<p>jmilton, just because you disagree with Wash U’s unique approach to admissions does not mean there is anything wrong with it.</p>
<p>Sure, Wash U sends out lots of mailings and emails to prospective students, some of whom are qualified and some of whom are not. This is not manipulation–it is marketing. They send out these mailings for publicity, so that students unfamiliar with the school can find out more about it.</p>
<p>Sure, there is no supplement and the application is easy to submit, even for disinterested students. So what? Wash U has clearly shown that demonstrated interest can make a significant difference in a student’s application. You cannot blame Wash U for wanting to make its application available to as many people as possible. If you asked anyone working in the admissions office, I’m certain none of them would deny that they want to take in as many applications as possible every year.</p>
<p>It is completely irrational to blame the university for taking this approach to the admissions process. Would you ever walk into an interview, completely unprepared and demonstrating no desire whatsoever to work with a company, and expect to get the job? Of course not. One should expect that a student who has demonstrated interest will stand above a student who has not demonstrated interest if all other factors are equal. Wash U has no qualms about rejecting a student it genuinely does not believe should attend, just like every other school. There’s not a single school out there that does NOT want to increase its yield.</p>
<p>The ball is in the applicant’s court. Just because Wash U has devised an admissions strategy that has favorable results for its statistics does not mean it is manipulating the students or the admissions process.</p>
<p>That’s fine that your child decided not to apply to UChicago because of a stupid pennant he/she got in the mail, but that sounds like a foolish overreaction to me. I don’t see the need to need to come in here and post incendiary, unprovoked criticisms.</p>
<p>Raven, btw, is your name related to Ravenscroft the school in NC?</p>
<p>I have no qualms with what Wash U is doing. But I think we really don’t know. This whole thing about demonstrated interest can’t be the sole or always most important factor (all things being equal), because we’ve seen examples of no interest kids getting in (a lot) and high interest and apparently extremely qualified kids not getting in. So I don’t the interest argument OR the Tufts argument. I think we don’t know, and that is frustrating in itself. But it’s no frustrating than it is at all the other high end schools where you just never know.</p>
<p>The college ranking manipulation I mention is real: it should not be sugar coated with facile euphemisms. </p>
<p>All colleges market. None market as aggressively as Wash U does – not even the University of Chicago with its free pennants and t-shirts. </p>
<p>It is naive to believe that marketing is not manipulative. In fact, manipulation is the primary function of marketing.</p>
<p>If Wash U focuses on accepting students with demonstrated interest, why would it tacitly encourage uninterested students to apply by radically simplifying its application? </p>
<p>Wash U’s aggressive marketing does not negatively reflect on its students. But it does shine an unflattering light on Wash U’s college admission office.</p>
<p>I agree with you (like I did in my post#15 on this thread) There is more to it than demonstrated interest or not - my D showed lots of interest and was waitlisted. But to the OP, she was admitted to Swarthmore today, so there is plenty of hope for your other applications. Good luck to other waitlisted students!</p>
<p>Well, then, I disagree, although I might agree in a couple of weeks :). All of us certainly hear stories of kids getting shut out and applying to too many in the “same range,” but as you see above a kid who got waitlisted here just got in Swarthmore (arguably more competitive), and there are other waitlist kids here holding admits to Ivies. I think it is more random and certainly not predictive based on one waitlist outcome.</p>
<p>Well, welcome to the WashU forum. I’m not sure why you all are here. I’m also not sure why one of your number (<em>cough</em> luisarose) was compelled to revive a nearly 7 year old thread on this same issue just to brag about herself, despite claiming not to be bragging.</p>
<p>To speak of anecdotes, I also have a friend who applied to both MIT and WashU. He got into both. But who really cares about anecdotes anyways?</p>
<p>My very "overqualified’ son got accepted to WashU and we couldn’t be happier. This school is a great fit for him for so many reasons and I know he will be well prepared for med-school or whatever path he ends up choosing. For him, the Ivies were back ups.</p>
