<p>That would depend on how you interpret it. If you're thinking I'm insulting those that did end up getting in, maybe you take it that way. However, it only makes sense to me that the more a school entices many students to apply, the harder it will get to accept the students that have great stats and really want to go there. Haven't you seen it in the three or four WashU waitlist threads? Quite a few CC members have been accepted off the waitlist - couple that with the fact that WashU is "over-enrolled" and thereby accepting fewer students, and it seems that yield may have been quite low this year, which translates into the fact that for a good deal of those accepted, WashU was not a top choice.</p>
<p>And for a good deal --- such a nice anything-goes estimate --- of those accepted, it was a top choice. It's a top choice for some and a backup for others, just like Wesleyan. (Maybe someday WashU will get to be the butt of a joke on Saturday Night Live. No such thing as bad publicity.)</p>
<p>Ok let's not speak in abstract terms then. WashU's yield hovers around 35%. Not bad, but my "good deal" trumps yours. Of course schools such as WashU, which has attained status as one of the top schools in the nation, will have applicants including them in their 12+ schools to apply to and this takes its toll on their yield, but from viewing our sample here it seemed that quite a few of those reporting to have been accepted weren't actually wanting to go there, whereas those waitlisted had their hearts set on WashU. Either way, I won't go into this debate as it runs around in circles, but it seems that schools really don't have much to gain by actively trying to increase the number of applicants as WashU and practically every other top school does. </p>
<p>Re Wesleyan: lol I didn't see the SNL joke but did happen to see the Daily Show where they called it the safety school to the ivy league. I'm just glad they actually used Wesleyan instead of Tufts. As you say, no such thing as bad publicity.</p>
<p>Hey, I'm with you. I'm not interested in a pointless, speculative debate either.</p>
<p>Brand_182, what you read here, it's not always true. As a matter of fact, two of those "accepted" from the wait list, weren't accepted. One was rejected; the other didn't apply to Wash U. (my "nice" classmates…)</p>
<p>Trapper: There are always jokesters out there who think its "cute" to go on CC and post garbage, toying with people's hopes and dreams. Call them petty scamsters. They see it as a harmless practical joke, but really its something deeper. And they will be well suited to become the next corporate scamsters we read about in the WallStreet Journal.</p>
<p>My D knows a boy who used to brag in the hallways about cheating on exams. (She doesnt know if he actually cheated or whether it was all braggadoccio talk). He was NHS, much to her chagrine. He got into a prestigious state school. He is a world class jerk. Classic jock, big ego, treats women like possessions and play toys. His intended major in college? Business! PERFECT! We will be watching.</p>
<p>Many students applied to WashU because of its merit scholarships. If they do not win scholarship they are not likely to go to washu. This could potentially hurt washu's yield much. Wash u knows it and thus waitlisted many of the applicants who applied for merit scholarships.</p>
<p>wonder123 - Just curious what you base your statement on "Wash u knows it and thus waitlisted many of the applicants who applied for merit scholarships." Unless you have some inside info, that is just an uninformed opinion with no basis.</p>
<p>mmm, wonder, i'd contend that the opposite is true. washu looks favorably on students who apply for merit scholarships, because it's one of the strongest ways of showing interest in the school.</p>
<p>the idea that washu rejects/waitlists kids who will turn them down because of lack of merit aid and ALSO rejects/waitlists people they think will opt for an Ivy (a contention made by a number of people) doesn't really make sense to me. the Ivies sure won't be giving people better merit aid packages than washu does. if they're waitlisting both of these cross-sections of their applicant pool, who are they accepting? a bunch of rich kids that can't quite make it into the ivies? some might say yes, but keep in mind, some people are idiots.</p>
<p>The idea of yield protection is hardly unique to WUSTL. It's a very common practice among most schools -- a team of economists did the math to prove that even Princeton does it. (Ironically, a team of economists at Princeton.)</p>
<p>hell yeah it's common and all of the crap WashU gets over "spamming" students is not merited either since every great school (even harvard) sends out letters encouraging thousands of kids to apply.</p>
<p>It makes no sense what you said Wonder 123 because the results for the merit scholarships are out between four to two weeks before the decisions are out, the only ones who are in before knowing if they could get a merit scholarship are the ED applicants.</p>
