<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, because it’s irrelevant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. I was accepted at both Duke and Columbia and did not apply to WUSTL. Guess again…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d appreciate if you don’t tell me how and when to post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No one’s “bashing” WUSTL for waitlisting well-qualified students. Many people, including me, criticize WUSTL for accepting LESS qualified students (and waitlisting MORE qualified students) in order to protect yield. It’s one thing to waitlist (or reject) well-qualified students and quite another to waitlist (or reject) OVER-qualified students. WUSTL is the new TUFTS! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>WUSTL is in a class of its own when it comes to spam mail. No other schools’ forums have multiple threads about it. Even WUSTL students admit this.</p>
<p>[Sustainability</a> groups question admissions office practices | Student Life](<a href=“http://www.studlife.com/news/2009/10/02/sustainability-groups-question-admissions-office-practices/]Sustainability”>Sustainability groups question admissions office practices - Student Life)</p>
<p>[How</a> to advertise the University in the recession | Student Life](<a href=“http://www.studlife.com/news/2009/09/21/how-to-advertise-the-university-in-the-recession/]How”>How to advertise the University in the recession - Student Life)</p>
<p>[Remember</a> those mailings with “the pretty castle”](<a href=“http://www.studlife.com/archives/News/2002/04/19/Rememberthosemailingswiththeprettycastle/]Remember”>Remember those mailings with “the pretty castle” - Student Life Archives)</p>
<p>I still agree with DudeDiligence take on this that Wash U is taking the students that they see as the best fit and that is what alot of schools do. If it’s a matter of weeding out students who are throwing an application out there just for the sake of it, that’s certainly their perogative. They don’t have an essay, so they can’t weed them out that way.</p>
<p>InterestingGuy - CC college-specific forums are designed for two groups of people. People who have an interest in a school, and people who have some experience (good or bad) with that school. Since you clearly are in neither of these groups, it would be appreciated if you would take your immature and baseless derision elsewhere. Unless you have something to bring to light, there is no evidence for your claims about WashU “gaming” the rankings except for CC-based rumors which crop up every year. There is no need to go through this forum, thread by thread, bashing WashU in every way you can think of. I don’t know if you are a ■■■■■ or not, but either way I hope you will consider the fact that (despite the fact that this is the internet), these forums are intended to retain some basis in objective reality, and as the one with the axe to grind, yours is the responsibility to provide some sort of evidence that WashU admissions are in anyway cheating the system if you wish to make that accusation. If you have no such information, which I highly suspect, please stay out of the forums of any colleges whose merit you have deemed (based on zero experience) to be nonexistent. Thanks.</p>
<ul>
<li>hchsch: to my knowledge, there is no basis for the accusations being made in this thread about WashU admissions. It is, of course, entirely likely that demonstrated interest plays a role in the admissions process, but that is hardly a reproachable practice. Among employers and grad schools, which are (hopefully) above being concerned with rankings, WashU has as good a reputation as its statistics would suggest, and there’s very little more to the story than that. </li>
</ul>
<p>-To everyone else: I am not going to argue with interestingguy on a point-by-point basis: Issues like admissions office mailings and the validity of USNWR rankings have very little right to be thrown up off-topic in threads all over the WashU forum as IG is doing. If anyone has actual concerns about things like this (which is hard to tell, since IG is the only one voicing them), please feel free to make a thread on the subject so that it can be debated without detracting from the threads of others. I, and other posters, will be happy to answer whatever questions we can in that setting. Otherwise, I recommend ignoring InterestingGuy, whose posting history I will again link to here, if any of this seems unfair: [interestingguy</a> - Posting History](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/search.php?do=finduser&u=289318]interestingguy”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/search.php?do=finduser&u=289318)</p>
<p>interestingguy, if you are at a respectable college as you seem to claim, I’m curious as to how you have the time to patrol the forums for any thread about WashU and then bash it with no remorse, as well as attack people who contradict your points ad hominem. Are you unhappy at your institution?</p>
<p>If you “didn’t even apply to WashU,” I’m curious as to how you are so knowledgeable on the school. What is your incentive for spending so much type talking about something you know so little about?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Top banking and consulting firms do not treat WUSTL as a “target school” at which to recruit, despite WUSTL’s undergraduate business program. WUSTL students do not necessarily end up at top grad schools either:</p>
