Double Depositing is NOT a good idea

Parents Forum
121

<p>There also has to be an END to the process. The benefit of psychologically preparing oneself to go to the school of ultimate choice, talking about it, reading about it, getting excited about it, should not be underestimated. That's why many kids end up not going to the first-choice but waitlisted school once they get off the waitlist; they're already invested in the school to which they've sent the deposit. </p>

<p>Why anyone would want to prolong the agony of the decision-making process is beyond me! (Of course with the few exceptions of incomplete information from the schools themselves.)</p>

122

<p>to original post : your claims make no sense - so, wouldn't colleges practicing waitlisting be violating their own, NACAC, big-wig double deopsit policy by setting up unrealistic expectations that waitlistees have an chance of enrolling after May 1st deadline---NO---- colleges could not enforce this so called policy beacuse many are dependent on waitlists to fill their class in order to not lose money, esp. in this era of students applying to 20 college yield is very unpredictable----this might be a policy, but the practicing of double deposting is MOST DEFINITELY indulged by universities and colleges to save their own ass in the end</p>

123

<p>I am impressed with the thoughtful debate surrounding this issue. I must admit that since DD and I came to our conclusion on May 1, I have taken a break from CC. The main reason that we wanted to hold off on deciding was that DD is a finalist for a large, national scholarship and if she would happen to win the $, her second school would be a much more realistic financial fit for this family. Carolyn's advice on double-deposit helped us reach our final (ethical) conclusion, on time and with no regret. Our situation really revolved around $ issues, not the hope of getting off of a waitlist at a "better" school. Both DD and I are 100% satisfied with her choice and are frankly glad to have it overwith!!</p>

124

<p>Let's say I manage to secure deferrment for national service for two years. During the two years, if I apply for another university, would it count as a DD? I would not be really depriving any other students of a place though it would constitute a breaking of trust.</p>

125

<p>im not double depositing because i alreayd chose ND... and because im from canada im not too certain about this whole double deposit thing in the states schools.. so my quetsion is this.. in everything we do.. e.g. rentals for apartments etc etc.. deposits are deposits... you can put a deposit down.. and it is also your decision to forfeit such amount should you decide not to rent the apartment anymore.. its not uneithical in any way... deposits are there so that the apartment owner will get compensated for the loss of costumer but nothing more.. i dun think thats unethical.. so shouldnt this double depositing be fine too???</p>

<p>and btw. how would the college know anyway if you double deposited?? i mean how can they check? there is no way of their knowing..</p>

126

<p>I didn't render an opinion about whether it was "ethical" -- but I posted earlier that it is definitely selfish, at least at any college that is highly selective and has a substantial number of waitlisted candidates.</p>

<p>Think of it this way: lets say you apply for an apartment in a city where housing is tight. Because you have excellent credit, the landlord chooses you over other tenants who also applied. You make a deposit on a place where you really don't plan to live -- thereby preventing a family who has no place else to live from moving in. My own son spent 3 months last year looking for housing; typically at an open house for a rental there would be up to 40 people showing up; the worst thing that happened to him was when people promised him a place, so he stopped looking, and then the day before he was scheduled to move in, called him back and said the spot was no longer available. That happened twice. Finally he moved into a really terrible place because it was the only thing he could find, and he figured he needed to grab it while it was available. That's kind of the reverse situation- the landlord double dealing (probably finding a more desirable tenant after the deposit had been accepted) - but it illustrates the same principle: what you do has an impact on the plans that others are making.</p>

<p>In the college situation, it is the waitlisted students that you really are hurting, because you are holding a spot that others want.</p>

127

<p>As always, Calmom's posts go right to the point. I just want to add that not only does double deposting hurt waitlisted student's chances, but as Carolyn pointed out, this practice also contributes to further skewing a college's yield - to the ultimate detriment of all parties concerned. </p>

<p>The ethics of double depositing has roused a glorious debate on this thread precisely because there are no hard and fast rules. I don't know how the system works in Canada, but in the United States there exists a strong underlying code of honor in academia that does affect applicants from the time they fill out the application forms, send in updates, recommendations, and ultimately send in their SIRs. The process continues, culminating in actual attendance. It is not absurd to argue that the higher up the echelon of elitism, the stronger the implicit code of honor. Not to harp on the point of ivy elitism (but your screen name makes it just too hard to resist) a prime case in point would be Harvard. The deposit required is "0" $ . Obviously, something else is at play here other than the inscrutable methods that colleges may or may not use to discover double depositing and the ultimate consequence that could arise from getting caught with one's hand in the cookie jar.</p>