<p>Out of 23,000 applicants, at least 5,000 are those the school could say "perfect fit", the exceptional ones get the scholarships, the other 4,900 or less someway they have to got one more thing: luck, since there is no way to accept all those applicants, 1/3 would be in, the rest would be given the possibility to accept the wait list and have another chance.</p>
<p>Wonder123, there are just a few merit scholarships, are you saying that only less than a hundred kids are willing to go to Wash U? I’ve must seen many holograms when visiting; I swear I saw thousands of students there…;)</p>
<p>All these "bitter pills" angry at WashU for sending them letters and materials and then waitlisting them? Come on! My D knows people who were outright rejected at WashU, and at other schools too who have great stats and are very smart people. Ivy's often take kids from the second tier of applicants as a sort of diversity thing, to mix up the class a little bit. Some kid from Maine got into Harvard this year (according to CC) with an 1980 SAT. So how does the kid with a 2300 and got rejected feel about that? People don't have a "right" to be accepted just because they have great stats. College acceptance is a privilege, not a right.</p>
<p>And whatever happens in the admissions office should not define a college. They do their best under difficult circumstances. Regardless, the college itself should not be judged with a broad brush approach because of a rejection or waitlist letter. That is immature...sophomoric.</p>
<p>WashU is a superb school. Its ambiance and "culture" is warm and inviting. Its a gorgeous campus. It has very nice dorms. St. Louis is a great place to go to college. If we get off the waitlist, we will be there. But we also know that 23,000 applied and they have an incoming class of what? 1350 or something? And of the 23,000 who applied, more than 90% are well qualified to attend and would thrive if they went there? But those same 90% .....er....the 81% who will not be a part of this year's incoming class will do just as well at another school. So keep it all in perspective.</p>
<p>Nobody here is a "loser" in the pejorative sense. Life is full of bumps and bruises. Its not really what happens to you that matters, its what you do with what happens to you that matters. Attitude is everything.</p>
<p>I spoke with the admission director. he told me there is NO weakness in my daughter's applicaiton. He asked "didn't you tell me your daughter was accepted by Stanford?" He also told me that the waitlist letter was prepared at the same time the merit scholarship rejection letter was mailed, even though not mailed at the same time. What is more, there was the infamous "congratulation card" with scholarship rejection letter, even though they had already decided to wailist my daughter. At that time I bet they had not reviewed all applications. they decided to wailist my daughter because they knew she would not attend Washu without merit scholarship. she was accepted by both Harvard and Stanford.</p>
<p>Seems pretty comprehensible to me. Admitting her raises their admissions percentage and lowers their yield. So they didn't.</p>
<p>A very common practice, hardly unique to WUSTL.</p>
<p>Better that way wonder123, so you didn’t lose anything. Kids invited to the Discovery weekend didn’t have to pay the application fee, I was one of them and I got my refund.
Your D can still apply next year as a transfer. (Btw, let your D speak for herself, colleges don’t like when students can’t do thing by themselves and their parents do what their kids should do)</p>
<p>Yeah bluedevilmike, one student makes a big difference ;)</p>
<p>... obviously if they were only going to do it for one student, they wouldn't bother. But if they were going to do it for twenty-five or fifty students, that would involve a whole aggregate of "one-student" bunches.</p>
<p>25 to 50 in 4,000…it means around 1%! I really don’t think that a Admission Office receiving more than 20,000 application would have the time to investigate where each one of those applicants had applied, it is more like they don’t care, if they think the candidate is strong, they would admit it, and if they want it very hardly, a nice amount of money through a merit scholarship would do the trick.
One thing Trapper said is very true, colleges don’t like when the kids can’t do the things by themselves and the parents are the ones calling to the Admission Office. They want young and responsible adults; they don’t want to deal with kids needing mom and dad for every decision they have to take.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I really don’t think that a Admission Office receiving more than 20,000 application would have the time to investigate
[/quote]
Which is why you don't investigate. You just make assumptions.</p>
<p>Yield protection is an extremely well-documented phenomenon anecdotally, philosophically, officially, and academically. That is to say, students report it widely, it makes sense, colleges have admitted they do it privately and all-but-admitted so publicly ("We're looking for students to demonstrate their interest"), and the social science literature is replete with analysis of this phenomenon.</p>