<p><a href=“WSJ in Higher Education | Trusted News & Real-World Insights”>WSJ in Higher Education | Trusted News & Real-World Insights;
<p>Of course, WUSTL apologists will complain that the WSJ Feeder School rankings reveal a Northeastern “bias selection” of schools. However, other midwestern schools including University of Chicago, Northwestern, University of Michigan, Notre Dame, Macalester College, Grinnell College all performed better than WUSTL.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>WUSTL “weeds outs” students via the waitlist. If WUSTL really cared about “fit,” it’d require an essay. But that’d drive down applications. But if by “fit” you mean likelihood of enrollment, then I agree.</p>
<p>To reiterate, since none of this is related to the OP, please ignore interestingguy. If there is anyone out there who is looking for information about WUSTL and who has questions about any of the things IG is spouting off about, please feel free to make a thread where those topics can be discussed separately and, hopefully, by people who have some form of experience with WashU. Thanks.</p>
<p>Edit: oh and i’m pretty sure wustl does require an essay - just not an extra, WashU-specific essay, to clarify.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To save CC bandwidth, after this post, I’ll stop responding to the Wash U bashes of an individual who demonstrates with each and every post not only zero direct or first-hand knowledge about Wash U, but also a complete inability or unwillingness to see subtle distinctions of any sort.</p>
<p>As for “fit,” I was not aware that Wash U discontinued an essay as a part of its application. My son wrote an essay in 2003 for his admission in 2004; my daughter wrote an essay in 2005 for her admission in 2006 (she didn’t attend). I wasn’t aware that this has changed (if indeed it has changed). However, to suggest Wash U doesn’t consider “fit” is laughable. In fact the critics who whine about some higher-achievers being waitlisted while some lower-achieving applicants being admitted are generally arguing that Wash U cares too much about “fit,” letting demonstrated interest and “fit” trump the superior paper credentials of some so-called “top” applicants (many of whom didn’t bother to do a single thing to show interest or fit beyond in essence forwarding their stellar CV’s). If you knew much at all about Wash U admissions, you’d realize that demonstrated interest and fit are at the heart of the entire process. Conversations with admissions reps and faculty, campus visits, and interviews mean a lot at Wash U. They are forthcoming and transparent about this. You don’t think much of this is tracked? You don’t believe it does (or should) count at least to some degree in admissions decisions? Moreover, for years, Wash U has had one of the nation’s largest and most actively applied for merit scholarship programs. Thousands of the strongest college applicants in the country apply for these scholarships each year, filling out separate applications, writing additional essays, securing new recommendations, and, often, coming to campus for interviews and selection weekends. I would think it’s fair to say that the very high-achieving applicants who demonstrate their genuine interest in this way are perceived as being far more serious applicants than the group of high-achievers who fire off a quick and dirty app for a “safety” acceptance notch in their belt. While I know many high-achievers who have been waitlisted at Wash U (I believe we all do), I don’t know a single high-achiever who did the visits and interviews, and put some elbow grease into applying for merit, and was then waitlisted. That might happen, but I’m certain it’s a rarity. In my opinion, it reveals immaturity and arrogance when waitlisted or denied high-achievers start with the “Wash U waitlists OVER-qualified applicants” battlecry. There are certainly some of the highest-achieving high school students in the country admitted each year (particularly in the life science arena – Wash U’s traditional area of greatest strength). They get their share of top high school admits. It’s part of what makes doing well at Wash U no easy thing. But to conclude that those not admitted outright are ipso facto OVER-qualified is absurd. Unless you are Einstein, Freud, or Hawking (or some reasonable facsimile thereof), nobody is OVER-qualified for elite college admissions. Admissions simply prefers someone else. That’s life.</p>
<p>As for trying to make your point of “overrated” by cherry-picking perceived “weaker” departments or focusing on “how many Presidents attended Wash U,” you can’t be serious. All colleges have areas of relative strength and weakness. Yep, how are those engineering departments at Harvard and Yale, anyway? I’m certain a lot of top BME oriented kids are just lining up to attend the robust BME programs at Harvard and Yale. What, they’re not? Overrated! And, Wash U is clearly second-rate all the way because despite the legion of top physicians, research scientists, and social workers doing incredible things all over the world, this clearly overrated school just hasn’t graduated a single U.S. President! Dartmouth, Brown, Cornell, Swarthmore, and NU must be similarly shamed. But eureka … tiny little “Eureka College” in Ronald Reagan’s Illinois … wow, now there’s a school (no offense meant to some of the fine graduates I know who actually attended Eureka).</p>
