<p>I'm pretty curious. :)</p>
<p>My friend got into MIT and Brown but was rejected from Duke and waitlisted at WUStL, if that counts.</p>
<p>Colleges never want to be a student’s “back-up” school, so oftentimes Admissions will waitlist a student if they feel their stats would probably get them into a better school. For example, my son was accepted to Yale, Princeton, Brown, Dartmouth, Williams, Middlebury, Pomona, and Georgetown, but waitlisted at Wesleyan. Although Wesleyan didn’t know where else he applied, they probably looked at his stats and thought he would not attend their school unless he was rejected from most of his other choices. So, they waitlisted him thinking that if he was really interested in them, he would ask to remain on their waitlist, which he did not. So, yes it happens.</p>
<p>I recall another poster with a similar list of acceptances but was rejected from Northeastern, his safety. It didn’t help that he didn’t submit his “optional” essay, so they probably spotted a mile away that they were his backup plan.</p>
<p>UMich has been doing this lately, with internationals at least. I know dozens of kids who have gone to Ivies but got the nope from Mich the last couple years.</p>
<p>I think “Tufts Syndrome” isn’t as prevalent as thought, especially around these parts. People seem to equate getting into Harvard and rejected by Brown as “Tufts Syndrome” where in actuality, the difference in admission rates/average stats is so miniscule that most of the variance can be attributed to chance. Then again, this is CC, where a difference in 3-4 spots in US News is regarded as a different tier of school completely…</p>
<p>Yes, case western had a bad case of it this year. Many 2300+ sat applicants were waitlisted. Also, I applied to william and mary as a safety and was waitlisted.</p>
<p>@smartalic34 I think it’s mostly the case of excellent schools that have acceptance rates in the high 10’s through low 30’s. For example WashU and Tufts - students that fall into the range or have higher than their 25-75% ACT scores & GPA would have a more reasonable chance at admission yet they are still rejected. Theses schools want to increase their yield so they prefer to play it safe</p>
<p>@guineagirl96 I don’t really see how w&m, a school with ~30% acceptance, was a safety for you when your weighted gpa was below a 4 and you rarely made A’s in core classes. </p>
<p>Thanks everyone for the responses!</p>
<p>could you explain to me what Tufts Syndrome is?</p>
<p>@AmbiD77 When a college rejects/waitlists a seemingly overqualified candidate because of the assumption that said student only applied to the school as a safety, has no interest in actually attending, and will likely attend a more selective college. </p>
<p>@AmbiD77 if a school can sense that an applicant is only applying to that school as a safety, then they might reject that applicant if they feel like they will get into much better schools.</p>
<p>It’s a “theory” that many top-tier (but not the highest tier) schools reject applicants in fear they are being used as a safety. Many high-ranking universities are afraid that many high-scoring, high GPA, high-ranking students that apply to them are being used as a safety or back-up in case they don’t make it into HYPS,MIT,Caltech etc. Tufts has been known to do this in particular, rejecting stellar students that don’t really show necessary interest.</p>
<p>I’ve seen it been called the “Rejected Students Cocktail Party”, just unhappy Tufts/WashU (just some examples) rejectees making up a reason to explain their rejection to these schools.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, schools like Tufts should not be used as safeties, being as selective and powerful academic-wise.</p>
<p>At our school, basically the 2 most competitive candidates in the school’s history were rejected at a state university that many lesser candidates get into every year. Both had it all, too, captain of varsity sports, good SAT and GPA, EC’s they were passionate about and I’m assuming good teacher recommendations because I have heard good things from their teachers randomly in class. I think the school had Tuft’s syndrome because the kids were obviously competitive candidates who could have gotten into at least one top 20 school, if not an ivy. This same school rejects many from a public magnet despite all these kids being nearly certified geniuses. </p>
<p>What I don’t understand is why a school is more worried about its yield than raising the average SAT score to seem more competitive. Nobody looks at the yield and goes, “wow, this school must be amazing.” They do that at SAT scores.</p>
<p>The admissions tab of a given college’s entry on <a href=“http://www.collegedata.com”>http://www.collegedata.com</a> will tell you if “level of applicant’s interest” is considered for frosh admissions at that college.</p>
<p>See this thread about how to show a high level of interest: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/1626043-ways-to-show-a-high-level-of-applicant-s-interest-p1.html”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/1626043-ways-to-show-a-high-level-of-applicant-s-interest-p1.html</a> .</p>
<p>thanks guys for the detailed responses! :D</p>
<p>One of my friends was the perfect match for our state’s top LAC. She had a 4.0 and amazing activities and recommendations and an ACT several points above the 75th percentile, but she was waitlisted. She didn’t show a lot of interest because she know it wouldn’t be possible to attend (not enough financial aid). She spent more of her time/effort on applications for schools that would actually give her money. She still applied to this LAC because she loved the school though, and there’s always that small hope of some financial aid miracle. Since we live only an hour or so away, the lack of interest is probably why she wasn’t accepted, even though she should’ve been accepted with no questions in my opinion.</p>
<p>Colleges have so many applicants these days, so they can afford to let a lot of qualified applicants slip by. Why accept a high-stats kid with mild interest, when you could accept a more average-stats kid who will clearly attend if accepted and will therefore raise the school’s yield? I guess it makes sense, but that’s why the whole yield thing bugs me. If it didn’t matter, more kids would be receiving acceptance letters they deserved instead of (unnecessarily) second-guessing themselves and their accomplishments. That’s just my two cents though.</p>
<p>@sumobats:</p>
<p>Well, if those spectacular high-stats kids don’t actually go to those safety schools, they don’t raise their test score average much, do they?
Say that pool A are spectacular 1550 score kids, but only 10% of admits accept. Pool B are good 1450 score kids and 50% of admits attend.
To fill 20 slots, the school can take 20 kids from pool A and 36 from pool B, so 56 total acceptances (say out of a total pool of 200), an average test score of 1460 and a yield of under 40% (acceptance rate of over 25%). Or they can just take 40 from Pool B: 1450 average test score, yield of 50%, and acceptance rate of 20%.</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t mind colleges wanting to take kids who really want to be at that school (and schools can tell interest from essays and how much contact an applicant makes a lot of times) . They’d make for better ambassadors of the school and more committed alumni and there are so many qualified applicants now to the top elites that there won’t be much drop-off at all in the quality of the student body.</p>
<p>@heptagirl:</p>
<p>No, your friend shouldn’t have been accepted with no questions.</p>
<p>Everyone is looking out for their own interests. The schools as well as the students. Schools are looking to put together the best student body they can. Students who do not attend do not make that student body better. Why should a school give out an admit to an applicant who has close to zero probability of actually attending just to boost his/her ego? Students don’t attend School B instead of their favorite School A just to make School B feel better. And handling rejections is part of life and growing up. If Girl A is cold and distant to Boy B but Girl C responds to his advances, what right does Girl A have to get all huffy when Boy B asks out Girl C instead of Girl A (even if Girl A is more attractive/smarter/whatever)? And if Girl A starts doubting herself, well, that’s her own issues.</p>
<p>The moral of the story is to apply ED to your dream school if finances allow and your dream school is one of those with much higher ED admission rates.</p>