It's unfair to say that Harvard University's recent and surprising announcement-that it intends to eliminate its early admissions program next year-hit academe like, as some editorialists dubbed it, an "H-Bomb." Many elite universities said last week they do not plan to follow suit.Nor will Brandeis, Dean of Admissions Gil Villanueva told the Justice Monday, and we can't blame him for that decision. The University is able to fill a considerable chunk of its incoming class each year with early decision applicants-students who, if applying regularly, might matriculate elsewhere.

Early admission can be comfortable for universities, but for applicants, it can be an unnecessary source of stress. By applying in the fall-and indicating their desire to attend a particular university-students receive a significant edge. Because college admission is so competitive today, a large premium is placed on applying early, even if that means making a hasty decision. And when students are rejected, they have mere weeks to regroup and apply elsewhere.

But far more importantly, early admission "advantages the advantaged," as William Fitzsimmons, Harvard's dean of admissions, told The New York Times last week. Applicants relying on financial aid already face barriers their more affluent peers do not. It's unfair-contrary to our University's mission, even-that they should face such roadblocks when applying here.

Early admission programs, Fitzsimmons rightly argues, may lock out students who cannot pay college tuition out of pocket. Students accepted early have little clout in negotiating for better financial aid packages, and are unable to compare offers from other universities. For some students, that's no big issue. But for others, the generosity of financial aid packages can prove the deciding factor in choosing a college. Furthermore, more affluent high schoolers generally have better access to guidance counselors, who not only assist students with applying, but often encourage them to do so early.

Still, it's unrealistic for Brandeis to scrap its early decision program entirely and risk losing students to schools of comparable, if not greater, quality. But a switch to the early action model-by which students apply early but are not locked in upon acceptance-would allow the University to both secure a portion of its incoming class and make it more heterogeneous. While the number of matriculating early applicants may shrink under a nonbinding system, that pool of students will more closely mirror our generation's demographics.