<p>I see so many kids on here who are hoping to come off of waitlists. I think the whole waitlist thing is bordering on dishonest. I can see if, let's say, last year they took 20 kids off the waitlist, so maybe the waitlist should be around 50. But these (relatively small) schools are waitlisting thousands of kids. It's absurd! My son got waitlisted at one school. Fortunatley, he promptly threw away the letter and hasn't mentioned it since. I just feel bad that kids are sort of strung along. As far as a "courtesy denial" - well, that is just rude.</p>
<p>If the schools told kids stats on the waitlist (from last year ... how many were on the wait list, how many were offered a spot, and how many accepted a spot) would you still say that?</p>
<p>I would guess the yield for a school (other than HYPSM) off the waitlist is pretty terrible and that they offer those slots to lots of kids on average before filling slots.</p>
<p>If they said that in the waitlist latter, that would be much better.
Wait listing serves a purpose for the colleges...in A is for Admissions book, (I think), the author described waitlisting legacies...it would stop the families from complaining as much as they might have with an outright rejection.</p>
<p>Are you advocating that the colleges accept more students and then recind offers.....or perhaps not guarantee housing? The yield changes from year to year. How would colleges fill the openings? Perhaps they would adjust tuition for the lack of yield?? I guess it seems to me that waitlist is a necessity for the economic model and that uninformed students will as you point out be disappointed. It maximizes the number of students paying tuition $$.</p>
<p>No just be honest with the letters, a waitlist means hope, and if there is really zero chance of getting off it, then be honest abou that...</p>
<p>As regards to yield, many colleges accept more students than the number of slots already, often double, so the colleges take care of themselves pretty well so they won't have all of the openings that can't fill. Colleges always accept more students than slots. History shows them the percentage that will likely accept, so they account for that in the acceptances.</p>
<p>It's much more tha just legacies. They waitlist candidates from certain schools so as not to upset relationships with the school, kids with letters of rec from influential people and many other sensitive cases. It's just politics and kids need to look at the stats of waitlist admits for each school to understand what their chances really are.</p>
<p>Xagat, you are right....</p>
<p>I think waitlists are becoming a questionable policy. It used to have the purpose of realistically providing some leeway to the colleges for those kids who are not going to accept the offer without risking accepting too many kids for the school to accomodate. Yes, a few kids might have been thrown in there as a courtesy, but the primary purpose was to make sure that the seats were filled at a college and that the reserves were right there if any vacancies arose. </p>
<p>Though the waitlist still provides this buffer to colleges, I believe that some schools are using the waitlist as a strategy for yield purposed. Though yield is removed from the ratings at USN&WR, yield is a very important to adcoms. When you have a record year of applications and you don't fill your class or your yield numbers are not good, there are going to be questions about how well admissions is doing its job. By using the waitlist extensively, a school, particularly one that has received a lot of apps, can make itself more selective and work on that yield. Some of the waitlists are becoming a back end binding commitment where if a student swears he'll come, and is backed by a school official, the likelihood of getting off that list increases. CMU does a "priority waitlist" that stops just short of being a binding decision . By having large waitlist, the adcoms can more closely hone into their admissions numbers. This extends the college app season and raises the stress level for all concerned.</p>
<p>"For the past three years, Boston College has received approximately 20,000 applications for 2,200 openings in our freshman class. We've offered admission to more than 6,000 students each year, many of whom have also been accepted by Georgetown, Notre Dame, Ivy League schools, and other formidable competitors"</p>
<p>they have it covered</p>
<p>intersting take on the waitlist policy</p>
<p>Large waitlists are necessary, so that if there is a particular kind of candidate you are looking for, you might actually find him/her. The school doesn't know in advance whether it is going to be the football quarterback or the necessary English horn player who is going to turn them down. So they need an alternate (or two or three or four) for each, knowing full well that just because they offered a student a spot on the waiting list that they would come if called. It is also one of the reasons that, in many cases, it is likely that what you do when placed on the list (other than returning the card) may be irrelevant to whether you get in or not. (But you don't know that, so you have to pull out the stops anyway.)</p>
<p>But if a college is accepting almost doulbe the students, would they even get to the waitlist?</p>
