The decision to let Early Decision applicants file simultaneous Early Action applications was made at NACAC’s national conference, which received little media attention and was poorly attended due to the terrorist attacks one week beforehand.

“Attendance was far from what it normally is,” Fitzsimmons said. “If they’d had a full membership there, there could well have been a different outcome.

“In the spring,” he said, “I kept running into people who were very well placed in college admissions who hadn’t heard about it or were unclear that it was being implemented for this year.”

According to Singer, the voting was influenced by the absence of many representatives of the elite Northeastern high schools and colleges most affected by Early Decision policies, resulting in what Breimer called an “absentee conference.”

With fewer of those voices present, Singer said, the “deeply felt attitudes about making a maximum amount of options for students” prevalent in other parts of the country were more influential.

Now, however, opposition to the policy is widespread among Ivy League admissions officials and prep school college counselors who say that it will further inflate the number of early applications.

“I believe that the new NACAC policy, as well as the policies of many colleges and secondary schools, actually promote more, not fewer, early applications,” Hargadon wrote. “Nor do I think it a great idea for my colleagues in other colleges to be spending valuable time reviewing applications of Early Action candidates who, unbenownst to them, are already committed to attend, if admitted, an Early Decision college to which the have also applied.”

Fitzsimmons said that although Harvard is complying with the new definitions, it opposed the policy at the conference last fall.

“A lot of trouble is put into Early Action for those people who have not made a commitment elsewhere,” Fitzsimmons said. “We don’t want another huge increase, especially from people who aren’t eligible to come here.”

In response to the new definitions, Harvard was strongly considering the possibility of letting students who were admitted elsewhere under Early Decision school matriculate at Harvard if they chose to break their commitment to another school, numerous members of the Standing Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid said last spring.

Had Harvard followed through with the policy, it would have created havoc for its competitors—including Princeton and Brown—who would have no way of stopping students they were counting on enrolling from changing their minds and going to Harvard.

Brown had shifted from Early Action to Early Decision the year before, after a substantial portion of students it accepted under Early Action chose other schools. Preventing applicants from filing simultaneous Early Action applications would have protected Princeton and Brown from the threat of losing students they accepted early to Harvard. According to Fitzsimmons, around three-quarters of students who are admitted to both Harvard and a top competitor chose Harvard.

Harvard clarified its policy over the summer to stipulate that students who are applying to an Early Decision college “must with draw from Harvard (and all other colleges) once admitted.”

No Way Out

The obvious route out of the stalemate is for NACAC to change its policies again at this week’s conference. Wilder said Early Decision and Early Action policies are likely to be reviewed in detail and that many options are up for consideration, including limiting all students to one early application.