In many ways, Princeton's decision to get rid of its binding early decision program is a lot more monumental than Harvard's similiar decision a week ago. For one, with Princeton in the ring, it seems increasingly hard for Stanford and Yale not to follow. If Derek Bok has labeled such programs as “advantaging the advantaged” and Shirley Tilghman claims that regular admission policies are the only “fair and equitable” thing to do, how could Harvard and Princeton’s only true peers show face if they didn’t follow suit? After all, both schools are considered to be more desirable than Princeton by common admits, and both schools depend less heavily upon their early admissions program than Princeton. In fact, both schools, unlike Princeton, currently only have a non-binding early action program. So it’s just a hop-skip-and-a-jump to getting rid of their programs, as opposed to the large plunge that Princeton is taking. Over the past week, there had been some discussion (here and elsewhere) that Harvard’s decision might help schools that keep their early decision programs to “win” students that otherwise would have gotten into Harvard. But if Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford all don't accept early applications any more, I can see such an environment changing the popular opinion that early decision is the way to go.