Wash U admissions baffles me to no end. Thoughts?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Washington University in St. Louis
141

<p>I think you are forgetting the key point in all of this: you are applying to the best 20 or so schools in the nation. If there’s one thing that this website can teach you, it’s that admissions at these selective universities are a giant crapshoot. Each admissions office, as I mentioned, has its own quirks. One may have valued a certain experience, activity, award, or grade higher than another, for whatever reason. What makes me angry is, as others have pointed out, that if this happened at another similarly prestigious university (say, Northwestern or Hopkins), you wouldn’t see nearly as many people claiming “Tufts Syndrome”. People need to wake up and realize that if admissions is a huge crapshoot at the other top 20 schools, what makes WashU different?</p>

<p>To your next point, keellota, I would say that a major variable that you aren’t taking into account is visit and interest. Obviously there are exceptions, but the general trend seems to be that WUSTL will take a 2200 with visits and interviews over a 2350 with little demonstrated interest. If anybody would like to blame this principle for their lack of acceptance, that’s completely valid, but calling it Tufts Syndrome is a different ballgame.</p>

142

<p>Coming from someone who was accepted to Wash U but showed virtually no interest, but was waitlisted at Vandy where I had an interview with an alumna and met my area’s rep, I guess I’m a little confused.</p>

<p>According to the US News College Rankings, Wash U is ranked 13th and Vandy is ranked 17th. I know rankings are not the gospel and should not be treated as such, but as a student right in the midst of the crazy college process, I can’t help but want to say “well I got in to the 13th best uni, why did I get WL by the 17th best?” I actually don’t care for rankings all that much since they discount some seriously fabulous schools (like Ohio State), but it is hard not to resort to an oversimplified numerical evaluation when you apply to many of the top 20 schools in the nation.</p>

<p>The claim “I got into college X, therefore I should get college Y because it’s ranked lower” is completely moot and silly. There are many reasons rankings are flawed, but besides faulting the rankings, I believe that you all are right when you say admissions are a crapshoot. Although I still think Vanderbilt is a bit more prestigious a school as a whole (just my opinion), I am finding that Wash U seems far superior for someone who wants to pursue medicine. These are just my opinions; both schools are excellent and there are tons of students who would be great at both. Neither of the two were my top top choices so I can’t really say if adcoms made the “right” decision. But I’m grateful to have been accepted to Wash U during one of the most difficult years for applicants, and I’m excited for a potential future there! :)</p>

143

<p>I seriously hope the following post can be the be-all and end-all for this thread:</p>

<p>I applied to Wash U and Johns Hopkins–both are tied, according to USNWR, at 13th in the nation. I showed tons of interest in Hopkins. Campus visit, information session, early decision, you name it. I even attended a month-long summer program for college credit and got an A in the class. Wash U was the polar opposite. I didn’t attend an information session or take a tour (I didn’t even visit the campus!) and I didn’t apply for scholarships.</p>

<p>So why did I get in to Wash U while I was deferred ED and then rejected from Hopkins? Hell if I know. But I ended up at Wash U and I absolutely love it here.</p>

<p>College admissions is a very complex process and that’s even more true for top 20 schools. If you applied to Wash U and considered yourself a strong applicant but didn’t get in, don’t be bitter. You’ll go to a great school no matter which one it is, so be happy about that.</p>

144

<p>@matcat1116
“I think you are forgetting the key point in all of this: you are applying to the best 20 or so schools in the nation.”
“if this happened at another similarly prestigious university (say, Northwestern or Hopkins), you wouldn’t see nearly as many people claiming ‘Tufts Syndrome’.”</p>

<p>I’m not forgetting this. If that’s all WashU’s admissions were, I wouldn’t be posting. Admissions are mainly based on merit though, and this isn’t a matter of a couple thousand accepted, couple more thousand rejected-- the waitlisted + accepted pool is probably much over ten thousand.</p>

<p>“To your next point, keellota, I would say that a major variable that you aren’t taking into account is visit and interest.”
FWIW, I visited WashU + went to a local info session, and have a 36. ;P</p>

145

<p>@RaVNzCRoFT
The thread is pretty exhausted. I just brought it back up when I came across the new vandy admission stats, which were pertinent to many of the older posts in this thread.</p>

146

<p>I have made this comment to many friends but this is clearly a crapshoot. These schools get 25,000 to 30,000 applications to find 3,000 kids to accept. They could have thrown out the 3,000 acceptances they sent out and picked 3,000 others and I believe the clas would be just as strong. There are just too many applications for so few spots. A month ago I was accepted to Michigan. Last week I was accepted at Wash U, earlier in the week I was accepted at USC and early yesterday I was accepted at Vandy and NYU AND by 5:00 eastern I was rejected at University of Virginia. I am waiting for 6 more schools next week. I could go 0 for 6, 3 and 3, 4 and 2 and none of them would surprise me. There are just no guarantees at this level of school.</p>

