<p>You seem to believe that admissions are somehow linear, they are not. Getting into school A doesn’t automatically mean you’ll be rejected at school B. Every school admits a range of students, some with lower stats and some with higher. Your three schools all have a mid-point SAT of approximately 1940 (plus or minus 1 or 2 wrong answers), yet you seem to be convinced that there is a quantitative difference between them because of some ratings guide you’ve read. Wrong. If I put the statistics in front of most people without the school names the vast majority of people couldn’t match up school to stats - they’re that close.</p>
<p>I don’t know why you were admitted at two and wait-listed at one. However, given that the one statistic you’ve provided shows you are an average candidate at all three schools, that’s hardly a surprising set of results. Your mistake was in thinking that Northeastern was somehow a lesser school. Your confusion and ego bruising is a product of your own (inaccurate) expectations. You may still clear the wait list, but at this point I think it’s time for you to move on.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s how I would have stated it, but I agree with vinceh’s opinion. College admissions can seem unfair, bizarre, and random, but sometimes, you just don’t get into places. Northeastern should not have been a safety for you unless your states were above the 75%ile - which they, unfortunately, weren’t. It is unfortunate that your ex-girlfriend got in with perceived lower stats/worse ECs, but perhaps it is time to move on and decide between the two schools that you did get into.</p>
<p>I’m not here to sour grape or to bash Northeastern (deja vu). I just felt that if I was able to get into NYU and Tulane, Northeastern should have accepted me. NYU and Tulane are a lot more selective with almost the same amount of applicants each year. I guess everybody else is right that college admissions can seem bizarre or random. Congratulations to any future Huskies out there. Like I said, my ex-girlfriend got in (long story short: she cheated on me-sort of). Me getting waitlisted was sort of a double whammy to my person. Still, I feel that my stats were good enough for Northeastern. I guess there was too many of me (Tae Kwon Do and Fencing Guys?). I guess I shouldn’t have picked Northeastern as a safety despite my counselors opinion.</p>
<p>It could be that your counselor is a little behind the times. Not very long ago, Northeastern would have been a safety school for someone with your stats. Not any more. Times change.</p>
<p>^I agree. Northeastern in the 1990s was a very different school than it is now. Times change. It wasn’t a safety school for you based on your numbers.</p>
<p>I’m not sure why there has to be such a heated discussion!</p>
<p>Schools only have a finite number of seats to fill for a freshman class. If they have 100 qualified students (by their stats) and only 75 seats, then something has to give. Even if the person is qualified to get in, they are rejected due to other issues:
Weak essays, weak ec’s, too many trombone players, not enough french majors…whatever! They are looking to balance the class out.</p>
<p>To the OP: Tulane and NYU seem like great choices. They wanted you for what your application has to offer. Concentrate on that! Move on. Good luck-</p>
<p>Whoah eerilie like my situation.
irvine was my safety
got Wled
Got accepted into my high reach.