<p>The whole process is random and there are SO many smart kids out there. No one can really say someone with a 32 act is somehow less qualified than someone with a 36. We are just talking about a few questions here. </p>
<p>Thanks to the current students like ravescroft, ryan, onecot for your thoughful and intelligent comments on cc. It is students like you that make WashU such a wonderful place.</p>
<p>" Well, welcome to the WashU forum. I’m not sure why you all are here. I’m also not sure why one of your number (<em>cough</em> luisarose) was compelled to revive a nearly 7 year old thread on this same issue just to brag about herself, despite claiming not to be bragging."</p>
<p>I meant to apologize for that. I was googling about the waitlist because, yes, honestly, I was surprised and confused by it. I didn’t realize the threat was so old and thought it was a current discussion that I could contribute to. My bad.</p>
<p>Ohio3mom,
Well said and great post. Unfortunately I don’t think my D is going to attend but it is a great school and the bashing of it and its admissions is quite strange. I think it comes down to not getting its due compared to Ivy’s - very few bash their process when they don’t get in. Oh well.</p>
<p>This is actually my first post! For what it’s worth, I was really surprised that I was accepted to WUSTL not because I feel “under-qualified,” but because very few people from my school are accepted each year. </p>
<p>To be completely honest, I didn’t show a whole ton of interest. I’m not forming any conclusions about whether you need to or not, but I didn’t. I went to a college meeting that they had at my school (where the representative came and introduced WUSTL), but that was basically it. I thought about applying for the scholarships, but figured that any amount of money would cut in to the need-based scholarship pool. </p>
<p>I am really grateful to be given this opportunity, and best of luck to everyone. I am also waiting for some other schools, so just a little longer until all this stress subsides!</p>
<p>Waitlisted not necessarily an indication of what to expect from other schools. S has likelies from Duke and 2 ivies, waitlisted at WUSTL. Top stats, however, did not demonstrate interest there. Hang in there and remain positive!</p>
<p>I’m watched this thread ( and others in the same vein) and I have my own theory. Assuming 28,000 applicants and maybe 20,000 are well qualified ( 3.8 unweighted GPA, 2200+, ECs) how do you winnow it down to accept the 5000 who will get the fat envelopes or the congratulatory e-mails? That’s essentially one out of four when all four are qualified and could be acceptable. It’s akin to organ donation or the allocation of scarce resources with limited availability. Maybe there is some hook in the application that stands out, maybe there is a luck component that the adcom likes your essay or maybe you had the misfortune to be the last one in a pile when you’re the 4th tuba playing editor of the yearbook. There is a randomness to it in situations like this that would explain why student A got accepted but rejected at another school while Student B got WL or rejected while accepted at that other school with nearly identical stats. Throw in demonstrated interest by visiting campus and/or having an interview or even submitting your application early with a quality essay and maybe it pushes your file into the accepted pile. Is the student applying for FA or not? I hate the term ‘holistic’ but it is true that it is a view that encompasses all the factors. We’d like to see a cleancut mathematical model ( like the Ivy’s Academic Index for athletes) but it doesn’t seem to be so clinical or cut and dry.</p>
<p>If my theory is right as it applies not only to WashU but the other equally selective schools, it gives credence to the belief that applying to more schools increases your chances at acceptance at one of them, provided you meet the minimum qualifications. With an acceptance rate in the mid-teens overall and likely lower if you calculate it based on RD only, there is an inherent randomness to it whether we want to admit it or not. When the rest of the results come out in two weeks, we will likely see more posting of students who got accepted here but not here while someone else is just the reverse……</p>
<p>I think you are looking at pretty skewed numbers based on post at CC. 2200+ on the SAT is the 99th percentile with approximately 1.6 million students taking the test every year. That only gives aboout 16,000 students overall with 2200+. I highly doubt that every one of these students applied to Wash U (or any other top university for that matter). I would guess that the number of well qualified applicants as you have defined it (3.8 unweighted GPA, 2200+ SAT, good ECs) is significantly less than your estimate.</p>