<p>Simply put, Tufts Syndrome is Yield Protection. It is when a university turns down highly qualified students who seems to be using that university as a safety school. Top colleges, such as Tufts, reject or waitlist these students in order to keep their admissions yield high. They want to admit students who are really going to attend.</p>
<p>It got it’s name because Tufts used to be notorious for this. Ironically, Tufts is not the worst offender of Tufts Syndrome anymore.</p>
<p>It is when schools such as Tufts and WUSTL, with acceptance rates higher than “upper Ivies”, are accused of waitlisting or turning down students they believe will have “better” options (that is, those whose applications they believe will be attractive to schools higher in the rankings), so that their yield remains high, while accepting students with “lesser” qualifications who they guess will have fewer choices come May 1. Visit the Tufts and WUSTL boards and you will get an idea of what this means and how many students who are not given the green light interpret their waitlist statuses.</p>
<p>Many of these are schools that used to be much less selective than is now the case, and that do not require much in the way of supplementation to the Common App. Our public high school’s Naviance does not indicate that this is happening. In fact, what we have seen is that when schools such as these wish to woo students away from alternatives that are higher in the rankings, they often go to great lengths to sweeten the offer with improved FA, admission to special programs, and reminders that they might prove an exceptionally good fit.</p>
<p>I might add that when I used to look at our school’s Naviance, the real surprises came with the Ivies and MIT. Some went for years without accepting any of the top students, while admitting an occasional outlier (at or below their 25%), presumably a recruited athlete or URM. None seemed to automatically accept students with perfect SAT’s and GPA to match, not even those that admitted students somewhat below that level.</p>
<p>It’s true the phrase is thrown around a lot. But, ime, Tufts Syndrome isn’t a random thing- it’s not, oh he’s 2400, with 10 5’s and has maxxed out math and science courses, and does cancer research, let’s turn him down cuz Harvard will take him. It’s influenced by the app itself. Some kids will specifically descibe a program they want, something unique to another school or about its environment. They use the app to “match” themselves to some other school and, in the process, don’t show how they fit us.</p>
<p>I agree with lookingforward. It’s also incredibly difficult to believe that adcoms are more interested in second-guessing other students’ decision processes versus just focusing on what students they want and don’t want.</p>
<p>Ten-twenty years ago, I would say that colleges are not trying to second guess where students may end up, in addition to assessing them for admissions. I don’t know a single adcom that would say this was happening, including a number with axes to grind. In fact, the exact opposite was said. Plus, for the most part, and really nearly always, the kids who got into the most selective schools also had a list of other schools that accepted them that were far less selective. I have a hard time believing that the kid who was turned down at Wash U was overqualified just because he was also accepted to NW, when I can see 6 other kids accepted to both schools and a bunch of ivies as well. Just doesn’t figure to me.</p>
<p>But in the last year or so, I am getting a bit uncomfortable and I wonder. I wonder because applications to these selective college have exploded in terms of number due to the common app and the loosening of the restrictions in the number of application that a lot of high schools are now doing. I know of several schools in this area who have lifted their caps, reluctantly, but because that is the way it is going down these days. The problem is that despite the number of apps increasing, the number of spaces has stayed pretty much the same and it causes a big problem for colleges as their historical yield and other enrollment data is no longer relevant to this new situation. So how to make sure you get enough kids to come, yet not over accept, and when it comes to aid, how to make sure you dispense it all without going over? It’s a problem that adcoms are having all over the place. The waitlist has become one answer to the situation, and I think enrollment management might well be putting some guess work in the process as well. Demonstrated interest really means that the school thinks you are more likely to come because of the time and attention you are giving the school. And kids who apply to 20 schools are not going to be able to as easily give each of those schools the same attention someone can who has 5 schools on the .list.</p>
<p>But I think it’s precisely because the number of apps at these schools that they are dealing with has exploded so much that I can’t imagine that they can focus on trying to second-guess any one student’s decision process all that much. It’s enough just trying to get through 25,000 apps and figure out whether you like the cheerleader with an interest in molecular biology from North Dakota better than the Boys State trumpeter from Georgia; to add in “I’m going to try to also second guess where each of you would really actually go and factor that into my decision making” seems like an untenable amount of work. </p>
<p>I don’t know, maybe I’m naive, but I"m pretty much a take-someone-at-face-value kind of person - if they applied, they cared; if they applied ED, they REALLY cared; and the error of admitting a kid who decides in good faith to go elsewhere (and hence damages my yield) doesn’t seem as devastating to the institution as the error of rejecting a kid because I secretly believe he wants to go to Harvard AND he’ll get in when in fact he really does love my school AND he’d be a great contributor / addition.</p>
<p>“I have a hard time believing that the kid who was turned down at Wash U was overqualified just because he was also accepted to NW, when I can see 6 other kids accepted to both schools and a bunch of ivies as well. Just doesn’t figure to me.”</p>
<p>Oh, see, by the numbers - I wouldn’t think twice if I saw a kid get into NU and not into WashU or vice versa. It wouldn’t make me think anything about the institutions or that one of them was playing games with said kid. It seems as obvious as can be that they can’t admit all the kids that are qualified, and so the kid pulled the lottery number at NU but not WashU (or whatever).</p>
<p>I also think you guys are way underestimating the competitive sets. Not every part of the country is as Ivy obsessed as the Northeast, and it’s misguided to think that every kid out there who is bright is either a) aiming for an Ivy and / or b) would certainly choose the Ivy over the non-Ivy if given a choice. Out here, people just don’t live and die by USNWR rankings the way you guys seem to; there’s more of a “there are a lot of good schools” mentality, and not the “sharp” HYP>rest of the Ivy League>other schools mentality.</p>
<p>But, among top performing kids in the west,(from super hs or preps,) the Ivies are on the list and there are droves of apps. Those kids might prefer Stanford, true. Or whatever rings in their neck of the woods. Fewer apps from kids at lesser hs or in more dire financial circumstances. And a much lower number of apps from rural states- WY, ND, etc. </p>
<p>When people get focused on stats, they miss this: the CA asks for more. Most 17 year olds stumble on the app. They misunderstand that being on top of the heap in hs (remember, it’s high school) is not the same as being a fit for a top college. They define themselves by very high school parameters- I am head of these clubs, my English teacher praises my writing, I participated in a walkathon, we sold pencils to raise money for a cause. We love our kids for these things, but adcoms are putting together a college class. It’s not a lateral move.</p>