<p>I can understand why keellotta might have expected to get into WashU.
I got into WashU, and I’m feeling very unsure about my chances at Vandy. I didn’t even apply for the Cornelius Vanderbilt scholarship because I KNOW I would NEVER have a chance in hell of getting it.
Vandy’s applicant pool is at least as strong as that of WashU’s ,and keellotta was identified as one of the VERY TOP applicants to Vandy (and also Emory). So it’s reasonable to assume that she was a top applicant at WashU as well.
Her getting rejected as opposed to waitlisted is baffling as well.
The fact that applicants CLEARLY stronger than me aren’t getting into WashU scares me, because it makes me even more pessimistic about my chances at the rest of the schools I applied to (all top schools).</p>
<p>massgirl wrote,
</p>
<p>While Vandy and Emory are fabulous schools, it’s inaccurate to say that their applicant pool is “at least as strong” as that at WashU. In student selectivity, which measures grades and SAT scores, WashU is #6 in the country. Emory is #29 and Vandy is #35. There is a CC thread that talks about selectivity here: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/687793-selectivity-ranking-national-us-lacs-combined-usnews-method.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/687793-selectivity-ranking-national-us-lacs-combined-usnews-method.html</a></p>
<p>And if you have this year’s US News edition, WashU remains #6 in student selectivity.</p>
<p>@20more: Thank You! I totally understand your frustration with trying to understand why you were waitlisted but you have great stats and an amazing attitude. By virtue of those alone, I think you’ll end up at an amazing school:)
@SimpleLife: I completely agree with what you said. All this “overqualified” speculation is getting kind of absurd. I was looking at the decisions thread and your son has AMAZING stats (I’m super jealous:)). If WUSTL truly does waitlist all “overqualified” applicants, then he should have been waitlisted for sure. Therefore, there is no reason to believe those waitlisted are superior to and/or more “qualified” than those accepted.</p>
<p>
Thanks, green678. This is a large part of the problem: many dont know how selective WashU actually isthere is no excuse for this!</p>
<p>Anyone making the argument over having been “overqualified” is arrogant, plain and simple, or more likely, in denial. This is WUSTL, not a community college. You can’t really be “overqualified” unless you’ve accomplished something of international renown.</p>
<p>I posted this elsewhere in the WUSTL forum but I think it’s worth posting here as well:</p>
<p>Bottom line: WUSTL is a highly selective school; it received over 28,000 applications, probably from many of the same applicants applying to HYPSM. Looking over the decision thread, it’s clear that many of the kids who got in had amazing stats, identical in fact to some of the kids who were either waitlisted or denied. This is no different from the EA/ED results threads of schools like Columbia, Penn and Yale.</p>
<p>We all know that at this level admissions is a crapshoot. No one should feel that they’re a shoo-in at a top 15 school, regardless of their merits. I completely understand people feeling upset that they weren’t selected but some of the attitudes displayed here are unfortunate. My S was accepted w/ SAT I and II scores in the top 1%, rank at the top of his class and remarkable ECs but he was humbled when he saw his acceptance. He never once took it for granted, nor did we. If he had been WL or rejected, we wouldn’t have been surprised. At this level, there are many qualified, wonderful candidates to choose from. Once the admissions person gets beyond the stats, it might just come down to how you strike them in your CA essays, your interview and what your recommenders had to say. At another school, your very same essays and recommendations might affect the admission counselor(s) differently depending upon their own sensibilities and what the school needs for this particular incoming class. </p>
<p>It’s very subjective, as is your own affinity for colleges on your lists. Why do you favor some over others? My S, despite his stats, did not apply to HYPSM because they did not appeal to him, although other top 15 schools, including some ivies, did and made his application list. He happened to really like WashU on his visit in a way that made him decide to keep it on his list, and he’s now thrilled to have it as an option and will seriously consider it come April. </p>
<p>So, for whatever it’s worth, I suggest that for those of you who were WL or denied, don’t needlessly worry that this is indication of ominous news to come, since it clearly isn’t, or espouse the opposite; and don’t disparage a school because it didn’t select you. Regard this as an opportunity to exercise good sportsmanship.</p>
<p>@green678, it’s interesting how that thread says Wash U is 7th in selectivity and Duke is 15th, because I was accepted to Wash U and deferred from Duke ED.</p>
<p>@massgirl92 the point of this thread is admissions is subjective. Once your stats are above a certain point, it’s whether or not you strike the admissions officer as someone who would be a good fit for the class. This is different at each school. Duke is a completely different school from WashU and maybe the WashU admissions officers thought you fit there better than the Duke admissions officers thought you did at Duke. It’s also possibly that there were 20 applicants applying exactly like you to Duke and that there were only 5 at WashU. There are so many different factors, but when selectivity is so high, the difference between getting in at #15 and #6 is pretty much a crapshoot.</p>
