<p>1)“Too bad, life isn’t fair, you have to accept that it was a mistake and move on”
2)“Too bad, life isn’t fair, but your computer system sent out an acceptance letter to all the applicants, so now you have to accept them and move on”
Read those 2 comments in an article :P. Ironically, they seem pretty similar</p>
<p>If that happened to me and Vassar was my first choice I would be heart broken. Although I hate stalking the mail man if it can prevent or at least decrease the chances of something like this happening again Im all for snail mail</p>
<p>and, I’ll say it again… NOT ALL OF THE STUDENTS WERE REJECTED. Some were merely Deferred, which does NOT mean that they weren’t qualified, merely that Vassar wasn’t ready (for any number of a million reasons, including saving spaces for various “tipped” categories) to accept them in the ED round. They may–or may not–be accepted in RD.</p>
<p>I am not a fan of the deferred or wait listed decision. Universities use this to fill up seats, while the students are held in limbo. If their scores are close ( and I would bet most are) they should be admitted. If only 30 agree then, bite the bullet and make Vassar the leader in this.</p>
<p>If I am one of those unfortunate students, I simply won’t go to Vassar. Vassar is unqualified one here.</p>
<p>I think Vassar needs to fix its system – and other colleges need to pay attention and learn from this before they do the same thing. I also believe Vassar needs to make amends with those who had a roundabout way of learning their actual early decision results. But actually admitting people who suffered a shock to learn of their ultimate outcome does more than make amends.</p>
<p>Imagine the results were reversed and actually admitted students received rejection letters by e-mail. Would anyone suggest that those people should remain rejected instead of having the actual, deliberated decision go into effect? Whatever the heartache and hardship might be in the case of people who were incorrectly under the impression that they had good news for an hour…that beats being incorrectly under the impression of having bad news for an hour. After that hour is over, the actual outcomes were conveyed. The disappointment of actually being rejected (or deferred in some cases) is much the same as it was for those who were rejected outright, without first getting bogus acceptances. With it comes, possibly, some embarrassment at telling others of one’s acceptance and then having to retract that. Maybe some pulled applications immediately…but Vassar will intercede to unwind that. What else happened…besides being happy for that hour while the other rejected applicants were disappointed for that hour?</p>
<p>The type of amends that Vassar should make should be along the lines of the type of amends that they should make in the reverse situation – addressing that one hour and the stunning news that the actual outcome was different than what was originally conveyed to them. Revising the outcomes simply makes no sense and is totally disproportionate to what happened. Waiving the fee makes sense because Vassar did not fulfill its obligation satisfactorily. Maybe even throw in a Barnes & Noble or Amazon gift certificate towards a textbook for freshman year. And I think each person is owed a full explanation as to how this happened as well as the steps taken to ensure that this won’t happen again to others. An offer of admission – for learning the accurate results one hour after getting inaccurate information – simply should not even be on the table.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Vassar has explained what happened.
How it happened is simple… human error.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.miscellanynews.com/2.1576/admissions-commits-a-serious-mistake-for-2016-1.2693362[/url]”>http://www.miscellanynews.com/2.1576/admissions-commits-a-serious-mistake-for-2016-1.2693362</a></p>
<p>No, Vassar is not the unqualified one here, yzhong94. One mistake does not mean the great school many of us attend or have attended is unqualified. It’s more than qualified.</p>
<p>Brilliant response published in McSweeney’s:</p>
<p>[McSweeney’s</a> Internet Tendency: An Apology From Vassar.](<a href=“http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/an-apology-from-vassar]McSweeney’s”>http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/an-apology-from-vassar)</p>
<p>I hope nobody takes that ^ seriousy</p>
<p>lol thats the funniest thing ever! Whoever actually took this srsly probly has no sense of humor :D</p>
<p>There was an even funnier article in the school’s newspaper. Some might not find it funny, as the students who wrote it did take some entertaining liberties.</p>
<p>Regarding post #43: cadence, I think the reason no one is responding to you is that we are not sure what your point is. Yes, some of the students were deferred. And? Are you saying that those students should have preference in the RD round? Please clarify. Thanks. </p>
<p>Regarding the “1 hour” that this mistake affected: many, many students learned of the supposedly good news and did not recheck their emails until the next day. Just a point that for some people, there were hours of celebrating, calling extended family, etc. </p>
<p>I’m not sure what I think the solution is. But I would like to see some safeguards put into place so that there is less risk of this in general.</p>
<p>I love the McSweeney’s letter. It’s an unapologetically brutal and unapologetically elitist apology.</p>
<p>Well, long time, no see, D’yer Maker. If you liked that you would love the tongue-in-cheek article published in the Vassar Miscellany News.</p>
<p>Vassar Miscellany News (2/01/2012):</p>
<p>[Vassar’s</a> serious mistake: Everybody’s been there](<a href=“http://www.miscellanynews.com/2.1577/humor-satire-vassar-s-serious-mistake-everybody-s-been-there-1.2693411#.T1EzYhyROv0]Vassar’s”>http://www.miscellanynews.com/2.1577/humor-satire-vassar-s-serious-mistake-everybody-s-been-there-1.2693411#.T1EzYhyROv0)</p>
<p>Hi, Testobsessed–I merely wanted to clarify that not everyone was rejected. Folks were making statements along the lines of “they’re obviously not qualified–why would Vassar want to accept unqualified people?” I just wanted to point out that a percentage of these kids are totally qualified, and some will likely be accepted in RD. It’s an interesting question as to whether they should be on the proverbial “top of the pile” for RD, but that’s not a point I’m arguing.</p>
<p>That Miscellany News piece was equally fun/brutal. Thanks. Hopefully this has blown over. The next time someone posts a test acceptance letter behind-the-firewall, they may want to include a watermark saying “Not Legal Tender” or use a fictitious college letterhead…or, better still, a rival’s and let them deal with the people flipping out.</p>
<p>Has anyone been substantively or materially harmed by this? For instance, did someone withdraw their applications and, if so, did they fail to get them reinstated?</p>
<p>Vassar said that if anyone had rescinded other applications elsewhere after receiving the erroneous email, they would contact those admissions offices directly for the student. Of course its a bit of a back-handed compliment. How would that call go–“Hi- we actually declined to admit this candidate- so please consider them in your applicant pool…” errrr…</p>
<p>Yeah…but is anyone claiming that they actually pulled the plug on their other applications so quickly? Vassar would only have to say that the applicant wasn’t accepted at the ED round. They wouldn’t have to disclose whether the applicant was deferred or rejected. </p>
<p>You’re right, though, because it’s the sort of interaction with an admission office that frantic applicants would rather avoid. Sometimes you want to get their attention. Sometimes you don’t. Of course, as the Vassar Miscellany author might point out, getting rejected by Vassar is still better than getting accepted at pretty much anywhere else. There’s no shame in a Vassar rejection (or deferral) – unless you’re comparing notes with someone who was accepted by Vassar.</p>