<p>The overall trend of these types of topics makes me realize high school students have a deep gap in statistical understanding and background, and no I’m not talking about AP Statistics. But a core understanding of what happens when a relatively small percentage is chosen from an overall larger population, and what this exactly entails. All I’m going to say about that…when you look back at these types of threads at the end of your college career, you have a completely different true understanding of what occurs compared to when you’re in it. </p>
<p>Look back at these threads in four years and realize how stupid they are.</p>
Ummm. Have you seen his rec letters? No. His essay might have also affected it. You might have thought it was a good essay, but the adcom might not have.</p>
<p>
Do you know how ranking works? Ranking cares VERY LITTLE ABOUT ACCEPTANCE RATE. Furthermore, WUSTL can still get 20,000+ applicants easily without ranking. So there goes your theory. Just because you are mad, doesn’t mean you should make up things and mislead prospective students.</p>
<p>OH ALSO: Why do you think he should have got in? Have you seen the complete pool of applicants. WUSTL ADMISSIONS IS JUST AS HARD AS IVY NOW. A LOT OF APPLICANTS, LITTLE ROOM. Please do not blame this on WUSTL. Dartmouth recieved 22,140 applicants. LESS THAN WUSTL. But why do no one accuse them of Tuft’s Syndrome? OH WAIT THEY ARE AN IVY SCHOOL SO NATURALLY, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO WAITLIST QUALIFIED SCHOOL. DUKE LAST YEAR WAITLISTED 3000 BUT NO ONE CALLED TUFTS SYNDROME. OH WAIT THEY ARE RANKED IN THE TOP 10, THERE WE GO.</p>
<p>Stanford has more prestige, plain and simple. Seriously, ask 10 people on the street if they have heard of Washington University in St. Louis. I would be surprised if more than 4 have. However, everyone has heard of Stanford University, its a great school! So people accept that there aren’t enough spots for every well qualified student applying to Stanford (or insert your favorite Ivy League, etc.), so a sizable portion of qualified applicants will be rejected or waitlisted. Maybe they didn’t get in because they already had a kid who plays oboe who wrote a stellar essay, who knows? Basically, when people apply to Ivy league institutions they understand that its largely a crapshoot. </p>
<p>The problem is that people don’t seem to understand the same thing applies to WashU. There may not be a discernible reason as to why applicant A got in, applicant B got waitlisted and applicant C got rejected when all that is being looked at is the quantitative aspect of the application. So people pick out random trends and scrutinize scores and GPA’s without regard for the subjective part of the application, forgetting that admission’s officers are trying to build a class that has a balance of personalities, interests, and passions in the exact same way that other prestigious universities do. </p>
<p>WashU does the exact same thing as Stanford does, but Stanford isn’t scrutinized for it because it’s Stanford for God’s sake, you can’t expect to get into Stanford! Well you can’t expect to get into WashU either, its just way too competitive. But people refuse to recognize that, and therein lies the problem.</p>
<p>Here are some calculations I did a few months back based on data from one of those “chance me” websites. I wanted to determine how correlated admissions were between schools. It is reasonable to assume if a student was accepted at Harvard that they would also be accepted at Duke, Cornell, Rice, Wash U, Chicago etc. How often does this not happen is what I wanted to determine. “Predictor Schools” are schools like Harvard in the above example. I choose Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Columbia as my predictor schools.</p>
<p>Example
4-11-13-9-12==10</p>
<p>What this shows is that 4% of the time a student that was accepted to Stanford would be rejected from the example school. 11% for Harvard, 13% for Yale, 9% for Princeton and 12% for Columbia. The average is 10%</p>
<p>Dartmouth
4-11-13-9-11==10</p>
<p>Duke
4-4-5-8-11==7</p>
<p>Cornell
4-4-8-2-4==4</p>
<p>Hopkins
4-1-3-7-7==4</p>
<p>Rice
2-4-2-2-4==3</p>
<p>Wash U
6-7-9-9-8==8</p>
<p>Chicago
5-2-3-1-3==3</p>
<p>First of all, the sample size is small and the data is suspect, but I think the flaws with the data affected all schools about equally. Dartmouth showed the most unpredictable results followed by Duke and then Wash U. In my opinion, the data showed Wash U with a slightly elevated “unpredictability” compared to it’s peer schools, but not egregious.</p>
I assume good faith on your part, and I think you present an interesting analysis. With that said, you put together a study based on self-reporting chance me websites? Why are you posting this here? Perhaps this would be more appropriate in the CC Café/Games section:</p>
<p>Perhaps my argument was a little too obtuse, I apologize. I was trying to refute the notion that Wash U rejects “overqualified” candidates.</p>
<p>My first impressions were formed of Wash U from CC and they were incorrect, the CC party line is that Wash U games the ranking system, rejects overqualified candidates and spams with (e)mail. Of all the schools that my son applied to, I found them to be the most on-the-ball and accommodating. Our campus visit was extremely well organized and they thought of every little detail. I think Wash U is an able and aggressive competitor in the college rankings game. All colleges at this level are competing with one another, to denigrate Wash U for making gains doesn’t make sense to me.</p>