<p>^I called an admissions officer at WashU on Friday, and she said they do not judge whether an applicant would be a good “fit” for the university. She said it’s too arbitrary to judge that; even with the information they have about the applicants, she said there is no way to accurately evaluate whether the applicant would thrive at WashU.</p>
<p>That sort of goes against everything we are saying about “fit.”</p>
<p>massgirl,</p>
<p>It is certainly possible to be admitted to a school with a higher student body selectivity and denied at one with a lower number. One of my relatives, for example, was admitted to Stanford and denied at one of the Claremont Colleges. The selectivity index information gives a picture of the combined grades/SAT scores of a student body, but of course, there are other factors that go into admissions. And student selectivity is not the same as acceptance percentage. The number does not reflect how difficult or easy it is to get into a school; it reflects the numerical stats of the student body. While as a general rule, it is harder to get into a school with a student body that has higher stats, there are other factors that affect school popularity and hence admissions difficulty, and at the level of schools we are talking about, the crapshoot principle does come into play.</p>
<p>@Keellota, did the admissions officer say what they did judge based on then? I highly doubt it’s a completely random pick out of probably 10,000+ qualified applicants.</p>
<p>Like I said in an earlier post, my son was waitlisted in WUSTL. He got a likely letter from a higher IVY school ahead of an impending decision the same day!!. I, for one fully understand, that it is part of the college admission process. Have no complaints. As as much the reviews make of it, there is no huge difference among the top 25 colleges when it comes to education. They are all top notch.</p>
<p>By fit, Keellota, what one means is an assembled class for a year for the university. ( diverse student population for doing science/playing sports/creating arts etc). Not whether a student will fit into that college.
But I can also understand a young student’s frustration when he/she says similar students getting accepted (at least in his eyes) or wait listed and when he/she gets an outright rejection.
RenaissaceMom, I buy the argument of keeping students on the wait list for different campus needs ( drama students, newspaper editors ect). But that argument quickly is diluted as the wait list is also used as a means to convey the message to students who are also quialified in a tempered way - “You are not rejected, but wait listed”. Because , in this case lot more students are normally wait listed and making a student like keellota wonder why he is rejected and not wait listed.</p>
<p>@GoldOwl, re: son’s stats, thanks! I don’t know why you teased that you were jealous, though. Your stats and his stats are extremely similar. Congratulations on all your success! You’re a force to be reckoned with! 
I think we’re on a lot of the same forums. I’ll be interested to see where you end up!</p>
<p>@SimpleLife: Thank You! Best of luck to your son . And yeah, I have also noticed that we are on the same threads a lot. Maybe your son and I will even end up at the same school:)</p>
<p>Would applicants feel better if WashU grouped applicants by SAT/ACT scores, GPAs and number or extracurriculars, put them in separate hats and pulled XXX number from each hat for admissions then waitlist and rejected the rest, would they feel better about being waitlisted or rejected?</p>
<p>This should probably be a separate topic.</p>
<p>forget about FA, demonstrated interest, any of that…
well, i’ll qualify that: don’t completely forget about it, but definitely DON’T read too much into it.
at any of these great, competitive schools, it IS, to various extents, a crapshoot.
when i visited vanderbilt, the admissions guy doing the info sesh said that 70% percent of their applicants are easily qualified to go there, and they end up accepting around the same rate as WUSTL. i’d imagine roughly the same is true with WUSTL.
keep in mind that a record 29,000+ people applied this year, for a 1500 person freshman class at a school with a 30%-ish yield rate.
Therefore, at that rate, they accept around 5,000 people of the 29,000, for an accept rate of 17-18%, ballpark estimate.
therefore, they have to cut out 5/7 or MORE of the qualified applicants to come up with the ppl they accept.
(70%)<em>(29000)=20300 qualified applicants, (5/7)</em>(20300)=14500 qualified applicants being denied!
That’s right… half of all the applicants were qualified, and then proceeded to get either waitlisted or straight-up denied! I’m sorry, but no WAY could FA and interest level account for over 14,000 denials…
how else COULD it be narrowed down other than for it to basically be a crapshoot? basically, you just have to have the perfect combination of being qualified, having your EC’s (either quantity OR quality) jump out at SOMEone along the line, and have your essay fall into the exact right person’s hands.