<p>If you read above Boston College accepts almost 3 times the number of slots, so if 2/3 did not come, you would still have a full class.</p>
<p>CityGirlsMom:
"No just be honest with the letters, a waitlist means hope, and if there is really zero chance of getting off it, then be honest about that..."</p>
<p>I'm afraid I disagree with you here, on the 'honesty' issue. There's nothing stopping a waitlisted applicant from looking up a school's statistics from past years, to see what % of waitlisted applicants actually got accepted. A school can tell you:</p>
<ol>
<li>You are waitlisted</li>
<li>You are waitlisted (and FYI, last year we eventually accepted 20 of our 7500 waitlistees)</li>
<li>Sayonara</li>
</ol>
<p>Why is option(1) less 'honest' than (2)?</p>
<p>Students and their parents want finality....a fat envelope....the process to have a happy ending. My suggestion to those who believe waitlisting to be dishonest is thus: </p>
<p>You can EASILY apply only to schools whom you believe will accept you....schools who don't create large wait pools....avoid the problem. Waitlists are in part driven by demand......little demand=less likely to encounter a wait list.</p>
<p>I think it's a valid question; some of these waitlisted students are probably just "soft denies." </p>
<p>I don't think there is essentially "zero chance" because yield is always uncertain. Colleges do their best to predict yield, but sometimes unexpected things happen and the class falls short.</p>
<p>As others have suggested, I think it would be helpful is all colleges instituted a practice of informing all waitlistees how many (or what percentage of) students have taken off the waitlist in each of the previous 3-5 recruiting years. That would help students be more realistic. </p>
<p>At Michigan, you don't automatically "get put on" a waitlist. You get a waitlist offer, and you can choose to accept a place on it or not. Is that generally the practice nationwide?</p>
<p>"The letter that you received about your standing should provide a history that describes the number of students on the waitlist in the past, and the percentage of those who were offered admission. This will give you a sense of the statistics you're up against. " Princeton Review</p>
<p>"No two colleges look at waitlists in the same way. Some schools use it as an effective enrollment tool,*others hope never to go to their waitlist. Others inappropriately use the list as a supposedly gentler way of saying "no," without any intention of ever admitting a student. The number of students taken from a waitlist can be a mere handful or in the hundreds. Sometimes colleges have "special interest" waitlists for athletes or legacy cases; others group everyone together. Some institutions rank waitlists, others do not. Recognize that there are numerous variables to how a college uses a waitlist. Waitlist opportunities can fluctuate from year to year - no two years are exactly alike at a given institution. Carefully review the letter for clues about past waitlist activity. A telephone call to admission offices can also provide students with valuable information." Exeter</p>
<p>I've wondered about this too.
Last year, our son applied to six schools that resulted in 3 acceptances and 3 rejections. Pretty straightforward. And the 3 rejections were absolute reaches.</p>
<p>My friends with kids applying this year are finding MANY waitlist responses.
One applicant with average stats applied to many schools, some quite reaches. Result: 3 acceptances and ALL the rest waitlists.
NO rejections. It does appear that schools are using waitlists as gentle rejections.</p>
<p>I think in some cases, a waitlist is just that - we almost (but not quite) picked you for the team, and if you sit on the waitlist bench you might have a shot. My son was waitlisted at a couple of very selective LAC's. Since, to my knowledge, no one from his HS has ever applied to either, I don't believe that any coded messages were being sent, for my son, anyway.</p>
<p>The Bowdoin WL letter specifically mentions that the waitlist is not ranked, and that all accepting a place on it will be re-evaluated come May. They enclose a reply card asking if you want to be on the list, and where you will be attending school next fall. The Carleton letter (a very nice one, BTW) requests that you write them a letter asking to be placed on the waiting list.</p>
<p>Perhaps what you folks are discussing is really the Early Decision problem and how that has impacted wait lists. When Early Decisions were changed 2 years ago....wait lists got longer=no surprise. With nearly half of the class at many schools coming in ED.....soft denies then get rolled to RD. When the entire pool of RD is evaluated......waitlist becomes the solution. Perhaps you are talking that only RD should rule and that there be a limit on the number of schools students apply to. Many students apply to 20 schools now.</p>
<p>So, for next year, make sure that you have a plan B for waitlists. In our case, my son's grades were the rough spot in his application, so he knew that he could not slack off - as third quarter grades were something he could submit. He was, thank heavens and CC, accepted at his first choice school, but waitlists are a fact of life you will probably have to deal with - or choice not to.</p>