<p>Today I received a letter informing me that spaces have become open for ninth and tenth grade at a local day prep school. This is quite interesting in view of the fact that I know of kids from my son's current school who are waitlisted and have not been taken off the waitlist for these grades.</p>
<p>That is very strange. I wouldn't feel appreciated if I'd already applied and were on the waiting list, and they ignored me.</p>
<p>My child did not apply to this school. I think this raises the issue of what does being on the waitlist really indicate in that they are inviting new applications rather than taking waitlisted candidates.</p>
<p>DrNancie- Do you think some of those original waitlists were "courtesy waitlists?" I think that the whole admissions scene was pretty weird this year. We heard of many really fabulous kids- including faculty kids-waitlisted from schools that people on this board would consider "second tier." And, how were your revisits? ;-)</p>
<p>Yes, I am beginning to think that a lot of waitlistees are on as courtesy. I agree with you that the whole admissions scene was weird, this being our third time doing it.</p>
<p>do you mind revealing the local day pre?</p>
<p>This can mean you don't fit the profile of the students that decided not to go.
i.e. It was explained to me at a local prep school that if an oboe player was accepted and decided not to go, they would try to find another oboe player before they took a hockey player.</p>
<p>Yes, it could. But my point is that some waitlisted kids are really on the waitlist as courtesy, and would not be taken off no matter whether space becomes available or not.</p>
<p>A couple of things come to mind when looking at this..</p>
<p>1) Could there be a FA issue and the school is trying to fill with full-pay first?</p>
<p>2) Could you have been referred by another school that perhaps thought your child was a better fit at this particular school?</p>
<p>The thing is that a) there's a group of kids on this waitlist who attend the school that the OP's son attends; and b) it sounds like the other school is putting out a general call to arms, not seeking students with special skills/aptitudes.</p>
<p>I understand that a school is well-advised to keep as many kids with varied interests on its wait list for as long as possible, to keep its options open. But to keep the kids on the list, they use disinformation -- primarily by extending a sense of false hope for wait listed students -- instead of exchanging some valuable information. If many students knew that they had a "courtesy" waitlist (which is an oxymoron if you ask me since it's actually just cruel) or that their admission was dependent on all 6 flutists ahead of them turning down the school, they might choose to commit themselves to another school (even if it's just mentally and emotionally). The schools know that this is one possible reaction so they deceive the kids by withholding information or even going so far as to provide encouragement.</p>
<p>What applicants (and their parents) need to remind themselves of is that this is a business transaction. The admissions counselors are not your children's counselors. They have no fiduciary duty or ethical obligation to guide your child to educational success for that $50 application fee. They are trying to sell a product to as many people as possible and then find the right students from that large group to meet their school's needs.</p>
<p>They'll blow sunshine up your wazoo all day long to get you to apply. And they'll do the same to keep you hanging on to the waitlist, even if your chances are slim to -- AND INCLUDING -- none.</p>
<p>That's not to say that they are bad for doing this. They're no worse than, say, a Realtor that you work with who wants to sell you the more expensive home. This is how they make a living. It's what they do. Applicants and parents just need to understand that they are talking to sales people AND NOT THEIR CHILD'S EDUCATIONAL CONSULTANT when they communicate with the admission counselors at schools their children apply to. Once you are in that frame of mind, there are fewer surprises and fewer "betrayals."</p>
<p>Thank you d'yer. well said. </p>
<p>Now, to address what goaliedad asked, no it is not possible what you are asking. I checked, and there are kids on the waitlist who are full pay. Second, they know nothing about my child. It is a form letter addressed, "Dear Prospective Family". They obtained our name because last summer, I requested admission information when I was beginning to gather
information on local day schools and boarding schools. I never even filled out a form with any information. My child has already committed to a school. They are re-opening certain grades while they already have kids sitting on a waitlist with false hope. I am posting this because I totally agree with what d'yer has said, only he said it way better than I could.</p>
<p>last year, one of my son's friends remained on a waitlist until the first day of school--he and his parents kept hoping he would be taken off. It is the same school that just sent me the letter.</p>
<p>hmm...sounds like this happens pretty often at local day schools that arent really famous around the U.S.......but i wonder if this happen at top private schools like Milton Academy or Andover..</p>