147

<p>I have one child that was accepted and attended WUSTL and one that was waitlisted so I think I am uniquiely qualified to comment. My DS, who is the one that graduated from WUSTL will be the first to tell you that he was blown away by the student body. When he was a freshman, I remember him commenting about how amazed he was by his fellow student’s accomplishments and intellect. I have no idea why he got in. His stats were excellent but I’m sure that there were plenty of other students that had better stats. He did have a ton of ECs and did show a lot of interest. A good friend that applied the next year with similar stats and level of interest did not get in. Who knows why. My best is guess that the year DS was admitted they needed a boy from the midwest that wanted to study engineering, run XC and play the trumpet while the next year they didn’t need a girl from the midwest that wanted to study biology and swim. Both were qualified. Both would be able to excel there. Who really knows why? They can’t take evey qualified student so they take the ones that they think will create the class that will give them the diversity they are looking for.</p>

<p>DD was disappointed that she was waitlisted but WUSTL would not have been a good fit for her. She is now thriving in a completely different kind of environment that works for her. Unlike a lot of posters here, DS didn’t think that she deserved to be admitted to WUSTL. She knew she was qualified but that a whole lot more than just GPA and test scores went into the equation. She accepted the decision (after a day or two of moping) and then chose a different school that was a better fit for her. If people could just accept that WUSTL is NOT a safety for anyone, I think there would be a lot less complaining come decision time.</p>

148

<p>In reading this thread, some seem to take the USNWR rankings as Gospel.</p>

<p>Let’s all remember, the weighting scale and the criteria selected are somewhat subjective, and even change from year to year. Just because a school is ranked 13, 18 (or even 2 or 3) by one organization doesn’t make it so.</p>

<p>Let’s say you’re want to be an English Major, would you go to a school like MIT (USNWR #7) over Wash U (USNWR #13). I don’t think so. </p>

<p>What it comes down to is that AT BEST, the rankings give you a rough guide as to the relative reputation of schools. They are one factor in the decision. If you got into several schools with similar USNWR rankings, it would be silly, for example to say you’re going to the highest ranked USNWR school, and ignoring all other factors.</p>

<p>As to admissions – If you look at schools 5-20, you’re not going to see much difference in the overall stats of their student bodies. </p>

<p>One suspects that each school in this tier is looking for somewhat different things. It’s how the schools differentiate themselves, and to be honest, it’s part of what makes Wash U, Wash U (and Peer School X, Peer School X). Factor in the subjectivity here – and it may just come down to the fact that one person’s essay captured the fancy of Admissions Officer at School A (but not school B) and the opposite was the case for another student. To be honest, there’s a luck factor too. In a close case, an Admissions officer might love your application on Tuesday, but merely like it on Thursday. We’re dealing with human beings making subjective judgments, and there’s absolutely no way to avoid this (though I’m certain the schools try as hard as they can to minimize it).</p>

<p>Finally, the schools spend a lot of time and effort in their acceptance. I suspect that for the most part (though obviously not 100%), if Student A is accepted at Wash U, and rejected at Peer School A, it’s because they are a better fit for the kind of institution (and vice versa).</p>

<p>Disappointment at not getting into any school is natural, but getting into some, but not all schools (regardless of merit aid, ranking, etc), within this top tier is completely normal, and should even be expected.</p>

149

<p>On the flip side, I think I now have a really good ideae for a Statistics Thesis if I go to grad school in Stats.</p>

150

<p>Apparently some of us didn’t get the memo.</p>

<p>Selectivity Ranking:</p>

<p>1 Cal Tech
2 Yale
3 Harvard
4 MIT
5 Princeton
6 Columbia
7 WUSTL
8 Harvey Mudd
9 Penn
10 Swarthmore
11 Stanford
12 Dartmouth
13 Brown
14 Pomona
15 Duke
16 Williams
17 Amherst
18 Northwestern
19 Georgetown
20 Cornell
21 Notre Dame
22 Claremont McK
23 Rice
24 Haverford
25 Chicago
26 UC Berkeley
27 Middlebury
27 Tufts
29 JHU
29 Emory
31 Bowdoin
32 USC
33 Carleton
34 W&L
35 Vanderbilt
36 Wesleyan
37 UCLA
38 Carnegie Mel
39 Wellesley
40 Davidson</p>

<p>(<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&lt;/a&gt;)</p>

151

<p>Anyone have any clue how many are actually waitlisted?</p>

152

<p>(that list only counts acceptance rate as 10% of the score)</p>

153

<p>I got waitlisted, but how does financial aid work then? Do they tell you your aid at the same time that they tell you if they’ve got more spots for you?</p>