<p>@gunit5:
Not that I support the notion that the waitlisted people are “overqualified” – in fact, I really don’t accept much of the rhetoric that has been thrown around here about Wash U’s admissions process, but I DO think that some closely watched college rankings DO reflect acceptance rates.</p>
<p>If a college can increase its applicant pool, the number of students it ultimately accepts will represent a lower percentage of the total number who applied. Then, the college can boast a higher “selectivity.” It really is true. Some colleges actually flood mailboxes with opportunities to “apply for free!” for just that reason. Wash U isn’t one of the schools that does THAT. I have no idea if Wash U paricipates in any sort of marketing with an intention of driving up their selectivity (hence rankings). </p>
<p>But, I do know that acceptance rates are reflected in college rankings by way of reported “selectivity.”</p>
<p>Does anyone think they accepted fewer this year than last so they could actually take some off the waitlist? I’m wondering if there is any boomerang effect from last year’s overcrowded freshman class? This is my first go-round at the college game & D’s first waitlist (and her #1!) so I’m not sure if she even has a chance?!</p>
<p>boymom,
I think you’re correct, and last year’s over-enrolled freshmen class led them to be very cautious this year with acceptances, and rather than risk too many this year, they are prepared to go to the waitlist. If your D truly wants to go to WashU, then she should write a letter to admissions expressing that. Good luck to you and your D. I hope it works out–Wash U is a fabulous school.</p>
<p>Sharpenedpencil - I have already called her GC to contact her friend on adcom and emailed the alum who wrote her rec. Do you just send a letter directly? I can’t imagine that they wouldn’t take quite a few off waitlist after none last year…seems as though some are keeping their spot which is fine by me! Thanks for the help :)</p>
<p>I was waitlisted at wustl, and sure it bothers me but I am still waiting to hear back from a few other schools I feel good about. </p>
<p>However, what really gets to me is the fact that my cousin was waitlisted as well. She’s top of her class, varsity tennis, president of a few clubs, etc… And her parents both went to washu. Her dad in fact, works there as a medical researcher. She would’ve gotten free tuition to go there and we all thought she would be a shoo in for sure. That’s what I find strange.</p>
<p>I don’t think WashU admissions are nearly as baffling as everybody thinks. It’s all about fit with the school. What they want are the kind of people who are Type-A people but at the same time friendly and relaxed, if that makes sense. Great academics are necessary for WashU, but not sufficient. It really is how the feel you would fit on the campus. For example, being a recruited athlete is a huge plus when applying, but only if the current athletes think you would fit in well with the team.</p>
My apologies, QEDdad. I think you put together a worthy and interesting studyif only we had access to more representative, robust data. There is just so much unsubstantiated rumor and speculation floating around CC, and it is almost always supported by personal anecdotes and limited/suspect data. Glad to hear that youve had a positive experience with Wash Uit truly is a world-class institution.</p>
<p>boymom5,
When one of my kids was waitlisted for some top schools we were advised by the college counseling office at the high school to send a letter via email to the admissions officer who handles our region. If your child’s college counseling office doesn’t know who that is, then call WashU and find out. In the letter your child can update the admissions committee concerning academics/ extra-curriculars, and say that she will attend if pulled off the waitlist (if that is in fact true). In addition, she might point to ways in which she might contribute to campus life at WashU. For example, if she is currently on the school paper, she might talk about what she could bring to WashU’s paper, Student Life. Or if there is a particular academic interest, she can look at what is going on at WashU in that field. Have her look on the website at the areas she is interested in so that she can make an informed statement about what is there and how she envisions herself as a part of it.</p>
<p>FWIW, I got in with very little demonstrated interest. I never would have applied to WUSTL if it hadn’t been just an extra box to check on the CommonApp and I don’t think I ever had any personal contact with anyone at the school. I visited literally the day before I got my decision. Somehow, I can’t imagine someone in the admissions office changing my app from a waitlist to accept at that point.</p>
<p>Of course, I was a solid applicant otherwise and did not apply for financial aid.</p>
<p>I think people just need to realize that top tier schools really look into students that are “the best fit” for their schools and are the best candidates to be successful at their institutions. Scores are secondary.</p>
<p>Right on. Just like any top institution, WashU gets it’s pick of applicants. There are absolutely going to be some applicants that, based on their scores, look like excellent applicants but come across in their essay as someone who might not fit in at WashU, so they get put on the waitlist. There are plenty of kids that are going to absolutely going to fit at WashU, so the ones who are questionable just aren’t likely to get acceptances.</p>