Is Wash U St. Louis really a top tier school?

Applying to College
1

<p>It's not always via direct criticism but it often appears (to me) on CC as though WUSTL is not held in the same esteem as Duke, Northwestern, Cornell, U Chicago, Dartmouth which are sometimes listed as it's peers.</p>

<p>Even beyond all the anecdotal reports and speculation concerning their manipulation of application stats, extensive paid visit offerings, and their 'purchasing' of highest qualified applicants with merit scholarships to ensure matriculation, it just seems as though the Wash U name is never brought into the mix in the same high regard as the above listed peers.</p>

<p>Is Wash U legit as an elite top tier school or is it really regarded perhaps in the slightly lower ranks of Notre Dame, UMichigan, UC Berkeley, Georgetown, Washington & Lee? Or is it regarded by academia as even lower?</p>

2

<p>It’s probably lower.</p>

3

<p>*My post may be biased because I live in STL</p>

<p>I think it is just as highly ranked and regarded on a business level or graduate school level [meaning, if you have a degree from WUSTL you look very well qualified to get a good job or get into a great grad school] The reason it doesn’t get as much regard among students is because many students on the coasts don’t know much about WashU. In recent years, WashU has made more attempts [as you stated in your post] to make it seem not like a midwestern school, but rather a nationally regarded school.</p>

<p>It is definitely a great school. My boyfriend chose WashU over Duke, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Rice, a 6 year med program, and a few others, and the reason wasn’t because of money. He was down between duke and washu and chose washu because 1. it’s closer to home and 2. it has the same percentage accepted into med school as Duke [that’s what he told me…so don’t quote me that those percentages are exact]</p>

<p>It is definitely a great school with a lot of professional recognition!</p>

<p>Hope this helped</p>

4

<p>A REAL elite top tier school wouldn’t have to play games with its applicants, waitlisting many of their strongest ones until they get a guarantee that an offer will be accepted.</p>

5

<p>They are only 16 scholarships that could really pull in a top student away from other schools, and they don’t offer “extensive paid visits.” To put it in CC terms, they are more akin to a “lower Ivy,” I believe.</p>

6

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually the posts to which I am refering are from alumni, parents, senior members.</p>

<p>And I am not just refering to the * lack* of regard - that is also seems very prevelant (due to its regional nitche or just general lack of interest?), but the * lower* regard in which, at times, it seems to be held on CC (at least as I have gleaned).</p>

7

<p>

</p>

<p>Are you saying that Wash U only offers non-need-based money to 16 people? Or is it your point that unless they offer a full ride, that offering any money to students (and mostly parents) who do not qualify for need based aid is not successful in improving matriculation?</p>

8

<p>First of all, CC people are not normal people. WUSTL is considered an upsart, a newcomer to the elite circle. Any school that is rising in the rankings has to be suspect. “How dare they challenge our little group of elite (non-Ivy) schools”.</p>

1 Like
9

<p>^They only offer significant scholarship money (>$2,000) to 16 people.</p>

10

<p>It’s true…I feel people associate WUSTL with Vanderbilt, Rice, Emory, and Notre Dame which are all somewhat considered a tier below Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke, Chicago, Penn, and Cornell. Reason is that these universities just have established themselves so well. They have regal names with admit rates below 15%.</p>

11

<p>^Actually Cornel at 18%, U Chicago at ~17%, Northwestern at ~19% are all over 15% admit rates but seem, in my opinion to always be considered tier 1 elite schools.</p>

<p>And I dont believe its just an admit rate variable or Westpoint and Annapolis would be tier 1 elite schools.</p>

12

<p>^I believe Cornell gets the benefit of the doubt because it’s an “Ivy” and its so alluring. UChicago passes because it’s affiliated with the most Nobel Laurette in the country.</p>

<p>I’m not too sure about Northwestern, but its growth is astounding.</p>

13

<p>Where there is smoke, there is often fire. Is another possiblity that Wash U is indeed a venerable institution clearly worthy of being considered a peer to U Chicago, Duke, Dartmouth, Northwestern, Cornell, BUT has been done a disservice by recent administrations in attempting to raise its rankings by unscrupulous means?</p>

14

<p>"BUT has been done a disservice by recent administrations in attempting to raise its rankings by unscrupulous means? "</p>

<p>“Unscrupulous” is a bit strong, but in any event:
On the one hand, you may say they did a disservice, in that the taint of alleged “undiignified” deliberate efforts to game US News to raise rankings, via being among first Spam mailers, buying students with merit aid, etc, has resulted in them having a lingering odor attached.</p>

<p>On the other hand, you may say they did a service, since these measures actually worked and dramatically raised its esteem.</p>