128

<p>"I just want to add that not only does double deposting hurt waitlisted student's chances, but as Carolyn pointed out, this practice also contributes to further skewing a college's yield - to the ultimate detriment of all parties concerned."</p>

<p>"..in the United States there exists a strong underlying code of honor in academia..."</p>

<p>How interesting. As if there is ANY data to support the wild speculation that double depositing affects waitlisted students. </p>

<p>And, please tell me what honor codes have to do with double depositing?</p>

<p>Come on, moral enforcers. You can do better than this! I think you folks are groping...</p>

129

<p>Until statistical data proves the contrary, the generally accepted metaphor of musical chairs provides a vivid image of the waitlisting phase of the college admissions process. Now, in musical chairs two or more people compete to occupy a smaller number of chairs. The basic idea that keeps this game moving and challenging is that only ONE person can occupy ONE chair. If the game is to be played correctly, (I did not say fairly), no sharing or doubling up (one person occupying two chairs) is allowed. The game moves along, albeit with a few tumbles here and there, until all the chairs are filled which, more or less, gives you yield. Double depositing is akin to doubling-up with one person attempting to occupy two chairs. The rules of the game are bent or broken - but in this case we do not have a toddler crying "no fair" but we have a college student who was in the game but is left without possible accommodation and two colleges making accommodations for one person who, in all good faith, is highly unlikely to attend both schools at the same time.</p>

<p>The honor code works for double-depositing just as it does for every single aspect of the application process. Most letters of admission explicitly indicate that an acceptance is expected to be made for one college and only one college and that means just that - one college. Now, most people are honorable e.g. accountable and responsible for their actions without the need for specific laws or regulations (and please, don't we have enough of all that already?). Iit would be extremely hypocritical for colleges, parents and students alike to be outraged by EC padding, plagarism, cheating and not be held accountable on the same standard for hedge-betting aka double-depositing. In any case, double depositing is a bad bet which is probably why the metaphor of musical chairs is used and not gambling.</p>

<p><a href="http://renzey.casinocitytimes.com/articles/1035.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://renzey.casinocitytimes.com/articles/1035.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

130

<p>As I believe someone pointed out many posts ago, some of the elite schools do not require a deposit on May 1st--just a written acceptance. Thus there would not actually be a financial penalty in terms of loss of deposit to the student who double-accepts. I suppose it is still a "bad bet" because if a school learns you have also accepted elsewhere they may rescind your admission. Worse, both schools may do so. However, I haven't seen anyone post here what method schools use to learn if a student has done this.</p>

131

<p>

Xiggi, that's not true. UT freshmen housing deposits are fully refundable if requested before May 1. Here's a quote from the UT Housing website:</p>

<p>"Your $300 advance payment is refundable only if you are a first time freshman not attending the University and you inform Admissions and Housing of your decision before May 1."</p>

132

<p>newmassdad: It is obvious to me that those who do not wish to hear just won't listen or even attempt to listen. </p>

<p>The latest arqument is the old arqument that there is an 'honor code in academia".</p>

<p>Colleges send out slanted information, do not reveal factual data in the areas of Financial Aid, Scholarships, true numbers on GPA/SAT/ACT/Yield/etc etc etc.</p>

<p>The published information seeks to gather the largest number of applicants to serve whatever PR image(s) the colleges/universities are hoping or trying to create.</p>

<p>I don't fault the colleges, they are seeking consumers/customers in a highly competitive market in which the 'customers' are only available when they are high school seniors. Each year a new crop of 'customers' must be 'wooed and wined'. On May 1, they start trolling for the next years crop. It is a difficult and tedious enterprise,</p>

<p>BUT</p>

<p>how well they have done the ground preperation is demonstrated by the false image declared on this thread that "{HONOR} is involved.</p>

<p>That these one time customers who enter the marketplace with no experience and so many possible venues to select are somehow, {Honor Bound} to a standard that few. if any, of the colleges would even remotely try to adhere is patently false.</p>

