<p>Yes-- this is not all that uncommon. As someone above mentioned, if a school feels you are very unlikely to attend, they may reject you (ie Tufts syndrome) so that their yield isn't lowered. Of course, in this day and age, it is probably harder to "predict" whether a student is likely to be admitted elsewhere or may end up at their safety.</p>
<p>It just kind of throws a monkey wrench in the entire process..almost like the bottom fell out, because if he got waitlisted to school A. where the median SAT is 1720 with a average GPA of 3.3 BUT got into school B where the median is 1990 and the average GPA is at least a 3.8+, and my son has a 2000 but a 3.0 wouldn't it be safe to say he would have gotten into school A and not B? Where is the rhyme and reason? Would this happen any year or are you thinking that this particular year, all the rules flew out the window?:)</p>
<p>Rejected by Pepperdine, into Berkeley. I ended up meeting a few other people who'd experienced the same trouble at Pepperdine. Reasons proposed included the UC's not considering freshman year, insufficient church involvement, and/or "Tuft's Syndrome." I ended up being in the exact same situation when law school acceptances came in (different schools), so go figure.</p>
<p>Regardless, as other posters have said, it highlights the importance of applying to true safeties (preferably rolling, preferably more than one unless an acceptance is already in hand), and of keeping an open mind regarding possible outcomes. So often, admissions is so much more than just a numbers game.</p>
<p>
[quote]
because if he got waitlisted to school A. where the median SAT is 1720 with a average GPA of 3.3 BUT got into school B where the median is 1990 and the average GPA is at least a 3.8+, and my son has a 2000 but a 3.0 wouldn't it be safe to say he would have gotten into school A and not B?
[/quote]
Ctmom-
It isn't as simple at that. The median SAT scores and GPAs reported by schools are for the enrolled students, not for the students who were admitted but did not attend. And if schools accept too many kids whose SATs and GPAs are way above their median, the likelihood that these students will attend is lower, and the school's yield is lower. Schools don't like that.</p>
<p>Last year I got into Boston College and Villanova and got rejected at Fairfield...hmmm</p>
<p>I've seen a number of students rejected by Berkeley and UCLA and accepted by Stanford and other elites. Sports-related admissions are the reason for many and race accounts for others (UCs are by state law not allowed to consider ethnicity, yet most private schools do).</p>
<p>I was rejected at most liberal arts colleges but got in 3 of the 6 top 10 national universities instead.</p>
<p>I know one rejected at Florida and accepted at UChicago</p>
<p>Last year a middle-class white girl from MA was accepted at Harvard but denied at Duke.</p>
<p>???</p>
<p>^^^ that's not THAT unusual. duke is more selective than you think it is, their SAT ranges are higher than stanford's</p>
<p>I'd hardly consider Duke average....to get rejected by one top 20 school and accepted by another really isn't that unusual.</p>
<p>A relative was rejected by Brown and accepted by WUSTL</p>
<p>The GC's at my daughter's hs tell the kids that WUSTL app is a waste unless they apply early decision...I guess eventually no one applies unless it's the only college they want to go to?</p>
<p>Maybe the only true safeties are state colleges which rely solely on stats? At a local state u nearby, they take anyone with a 2.0 and 900+ on the SAT. The Honors program is for kids with a 3.0 and/or 1100 SATs.</p>
<p>Hope I don't sound foolish but exactly what is WUSTL? Thanks!</p>
<p>Washington U of St. Louis</p>
<p>I know someone who was rejected from the University of Michigan (in state) and is now at Harvard...</p>
<p>my friend didnt get into brown but got into MIT and harvard</p>
<p>Just a reminder-- the OP's question had to do with Average vs top tier schools. A student getting into one top tier school but not another is par for the course.</p>