<p>^Harvard did not lose anywhere near 50%. They lost 8 billion, a 22% drop. But you're right that Wash U lost a smaller percentage. And to whoever suggested that HYPSM be changed to WHYPS, that is ridiculous. Wash U is certainly a good school, but not on that level. sorry</p>
<p>"WHYPS" would make a handy acronym for the pressure that comes with attending one of those schools though :D</p>
<p>jk, WashU isn't all that intense, and I don't know about the others. I've only seen it written HYP though... are the S and M referring to Stanford and MIT?</p>
<p>Yeah, I was waitlisted too. I received the letter today, 1,500 out of 23,000?</p>
<p>But I'm looking at it on the bright side. At least being waitlisted means you somewhat stood out in their selection pool. So many other kids would kill to be waitlisted rather than being rejected.</p>
<p>My concern about the size of the WUSTL wait-list is the financial aid angle. While the evidence is anecdotal, it seems that there is a strong correlation between ability to pay and being admitted. Yes, I know they do not claim to be need blind, but it seems to me that a school of this caliber would not want to have a reputation of discriminating against poor and working class students. If you are admitted off the waitlist, WUSTL indicates that fa is likely to be limited. Again, that leans in favor of those who can pay. Not encouraging.</p>
<p>I wish we could drop the whole 'ability to pay and admittance "correlation" ' I've heard now several people say they applied for almost complete FA and were still admitted. I was also admitted though I applied for FA.</p>
<p>Almost all top schools claim to be need-blind with respect to "regular" admissions. When it comes to filling the class from the wait list, there is an ominous silence. Since Wash.U. doesn't even maintain a polite fiction of need-blindness with respect to regular admission, what does one expect from wait list admission?</p>
<p>If a poor or even middle class kid is offered admission from the wait list, they are unlikely to get enough aid to attend. Thus they have to refuse the offer , lowering Wash.U.'s yield and possibly its ranking. It should be obvious that the very venial and competant Wash.U. administration is going to minimize the occurance of this circumstance for "the greater good".</p>
<p>BigG - Time to give it a rest and move on. Spending your time with negative posts on the WashU board will not change anything, nor is it beneficial in moving towards a positive future direction. I am sure there are great things waiting for you in the future. </p>
<p>As for financial aid - Any student new or existing (WL, RD or ED) who's family makes $60,000 or less per year - comes under the policy of being offered all grants or scholarships to cover their cost of attendance. Beyond that, the financial aid office will do everything possible to make attendance at WashU a reality for all admitted students.</p>
<p>Despite the fact that WashU does not claim to be need-blind, I <em>highly</em> doubt that they give financial need as much consideration in admissions as everyone seems to be thinking this year.</p>
<p>@BigG
Also, I do not think that "venial" means what you think it means in your last two posts. Venal, perhaps?</p>
<p>Also BigG - perhaps you mean competent?</p>
<p>Yes to the two previous posts. I cannot barely spell without Word spellchecker.</p>
<h1>47, good points.</h1>
<p>
Great movie :D</p>
<p>
Great movie :D
</p>
<p>yes it is! :)</p>
<p>btw BigG, i wasn't really trying to be critical there, you just confused me for a second (venial's actual meaning <em>almost</em> made sense), and i saw the chance to throw in a movie allusion, so i figured why not...</p>
<p>No problem. I post to sharpen my communication skills and get feedback on whether my world view is skewed.</p>