154

<p>@Gatsby11

As you bolded Emory and Vanderbilt, I’ll assume that was directed mainly at me. To add to what cjester said, the acceptance rates of [url=<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/vanderbilt-3535]Vandy[/url”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/vanderbilt-3535]Vandy[/url</a>] and [url=<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/washington-university-st-louis-2520]WashU[/url”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/washington-university-st-louis-2520]WashU[/url</a>] are hardly different.</p>

<p>That list you copied is 50% weighted on SAT scores. In the year that list was created, WashU’s quartiles were insignificantly higher. I’ll assume that difference this year is the same or even less noticeable.
The list is also weighted 40% on percent of students in the top 10% of their high school class. Vandy’s class of '10 had 85% in the top 10% of their high school class. I don’t know WashU’s percentage, so maybe this could account for the ranking disparity on that list… a list which, by the way, a CC user personally created “for grins.”</p>

<p>More likely though is that all the schools have such insignificantly different stats in the areas on which the list was based that the actual difference in this hypothetical “selectivity” is belied and exaggerated by the relative positions in the list.</p>

155

<p>

As it should: among the three metrics, acceptance rate can be manipulated and is more a measure of a school’s “popularity.”

Yes, this is one of the reasons for the differential: WashU has had 90+% of students in the top 10% of their high school class for the last several years.

I don’t see why this makes it any less informative—this list actually mirrors the data presented from US News. If you’d like an updated list for 2010, it can be found in the appendix of the latest US News.</p>

156

<p>Not sure what gets you in–my son has all the academic/score qualifications, but limited EC’s. We visited 5 schools this summer. Two of the visits (including WUSTL) involved spending a day doing a behind the scenes tour of the labs and spending extensive time with professors/staff in departments of interest. We didn’t go through admissions and had no idea if the visits were shared with the admission offices. He also is interested in Nanotechnology, and Rice has a major in it, while WUSTL is starting a minor next year. My son was accepted at WUSTL and Rice, but rejected at the others where he showed general interest/interviews. Wonder if that is a back door to the universities? We were just looking for a good fit. Did anyone else accepted/waitlisted “interview” professors to get a feel for the “fit” of the school for themselves?</p>

157

<p>

</p>

<p>Vanderbilt not only has to account for Division 1 Athletics in the SEC (football, basketball, baseball, track, tennis, etc.), but a full-time undergraduate music school as well. I think we can all agree that those students (who have talents that extend far outside of class grades) help account for a lower percentage of students in the top 10% of their class. Does the selectivity data consider those factors? What was the acceptance rate for WUSTL this year? Vanderbilt’s was 15.45%</p>

158

<p>^I think WUSTL will be around the 15-16% range—official statistics have not been released. Of course, we won’t know the exact numbers for either school until later in the process.</p>

159

<p>I think the best explanation for the “baffling” Wustl admissions is simply that they are not need-blind. Wustl is a great school with comparable “stats” to all top 20 schools, just the admissions favor those not requiring financial aid.</p>

<p>Many schools’ decisions seem confusing when looking at the objectives of applicants and seeing seemingly arbitrary decisions, but then seem to assume a more logical pattern when finding other factors such as race come into play.</p>

<p>WustL, I think, is accused of “Tuft’s syndrome” because when looking for a factor to attempt to discern the “logic” behind seemingly arbitrary decisions, most are accustomed to seeing “factors such as race” as a satisfactory explanation and therefore don’t look for or recognize a financial explanation (perhaps primarily because WashU is the only need-aware T20 school).</p>

160

<p>Cjester, I do agree with you that decisions are baffling. On the other hand, while I understand that you see a difference between Wash U and other top-20 national research universities, that doesn’t mean it’s an explanation for anything. </p>

<p>Next week, the decisions from Brown, Yale, Duke, and Princeton will be just as baffling. The difference is that everyone will accept those results and not try to go through self-reported and shoddy data to make up reasons why they were rejected or waitlisted from those schools. In part, by that time, students will understand that decisions are unpredictable. In part, they also expect decisions from those schools to be difficult. However, once a school is below the 25% acceptance mark, it’s difficult for outsiders to understand what made the difference.</p>

<p>I know of many schools (particularly former women’s colleges) where it is an advantage—a serious advantage—to be male. I know of many schools, particularly schools with strong reputations in engineering, where it is an advantage to be a woman. I know of many schools that have rejected top students in favor of good students who are stellar athletes. I’ve heard of admissions committees that rejected top students because it looked like their essays were written for other schools (this was not Wash U). Without being there, we can’t say much.</p>

<p>Further, the admissions director at Wash U changed last year, I think. Though the new director was in the office before (someone can correct me on this if I am wrong), I don’t think we can say much about trends in admission from Wash U.</p>