In other words? Lotsa luck involved.
I got in applying for FA (at least, I’m pretty sure I did) and DEMONSTRATED little to no interest (although i definitely was and am interested), but I’m certainly no stronger than many of the people who got waitlisted. I had essentially no hooks or anything working to help my cause, either.
so yeah, that’s my theory… anyway, I’m no expert or college admissions officer, that’s just my idea of why it HAS to be a crapshoot… haha</p>
<p>all i know is that a girl at my school with 4.0 val and 35 ACT was waitlisted while a guy with a 4.0 val 30 was accepted (they are tied for val along with 15 others). They both visited campus and did all of that good stuff. I do not know their essays but I know their EC’s are pretty equivalent, the girl may even have the edge. I cannot explain how this happened.</p>
<p>P.S. The girl applied for fin aid and the boy did not</p>
<p>I’ve read this thread, my two cents.</p>
<p>The argument is basically, I was accepted at Ivy Schools A, B and C, so I should have been accepted at Wash U.</p>
<p>I think this premise is false. A number of people in various threads have cited the applicability of the so-called “Tufts” factor, i.e., Wash U doesn’t want to be thought of as an Ivy safety school, so it rejects people who don’t show sufficient interest. </p>
<p>I suspect that this attitude is largely east-coast based (where, frankly getting into an Ivy often approaches religious fervor). To be honest, though if one planned on locating in the east after graduation, you might be marginally better off at any Ivy league school because of perception, not because of educational value. If, on the other hand, you expect to live in any other region of the country, go to grad school, etc., I’m not certain that this Ivy bias would apply against Wash U, or many of the other extremely fine schools in different regions of the country.</p>
<p>The truth is probably – In 2011, Wash U IS NOT an Ivy safety school, and it’s as competitive to get into as most of the Ivys. While many would prefer any Ivy over Wash U, others regularly reject Ivys to go there. The premise “I got into Ivy A, B and C, so I should have been accepted by Wash U,” is as silly as saying "I got into Wash U, Ivy B and Ivy C, so there’s something wrong with my not getting into Ivy A.</p>
<p>Just my 2 cents.</p>
<p>I think that Wash U has several criteria that are not used at the Ivy league schools that leads to this notion of Tufts syndrome. </p>
<p>First, Wash U is very clear that interest matters to them while the Ivy’s don’t pay attention to who visits them. Second, unlike the Ivy schools, Wash U is not need blind in admissions. </p>
<p>Thus, it would make sense that the academically talented who do not express any interest (visit, interview etc.) and will need significant financial aid are to some degree at a disadvantage. Why else do they have these criteria?</p>
<p>This doesn not mean that cases can’t be cited where someone with great scores who needs significant aid gets admitted - of course there will be those cases - but it does tell you that there is a pool of money out there and that at some point they have allocated all the money available and, after that, an academically superior student must give way to someone who is better able to afford the school.</p>
<p>i was one of the kids who threw in a last minute app because it was an easy, easy app that required no additional essays, and looked like an interesting school. totally last minute thought. like a $50 lottery ticket.</p>
<p>because i applied SO last minute, i had no chance for an interview (fair enough). also, i had shown NO DEMONSTRATED INTEREST whatsoever.</p>
<p>i have great scores (2290), decent grades but not great (3.5 UW, 4.0 W, 11 APs, hardest curriculum), only top 20% of my class (17% to be exact), very strong ECs, leadership, athletics and 2 interesting essays. i applied for fin aid.</p>
<p>a very close friend who has been demonstrating interest in WU for 2 YEARS, has visited, interviewed, stayed on campus, named WU as his top choice for National Merit, is in the top 2 % of our class, only 1 B in HS everything else A, huge community service, leadership, scores around 2200, kid works his tail off. no fin aid needed.</p>
<p>i got waitlisted.</p>
<p>he got waitlisted.</p>
<p>um, if I got waitlisted he should have gotten in, sorry but that’s the truth!</p>
<p>and if he was waitlisted, then I should have been flat out rejected.</p>
<p>my friend is so, so disappointed. he really loves the place. WU makes no sense to me, but now I think they keep their app so easy, just generic essays, so they can loop in last minute applicants like me who are like, OK, what the heck. because it bloats their app pool, lowers the percentage on the acceptance rate, and helps boost their rankings.</p>
<p>kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but i still feel awful for my friend. he deserved better. we did not deserve the same decision on this one.</p>