<p>Some parents make the mistake of believing teachers, coaches, and adcoms are completely objective and would have no vested interest in preferring one student over another for any but the most noble of reasons.</p>
<p>If your character was better you’d be in.
But that’s the point: it’s not all about “you.” Or your character. It starts with too many vying for limited spots and is colored by what the U needs. And doesn’t (like the bulk of its class from one geo.) NOT what you want, not the gazillion people who think you are perfect- and not the people who want you to think if you missed some chance it has to be your fault.</p>
<p>As I think others mentioned above, the colleges go out of their way to make their invitation to apply seem as personal as possible, so it’s not surprising that kids take the rejection personally. Despite my position that adults can make bad and unfair decisions, I do think that in the vast majority of cases rejected college applicants should realize that it doesn’t mean that other applicants are “better” in any real sense, but simply that there were other applicants who better fit the needs of that particular institution. Oboe players aren’t better than violin players, and people from Idaho aren’t better than people from New Jersey.</p>
<p>An earlier version of post #220 was in an email in my Inbox, and had the same comment that lookingforward was quoting: “If your character was better you’d be in.” Either CSIHSIS and have quite different definitions of the word “character,” or this is just not true. lookingforward has covered this issue nicely, from the standpoint of someone who reads applications for one of the top schools.</p>
<p>Ironically, the situation that upsets some of us is when the person with “better character” is passed over in favor of somebody who might have superior qualifications, but not such a great character.</p>
<p>I think that the wording of a rejection letter and accompanying material, if any, can have an impact on how personally a student takes rejection.</p>
<p>Stanford, in the rejection letter, used to inform students that they were strong students with solid support from their recommenders. Gentle let-down as far as it went–though fairly personal. However, they used to accompany this with an FAQ sheet (questions frequently asked by <em>whom</em>, exactly?) that said that Stanford selects students based on potential, rather than accomplishments to date. Speaking on behalf of local students rejected by Stanford, I think this undid whatever good the rejection letter itself had done. It is rather personal, in my opinion. It’s also plenty easy to fill in the implied remark after the statement that selection is based on “potential.” The only question is whether there should be another sentence, following the implied remark, that says, “Nyah! Nyah!” or whether it moves on to something else.</p>
<p>Please ignore the part of the last sentence of my post #224 that follows the comma. The sentence should just end with the word “nicely.” Thanks.</p>
<p>QuantMech,
I’ve been cleaning out files, and came across the worm’s Stanford rejection. (Mind you, son was a junior, applied on last day possible, no one from his HS every accepted there, so a real long-shot). Point being, it was a very nice rejection letter. I.e. how well thought of by teachers & advisers, how other schools will be delighted to offer you a place, wish we had room for you, etc.</p>
<p>my point- is this there rejection letter? rather a soft landing, IMHO</p>
<p>Maybe the local people did something that triggered the Stanford FAQ sheet in addition to the letter itself? It was the FAQ sheet thrown into the same envelope with the letter that I thought was pretty bad–and rather personal, really. Perhaps they dropped it in between the application years of the local students I knew and “worm’s” year. Possibly with the online notification, Stanford has either dropped the FAQ, or a student only sees it if he/she clicks on it. Any of those changes would be an improvement.</p>
<p>Also, perhaps there are multiple categories of rejection letters? That seems like a bit much, but maybe Stanford has them?</p>
<p>It reminds me of the Greek grading system, where possible grades include (in English translation) “Fail,” “Bad Fail,” and “Very Bad Fail.” That in turn reminds me of my father’s old joke that he got “the highest score on the French examination, among all those who failed.”</p>