<p>has anyone even gotten rejected from tulane?</p>
<p>My guess is those that have aren't looking at the Tulane CC site. ;)</p>
<p>Tulane is a selective school. It's considered "more selective" by the USNEWS. It has an acceptance rate of under 40%. So, the majority of all applicants are rejected. And as above stated, most of those rejects aren't the type you'd find on CC.</p>
<p>^^^The US News selectivity designations are pretty meaningless. Schools that have 80%+ acceptance rates are listed as "selective." The 38% acceptance rate at Tulane is misleading because Tulane solicits every other high school student to apply, and most of them go through with it since applying to Tulane requires little more than pressing the "submit" button. Therefore the Tulane applicant pool is huge, and the school only has to admit a small proportion of the total pool to get the class size it wants.</p>
<p>You do see rejects on CC with other schools that have comparable rates. This is because at other schools even if you have the stats to get in, you still need another factor to get you through the door. If you have the stats, you'll get into Tulane.</p>
<p>Tulane's are no more misleading than any other school's - my HS senior has a stack at least a yard high of material from possibly every college in the the country; unlike Tulane (where she has applied) most of these she won't apply to (reverse selectivity?), which means that those colleges basically wasted their marketing dollars money on printing and sending this material to her, v. the online email from Tulane that she got and replied to...that said, she won't make any decision until she gets all her acceptances and visits.</p>
<p>And yes, ALL schools do marketing, much as it seems to have a negative connotation to many on this site...frankly, the whole point of any marketing is to reach your target audience as cost-efficiently as possible - so, to take your implied argument, if Tulane is 'less selective,' perhaps it is getting the types of students it wants at a lower cost per...</p>
<p>Personally, I think it is silly to choose a school on things like rankings or presumed selectivity, but for some it is important.</p>
<p>^african34 could be referring to the personal application though. Other schools usually still want everything (essays, recommendations, fees, etc.). Tulane just wants pretty much nothing..</p>
<p>the amount of marketing that tulane does greatly exceeds the amount that schools that generally consider themselves "elite" have to do, since the name alone does all the marketing needed at virtually no cost. therefore we cannot refer to tulane as "selective" and "elite" solely based on its admissions rate. the overwhelming correlation is that less known schools do more marketing. </p>
<p>but you're right CT2010Dad people should look into Tulane's marketing ploys as a practical matter, but they should rationally do so at the cost of realizing that Tulane is not even a Vandy or Emory level school.</p>
<p>Yes, of course 'names' do make a difference, so since we're talking marketing, let's use the right language: they're called brands. </p>
<p>But let's also be clear: strong brands are neither cheap nor stay strong very long without significant and continued investments - just because you don't see these investments in terms of emails (actually pretty low cost...) doesn't mean schools like Vanderbilt or Emory - or HYPSM - don't have significant marketing investments. </p>
<p>You're clearly down on Tulane ('not even..') and marketing ('ploys') - why not share with us why...</p>