<p>I don't advocate double depositing because it is risky to the student, and for no other reason. The simple notion that 'DD' impacts the waitlisted student is so far off the mark. </p>

<p>The very fact of the Waitlist process demonstrates the lack of {HONOR} among colleges. Each time that a college raids its waitlist, it is raiding another college's accepted student. That this causes ripples thru the systems is undeniable. One raid leads to another and so forth.</p>

<p>Naturally, the waitlisted student is happy to be finally selected and gladly gives up his deposit.</p>

<p>It is strange to me that this is considered {HONORABLE} when a college causes that student to forego his/her commitment to a college, BUT it is {NOT HONORABLE} when a student through 'DD' foregoes her/his commitment.</p>

<p>Talk about the double standard. But those who will not heard ......</p>

133

<p>FYI, waitlisting is part of the game - whether you like it or not, or agree with it or not. When a student receives a waitlist letter, they are told that it is perfectly alright to keep a place on the waitlist. Keeping a place on a waitlist does not entail anything except sending in a little card saying "YES" I am willing to wait. The waitlistee sends in a deposit to the ONE other school of choice and then waits. Many, many moons ago, extremely rigid educators considered waitlisting to be immoral etc. etc. Since societal rules are based upon a consensus of informed opinion and standard practices, most people today share the idea that a waitlist is just one other way to balance out inequities in the game/system.</p>

<p>BTW, I agree with you completely that is amazing how some people just won't listen and will add my dismay that they either can't or won't read.</p>

<p>Upon what logic do you base your assertion that a waitlist is tantamount to double depositing?</p>

134

<p>Gosh, let's see. </p>

<p>Double Deposit: you place a deposit at two schools A and B, then cancel school A. </p>

<p>Therefore: you lose deposit and end your commitment to school A</p>

<p>and go on to attend school B.</p>

<p>Watlisting: You place a deposit at school A and tell school B you will </p>

<p>attend if they let you. School B tells you (sometimes after May 1 up to late August) that they will let you attend.</p>

<p>Therefore: You cancel your commitment to school A, lose your deposit and go on to attend school B.</p>

<p>Results are the same, timing is different and in the Waitlisting scenerio the school is your co-conspiritor.</p>

<p>In both cases - School A is the loser, a student made a commitment and in both cases - broke that commitment and forfeited a deposit.</p>

<p>Ah, but it is a GAME now and the rules of the game are set by the colleges and the students must be {Honorable} while the colleges can set rules and use the GAME to their advantage.</p>

<p>At least Casinos are open and aboveboard and clearly brag that "the House always wins".</p>

135

<p>In some places and times a personal tax - that means a tax that was levied on a person - signified serfdom while a tax levied on property signified freedom. Same amount of money, same results to the treasury of said state, but wow! what a difference. The "mere" difference in the how the tax was levied meant a world of difference.</p>

<p>Happily, not that much is at stake when it comes to waitlisting! The rules of the house are clear and just about everybody comes out a winner - unless the student and parents involved are so bitter because the waitlist did not come out. A waitlist is a choice and it is also a bet - most of the time not a very good one.</p>

136

<p>ok i get you now, calmom- i didn't entirely understand your arugment i thought you were just blaming this whole ordeal on the indecisiveness of HS students</p>

137

<p>^^ok that probably made no sense. i just got calmom and carolyn confused...nevermind, this thread is too huge</p>

138

<p>My friend had to wait for cornell's financial aid offer so she sent it to rensselaer and is waiting for cornell to reply to her... i think it's ok...</p>

139

<p>I (not my son) sent in a deposit to his second choice just in case something happened to his offer of admission to a service academy. The SA reserves the right to reject the student on Induction Day which is in June due to failing the physical, coming up with an injury or illness that would not allow them to finish the summer physically. If my son breaks his arm between now and Induction Day, he would be sitting at home for a semester instead of attending college in the fall. So there may be some circumstances where double deposits may be in order. If a student quits on Induction Day or during the summer prior to the academic year starting, why have a kid at home. It's not insurance against making a choice (the choice and committment has been made); but a choice to insure a student has some form of education in the fall if they get injured or rejected for some physical ailment that crops up during the early part of summer.</p>

140

<p>Advice on the service academy forum has often been to do this; however in our experience with our flagship state school they still consider it double deposting and will not allow it. Other schools may have different policies.</p>