<p>I'm not sure by what you mean by "this" when you say that it "sounds like this happens pretty often." </p>
<p>So let me address both things you might be referring to.</p>
<p>I'm as certain that bulk mailings asking kids to apply in April are not sent out by "top private schools like Milton Academy or Andover" as I'm sure that those schools put -- and keep -- kids on their wait lists that they have no intention whatsoever of admitting.</p>
<p>Depending on the Prep school, being on the waiting list means different things. Some schools are looking for waiting list parents to offer a donation. This may explain the situation.</p>
<p>Yes, that makes sense. But I also think at a particular school there are different kind of waitlists. In some cases, it could mean money. I personally know of a situation in which parents donated a huge amount and offered to have their child repeat a grade, and she was taken off the waitlist.</p>
<p>I don't think it would happen at these BSs. First of all, if they wanted to take people from the town and not the waitlist, they wouldn't be making sure that these people were just as qualified as the ones who had applied - and secondly, they wouldn't be ABLE to accept people from the town because they'd already filled their day student quotient. They'd have to advertise nationwide, and that would take too much time; the quickest and most efficient way of doing this is going to the waitlist.</p>
<p>olivia567 --</p>
<p>You're missing the most important point. And you should take especial note of it. I think we all agree that the top BS's will not advertise for additional students in April. For a number of reasons.</p>
<p>There's pride and prestige, of course. But one reason is that they are so competitive and have such high yields and they don't even need to look to their wait lists (or deep into them).</p>
<p>The point here is that wait lists can have many, many students on them who are simply not going to get in. Even for those who can possibly get in off of the wait list if certain events happen aren't being given information they need. Taken one step further...even those few and extremely rare WL applicants who have some control over their fates aren't being instructed how to do this and what must happen for them to move off the wait list. drnancie's point is that there's a gross asymmetry of information afoot.</p>
<p>Those who have tried to explain away this only confirm it. When a tale is told of some person donating a large sum and getting off the WL, do they go so far as to say that the school was forthright in explaining that quid pro quo? No. It's a coy exchange, at best. Often it comes in the form of a conditional grant by the family, "a gift of $500,000 over 10 years beginning on the anniversary date of Junior's first day of classes at St. Grottlesex" -- and not an express signal from the Admission (or Development) Office. Even in those cases it's the family that's communicating the terms, not the school.</p>
<p>All the students get is a generic and uniform letter saying that they are on THE waitlist. That itself is misleading because I think we all understand that there's more than one list at every one of these top schools. They don't want people inquiring WHICH list. Are you on the so-called "courtesy list" where you'll get in when Hell freezes over? Are you on the oboe list -- waiting for 6 others or just 1 other oboist to fall by the wayside? (I would suggest that an applicant might act differently if they gave him/her better information...and that they know this, so they don't oblige.)</p>
<p>The point is not that a school would dare to advertise for more applicants while it maintained a number of people on a wait list. The point is that competitive schools -- including the top boarding schools -- are less than forthcoming about applicants' chances of being accepted off the wait list. Even if you have ZERO chance of being accepted off the wait list (meaning they're not even keeping you around as a backup for the aforesaid cold day in Hell), when it comes to information: they're not sharing nicely.</p>
<p>These schools are not looking out for you and trying to help you get off "the" wait list. They're trying to avoid having to reach into it. You need information. They're not providing it (not as much as you need). You're adversaries who might one day be partners...but you're not partners yet. Far from it. </p>
<p>Moral: Don't mistake a school that's being encouraging to its wait list applicants as one that's being helpful to them.</p>
<p>Thank you d'yer for saying it so eloquently. This is the whole point of my post.</p>
<p>My approach is sort of like that of those chimps who will eventually type "War and Peace": If you throw down a busload of verbiage, eventually you're bound to write an eloquent sentence.</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure that I worked in my point somewhere in there. Not sure where exactly you had to go to find it expressed eloquently, but -- yeah -- I'm pretty sure it's in there. Somewhere.</p>
<p>I guess it's no surprise that someone who's so prone to OVERcommunicating is so sensitive to UNDERcommunication, huh? :)</p>