<p>Whatever the actual # or $$ of merit scholarships are now, back at the start it got the reputation for this, rightly or wrongly, and it no doubt attracted applicants.</p>

<p>“WUSTL is considered an upstart, a newcomer to the elite circle.” </p>

<p>I think this is part of the issue as well. It seems a bit like the postman who hits it big in the lottery, uses the winnings to run speakeasies during prohibition, and then buys his way into the elite old-money country club. He may be there, but the other guys won’t sit next to him.</p>

<p>To give some historical perspective, here are the admissions rates for various schools mentioned here at the time I was applying to colleges; longstanding reputations take a while to change:
29%- Dartmouth
36-37%- Cornell, Rice
41%- Georgetown, Penn
52%- Northwestern, Duke
58%- 65% - Chicago,Washington & Lee, Emory,Michigan
68%- 76%- Notre Dame, Berkeley, Vanderbilt
81% admitted- WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY</p>

<p>D1 visited and thought it was very nice there, large dorms. D2 has a friend there who thinks it’s great. It may well be great, now. But its reputation has not yet completely shed recognition of its modest past and change efforts that some found unseemly at the time they were first undertaken.</p>

15

<p>Top students from my high school (Midwest) usually pick Chicago over Wash U.</p>

16

<p>

</p>

<p>This seems a reasonable explanation. But also seems to imply that WUSTL is suffering as a result of possible past transgressions.</p>

<p>I realize that all schools recognize the ranking system, and are forced to play along to some extent, but IMO the accusations are clearly still current and different when it comes to WUSTL. </p>

<p>There are innumerable posts disparaging their data reporting (teacher ratios, sat ranges, application #’s, etc). For example, suggesting they are counting post cards or phone calls from anyone who contacts the admissions office as an application or that they waitlist their strongest applicants (and only offer spots when assured of matriculation) so they can keep their yield high, ETC.</p>

<p>If any of these reports are true, such methods would clearly impact their admission rate numbers and thus their “selectivity” ratings - and would be unscrupulous no? Is it your contention, or any responders, that WUSTL is completely above board in its admissions strategies and data reporting? And that all the smoke being thrown up is just the old guard bemoaning a new comer?</p>

17

<p>Obviously, if a school counts a request for a viewbook as an application, that is egregious abuse of the system. I doubt if any school with aspirations would engage in such evil doings for fear of getting caught. </p>

<p>The so called Tufts Syndrome is used as an excuse by those waitlisted or denied admission at what they thought was a safety school. Think about it. You are aiming for HYPSM, you spend weeks writing, revising your essays. You have parents, teachers etc. critique it. You quadruple check your application for perfection before submitting it. Now you go to your applications to safety schools. You knock off the essay in an hour and submit the application with typos etc. When Tufts or WUSTL reviews the shoddy application, they see that despite high stats, the student put minimal effort into the application. It screams “You are my safety school”. Thus they could get waitlisted or denied despite their high stats.</p>

18

<p>

</p>

<p>These arguments are absolutely ridiculous.</p>

<p>Acceptance rate and yield account for a grand 1.5% of the USNews ranking. It has virtually no effect on a school’s final ranking. If that 1.5% is enough to push them past another school, than that school clearly wasn’t much better (if at all) than them anyway.</p>

19

<p>

</p>

<p>Doesnt it seem more logical/reasonable that the TUFTs syndrome is just a cover story to justify waitlisting “over” qualified applicants in order to keep yield numbers higher. Does it really make sense that HYPSM qualified students do not take adequate time (and surely use variations of accomplished essays they have already produced) to present a viable application to the lower Ivies and elite peers (Tufts, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, JHU)</p>

<p>Instead of denying the practice, perhaps might it not be more reasonable to assert that while WUSTL does use waitlisting strategies, so does Tufts, and so do other ivy league reject schools (if you have evidence that other schools practice the same strategy)?</p>

20

<p>In the academic world, everyone’s a peer. That’s why Harvard grads teach at state schools and state school grads become profs at Princeton and Yale. It’s also why Stanford and Santa Clara University have partnerships in research. They wouldn’t do this if they weren’t peers.
But students in high school see it differently. To them, everything is broken into tiers/prestige. WUSTL is virtually unknown in the West Coast. So is Tufts.
It’s “peers” or the schools you’ve mentioned, Dartmouth, Chicago, Duke, Penn, Cornell, and Northwestern are more well known. Students know these are elite and high places second to HYPSM. In this sense, I would not call WUSTL a peer of the lower half of the Ivy League.
While in academia, it could be a top tier school, in public prestige, it isn’t to my full knowledge.</p>