdraw their other applications, further complicating the admissions landscape. Submitting 15+ applications to “aspirational schools” can lead to students receiving more “deferrals or denials than acceptances,” which “doesn’t feel good, especially if you are a student who has given high school your all!” says Quackenbush. She encourages students to have more “strategic lists” rather than simply applying to more schools.
Colleges feel this strain. Each year, the rise in applications overwhelms admissions offices, stretching their resources and making it harder to conduct holistic reviews. On January 1st, The Common App reported a 7% increase in application volume—an additional 422,971 applications compared to the previous year (Niezal, 2025). This surge has overwhelmed individual schools such as University of Texas-Austin, which received 90,562 applications and was forced to delay EA decisions from January 15th to February 15th for many applicants. However, Quackenbush points out that this surge is not due to “a growing student population but rather a tendency for students to apply to more schools,” a trend likely exacerbated by the EA process and contributing to delays and rushed reviews.
Despite these challenges, EA does offer some benefits. Students who receive their decisions early can alleviate stress by adjusting their Regular Decision application plans. Hektor reflects that EA was a “great option for me” because it allowed her to “gain a sense of security early on.”
Receiving an acceptance letter can also help students “focus on their academics and extracurriculars,” says Quackenbush, rather than spending months stressing about more application deadlines. Additionally, since EA applicants are not required to commit until May, they have ample time to weigh their options carefully.
However, for EA to truly serve students and universities, reform is necessary.
Aligning EA and Regular Decision deadlines more effectively could greatly benefit both groups of applicants. If EA results were released before most Regular Decision deadlines, students could make more informed choices, reducing the time, effort, and financial burden associated with excessive applications.
EA’s growing popularity and timing of decisions have led it to lose effectiveness. While the process does offer some relief to students balancing rigorous senior-year coursework, the current system creates more challenges than solutions.
A more balanced approach to college admissions—one that ensures accessibility and reduces unnecessary stress—would better serve students and universities alike.