Makes for a very confused cricket, especially because my stats are well above irvines (and i’ve been spending the longest time trying to figure out WHY I got rejected and nobody can explain it except for tufts)</p>
<p>Except Tufts Syndrome doesn’t make any sense. There are at least some high stats applicants who go to the UCs for whatever reason (financial, social, boyfriend/girlfriend). Do you think that the schools would give up their top students in favor of improving their yield? </p>
<p>You probably didn’t get in for a completely arbitrary reason. It happens.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The colleges that practice this approach don’t reject “overqualified” students, they wait list them. If one of those students quickly accepts a waitlist position, they could be quickly admitted.</p></li>
<li><p>The colleges that do this, aren’t really concerned about yield. They are concerned about artificially decreasing their acceptance rate. A waitlist offer does not count as an acceptance. Only students who are serious about their college will choose to remain on the waitlist, so the college can then make offers to the students on the waitlist who are most likely to say yes. The students who choose to be dropped from the waitlist appear to be rejected in the “percent accepted” statistic. </p></li>
<li><p>Many of these same colleges also admit 1/3 to 1/2 of their students through binding early decision. That is another way to artificially decrease their acceptance rate. Their acceptance rate through regular decision then becomes absurdly low. An emphasis on early decision is also a way to inflate the number of full pay students, because a student who needs to compare financial aid is unlikely to apply early decision. </p></li>
<li><p>The colleges that do this typically are also obsessive about tracking student interest. For example, a student who doesn’t visit the college is more likely to be waitlisted, because they assume they are just an extra application, and the student is less likely to attend if offered a spot.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>These are all examples of a corporate mentality that corrupts some universities. These are also the same universities that manipulate their operations to score higher on the US News ratings. </p>
<p>Some of these colleges also have complex systems to target full pay students, including checking out the value of the family’s home online before any financial aid information is submitted. There is an army of “enrollment management” consultants who help these colleges be manipulative. They also often only offer spots on the waiting list to students who are not applying for any aid.</p>
<hr>
<p>A different set of colleges have very long waiting lists, but for a completely different reason. They want to be sensitive to alumni and politicians who would be angry that their child was not admitted. With a wait list, most people will drop off and everyone can conveniently believe that their child “was almost admitted.” That keeps the checks coming from the alums. A study showed that donations from alums often drop drastically if their child is rejected.</p>
<p>@al6200
Although there are a minimal number of high stat applicants who pick lower UC’s, the chances of that are very low. Generally from what I’ve seen people who have good EC’s, good SAT but an average GPA for the school seem to get WLed at uci. I’m guessing this might be because they have a minimum gpa for their honors program and therefore believe the high achieving kids who dont get into the honors program will pick another place. </p>
<p>I’ve seen a lot of people who have been tufted by UC’s in addition to me.
Please explain to me how i didnt get into UCI with good essays, 2200 sat, 3.8 gpa (a but weak, a lot of people did with lower), good diverse EC’s (>500 CS hours, >300 work, 2 varsity sports, state champions competition for another contest, and more).</p>
<p>WHAT IS THE BEST SCHOOL FOR PRE-DENTISTRY OUT OF THESE SCHOOLS?
THANKS.</p>
<p>University of Southern California
University of Michigan
University of California Los Angeles
University of California Berkeley
University of California Santa Barbara
Northeastern University
Tulane University
Vassar College
Stony Brook University
Buffalo University
University of Maryland
University of Mass. Amherst
Case Western Reserve University
New York University
Boston University
Boston College</p>
<p>I’m still puzzled by this whole ordeal to be honest. I got accepted to Boston University, George Washington University, and Fordham University (I got huge scholarships at BU and Fordham) . I also got a scholarship from NYU (which of course was pretty little). I guess I didn’t fit the Northeastern criteria. My friend who got into Haverford college and Colby College got waitlisted at NYU. I have another friend who got into Boston College but got waitlisted at Northeastern and rejected from Boston University (He had legacy at BC?). I guess what I’m trying to say is that college admissions seem weird. Though, I still think I should have gotten into Northeastern.</p>
<p>Their 75th percentile SAT is 2130, only about 37% of the admitted were in the top 10% of their class, and the acceptance rate has been 70% in recent years.</p>
<p>My stats were:
3.93
4/210
2230 SAT </p>
<p>Accepted at USC (trustee), BC (honors), U Mich, UCLA, Berkeley, and Northwestern.</p>
<p>Not like I would even consider case with these other options but the “syndrome” definitely exists.</p>
<p>I believe applications increased 45% this year at Case Western. And Northeastern had an all time record number of applicants this year. These schools probably aren’t sure what to do with all these new applications, so they go waitlist. Then they can hit exactly the class size they want in the end.</p>
<p>SmokeysL1ce, just wondering, if you were admitted to NEU, would you enroll?</p>
<p>Possibly. You never know. I still have 4 weeks to decide on where I want to go. I got into some pretty awesome schools. At this point it’s preference. I’m favoring NYU, Tulane, and BU as of right now. My dad wants me to go to GWU because of all the connections to D.C and such. <em>shrug</em> I don’t know.</p>