<p>Just curiosity: Why the restriction, if you defer an admission, on applying elsewhere the following year? If you have experiences during that year off that lead you to believe that another school might be better for you, or more interested in you after your year off, why shouldn't you apply and keep the other admission as a 'safety?' You aren't depriving anyone of anything (except maybe yourself since you forfeit the deposit if you walk away.)</p>
<p>This question is really two-pronged: Is the school's restriction ethical? (I'm inclined to think not.) If it isn't, but we accept the deferral, are we required to accept it on their unethical terms? (Not sure.) Second prong: Practically speaking, how would they know if you did apply elsewhere?</p>
<p>It doesn't matter whether it's ethical or not. If you accept their terms, it would be unethical, and more so, illegal, to later ignore them.
Also, sharing a list of a few hundred names over the internet and checking for odd occurrences takes less then a second, so if they want to check, it's really no problem.
Of course, if they never mention anything about applying elsewhere, you're free to do as you will.</p>
<p>That's silly. It's not illegal. I'd like to see that statute. It's a 'rule' that the colleges have agreed to among themselves and nothing more. Let's not give this more weight than this self-serving 'rule' deserves.</p>
<p>Um, colleges are private... they could make any rule they wanted. Its the same as an ED admission... you accept their terms if you choose to go that route. I'm sure if you have some radical experience you could talk to admission and sort stuff out but why should you be able to keep them as a "safety"? Why shouldn't colleges serve themselves? Please, tell me.</p>
<p>Because if you could keep a good school in your pocket, take a year of to do whatever you want, and shoot for an even better school with no penalty, lots of people would do it. And that would mess things up.</p>
<p>Plus, why would a school want a person who wasn't interested in their school enough to go for even a year and then trasfer, but rather felt it necessary to keep them as an utter last resort?</p>
<p>I don't see how this policy could be considered unethical. Could you explain why you think it would be? College A can't do anything but keep your deposit if you do this, but College B that you got into later can rescind your acceptance for whatever reason they want, including if you broke College A's policy. I agree that it is very similar to the issue of ED. Every year kids' minds are boggled at the fact that it's <em>binding</em>...well yeah, it is.</p>
<p>I have come to expect this sort of nonsense from kids on CC, but to hear someone who professes to be a Mom trying so blatantly to play the system is a little frightening to me.</p>
<p>The request for deferment of admissions that you make to a school is certainly not intended for the purpose of allowing the student to see if he/she can find a better school. The student has to request that deferment and it has to be granted -- it isn't a "right" that the student has. I think the school has every right and is indeed being ethical by being upfront with the student about their expectations for the gap year and they do have the right to expect the student to attend their school (per the signed agreement) and not apply elsewhere.</p>
<p>If you want to make sure you are being ethical, have the student request a deferment of admissions based on the premise that, while they like the school, they would really prefer to attend elsewhere and will be using the gap year to enhance their application and apply to other schools. If they agree to grant a deferment of admissions under that circumstance, then it would be ethical for the student to apply elsewhere.</p>
<p>the student has another option -- simply reapply for both better schools and the school at which he/she was accepted after the gap year.</p>