I was rejected by Oberlin which is actually my safety school <em>cry</em>. However, someone told me that they rejected me cuz I over-qualified. He reasons that they won’t take me in cuz I have very high chance to get into better colleges and eventually reject Oberlin. Does he have a point or is he just trying to make me feel good?
<p>i've heard that about a lot of schools actually, but i have no proof of it</p>
<p>There are a lot of rumors circulating right now that many schools (WashU in particular) do this frequently. It's known as Tufts Syndrome...</p>
<p>Perhaps you revealed,through your application or school contact, that you were not serious about the school, or that it was your back-up. This is a small school that is highly selective and they will have wanted to see particular interest from you and to evaluate your fit for them. A school of that calibre should not really be refered to as a back-up school. It could be that you did not evaluate your match/safety appropriately.</p>
<p>Thanks everyone for your comments... :D
Actually, I was really interested in Oberlin (I won't apply if I don't like the school) but I didn't wanna lie in the application about wad other colleges I'm applying to... haha :D Guess you have to pay for truthfulness :)</p>
<p>WashU defintley did that this year. Everyone at my school who was a great canidate with a 1500 or over was waitlisted, the other great canidates with 1300's, 1400's got in...very strange (this is like 20-30 people in total).</p>
<p>granted, not ALL 1500+SAT, 4.+ GPA kids were waitlisted. if they showed genuine interest, they were accepted (i know a few of these kids). i myself was waitlisted, but to assume that i was "overqualified" (b/c say, i got likelies/early write from five high-caliber colleges including dartmouth and williams before i was ever waitlisted at washU) would be kind of arrogant as washU is a great and prestigious school. i don't recommend going around bragging about being rejected or waitlisted at very good but what you thought were "safety" schools because you are "overqualified." it's offensive to those who were accepted as you're assuming that you're better than ALL of them. that's kind of presumptive, don't you think?</p>
<p>Come on, man... I just posted here to ask as a question... No harm intended... And I wasn't bragging... Just that the person who talked to me used the word "overqualified" so I reused it and asked whether it really exists... So just to please taurustorus, I shall use another term... Let's call it "ungenuinely qualified"... Is it ok taurustorus? :D</p>
<p>I sincerely apologize to whoever got insulted when I used the term "over-qualified". I am definitely NOT the exceptional type (with like 1600SAT or things like that) to be considered as "over-qualified". I simply posted a question to ask whether such a term exists. So again, if anyone felt insulted by any mean, I am sorry.</p>
<p>It was a fair question to ask about the "overqualified" not getting acceptend. There have been rumors to that effect for years...if people don't ask the questions, then we can't see patterns and trends. I didn't get that you were bragging, tesdasi. </p>
<p>Another reason to not accept kids who are qualified, but will most likely go to another school, in the admission departments eyes, is that it creates the appearance of looking more selective. Even though the yield will probably be the same whether they took the "over qualified" or not, if the school can say they only accepted 35% they look more exclusive. Just an idea.</p>
<p>sorry testdasi, that seriously wasn't a direct attack at you (it wasn't even an attack; sincerest apologies if it sounded like one). mine was a general suggestion for everyone, since the poster directly before me said "WashU definitely did that." did what? waitlist and reject "overqualified" people? i don't think so. waitlist and reject those who didn't show genuine interest in the school and who were very likely to choose other schools (say, the Ivies, which still does not mean they're overqualified esp. when compared to ALL accepted applicants)? most likely.</p>
<p>and remember testdasi, i was myself waitlisted at WashU, so you definitely did not offend me =) (not to mention you were talking about a completely different school...).</p>
<p>Yeah...I'm kind of expecting to be rejected by my uber-safety because they know that theyre my safety...But, if you show enough interest in a school (IE visit the school, talk to admissions officers, go to meetings, etc) than they are unlikely to reject you for being over-qualified...</p>
<p>Testdasi, you may be correct. There was a post on one of these threads about three months ago using Princeton's stats. The assumption of the authors of the study was that there would be a mathematical relationship between SATs and chances of being accepted. What they found was an unexpected dip in the curve. If the applicant scored in the 99th percentile the chance of being admitted was about one in two. I he or she scored in the 93rd the chances were, if I remember correctly, about one in three, but the student in about the 97th percentile actually had a lower chance than the one in the 93rd.
So if you have the incredible GPA and SAT and your sport is walking on water and your EC was feeding the five thousand, then you are two good to pass up. But if you are almost that good the colleges may assume you are going somewhere else unless you show a lot of interest. In other words you may be right. They may have realized they were your safety. Accepting you might lower their yield.</p>
<p>I asked someone at Lehigh if they do that, since they are a great school but a lot of cross admits to Ivy's and MIT go to those schools instead. I think thats where the "Why Lehigh" or "Why Columbia" or "Why Tufts" or whatever essay come into play. Its worth visiting a campus and showing a lot of interest because of these things.</p>
<p>If that is what they were doing the would have waitlisted you, which leaves the door open for you to tell them they're your choice without impacting their yield.</p>
<p>this happens at brandeis a lot...if you're really serious about going to that school, have a counselor call or write a letter or something, it's worked for people i know</p>
<p>Well, there is only so many people they can waitlist, so they probably would save waitlist spots for people who aren't definetely going somewhere else</p>
<p>Not true, colleges can and do waitlist far greater numbers than most know. Look at schools like WUSL.</p>
<p>My husband and I were just discussing this. My son is an excellent student, great test scores (top 1-2%), but we can not afford to send him to a top LAC - our EFC is very high and about double what we feel we can spend. In addition, he wants to stay in New England, so most of the schools that do offer merit money are schools where he could potentially be viewed as "overqualified". Because he is a bit of an introvert, we believe a large state school would not be a good environment for him. From what I have been reading here, it sounds like we need to be very proactive to make sure the schools are aware that these are not "safety" schools but rather schools that he is genuinely interested in. Any other suggestions from parents/students who have been through this would be greatly appreciated.</p>
<p>When people say they were rejected (or waitlisted) from their safety school I think the problem isn't so much with the school, it's with their choice of a safety school. If you are rejected, there is no way that school is or ever was a true safety for. I think safety is one where you are getting in there for sure, or at least 95% sure.</p>
<p>Testdasi, sorry about Oberlin, good luck with your others.</p>