<p>As many other posters have mentioned, I’ll trust that CC readers can see you’re apparently far more interested in winning arguments than contributing informed opinions. So be it. I’m confident that informed people will have a good sense of Wash U, warts and all. If you see the positives, then by all means work hard on a genuine and sincere application – a potentially great college experience awaits. However, if you’re overly concerned about any negatives, then you have so many other fine alternatives – we have the great fortune to have an incredible number of great college options available in this country.</p>
<p>Good luck to all.</p>
<p>WashU does require an essay- just as any commonapp school does.</p>
<p>It does not require an essay on the pre-app supplement.</p>
<p>I am new to CC. I stumbled across CC a few months ago to learn about colleges for my children. WUSTL quickly struck my interest for several reasons. We have done the visits, the interviews, etc. with WUSTL. My son is quite likely to apply ED at WUSTL. What we are experiencing from WUSTL is if you show the interest in them, they return the favor. It is a classic quid pro quo relationship. What more could you ask for or want? </p>
<p>With respect to IGs statement (#47) regarding Top banking and consulting firms do not treat WUSTL as a target school at which to recruit . Think about it. Those same top banking and consulting firms: </p>
<p>(1) Are the creators of credit swap derivatives (paying rating agencies to securitize poor mortgages with an investment grade rating to sell to the public only to short what they just sold). I believe that is a credit swap derivative if not exactly, I am close; </p>
<p>(2) Were willing to loan money to people who they knew could not afford to pay the money back with the knowledge that the shareholders will be absorbing the losses (not them); and </p>
<p>(3) Had no problems issuing complex financial instruments (making bets on bets) that they did not understand. </p>
<p>Mr. IG, I do not want my children to waste their abilities with these type of top folks. These same banks and consultants are inextricably linked to the colossal financial debacle that our country is experiencing today. Accordingly, if those guys are not showing up at WUSTL, sounds good to me.</p>
<p>interestingguy isn’t correct. some top firms do confirm at wustl. well, at least for undergrad</p>
<p>look at this:
<a href=“http://www.olin.wustl.edu/docs/WCC/EmploymentBSBA.pdf[/url]”>http://www.olin.wustl.edu/docs/WCC/EmploymentBSBA.pdf</a></p>
<p>oops i forgot this:</p>
<p>SELECTED COMPANIES THAT HIRED BSBA STUDENTS (2007-PRESENT)</p>
<p>Abercrombie & Fitch
Accenture
ACNielsen BASES
American Cancer Society
American Express Co.
American Red Cross
Ameriprise Financial Services
Anheuser-Busch InBev
AOL Time Warner
Arch Coal
Arnold Worldwide
Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.
AT&T Inc.
AXA Advisors Inc. LLC
Bain & Co.
Balyasny Asset Management LLP
Bank of America Corp.
Bank of New York
Barclays Capital
BKD LLP
Blackman Kallick Bartelstein LLP
Blackstone Group
Bloomingdale’s
Boeing Co.
Booz Allen Hamilton
Boston Scientific Corp.
Brown Shoe Co.
Build-A-Bear Workshop
Bunge Corp.
Capital One
CB Richard Ellis
Centene Corp.
Chicago Board Options Exchange
Chicago Trading Co.
CIBC World Markets Corp.
Citigroup Inc.
Clean Earth Technologies
Colgate-Palmolive Co.
ConAgra Foods Inc.
ConocoPhillips
Corporate Executive Board
Credit Suisse Group
D.E. Shaw & Co.
Dell Inc.
Deloitte & Touche
Deloitte Consulting
Deutsche Bank A.G.
Discover Card
ECG Management Consultants
Edward Jones
Eisner LLP
Eli Lilly & Co.
EMC Corp.
Epic Systems Corp.
Ernst & Young LLP
Essilor International SA
Express Scripts
ExxonMobil Corp.
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Fleishman-Hillard
Freddie Mac
General Electric Co.
General Mills Inc.
Georgia Pacific Corp.
Goldman Sachs
Google Inc.
Grant Thornton LLP
Harbour Group
Harrah’s Entertainment Inc.
Hewitt Associates LLC
Hewlett-Packard Co.
Hillstone Restaurant Group
Honeywell International Inc.
Houlihan Lokey Howard
and Zukin Inc.
HSBC
International Business
Machines Corp.
IMC Chicago
ING Direct
International Paper
J.C. Penney & Co.
JP Morgan Chase & Co.
Jefferies & Co.
Jones Lang LaSalle
JWT
Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Inc.
Kohl’s
LaSalle Bank Corp.
Legg Mason Wood Walker
Leo Burnett Co.
Lincoln Financial
Lockheed Martin
L’Oreal SA
Macy’s Inc.
Marvel Entertainment
MasterCard Inc.
McCann Worldgroup
McKinsey & Co.
McMaster-Carr Supply
Mercer Inc.
Merrill Lynch
Microsoft Corp.
MillerCoors
Monitor Group
Monsanto Co.</p>
<pre><code>Morgan Keegan & Co.
</code></pre>
<p>Morgan Stanley
Motorola Inc.
MTV Networks
Museum of Modern Art
National City Corp.
Nestle Purina Pet Care
Nielsen Co.
NISA Investment Advisors LLC
Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide
Peabody Energy
Peace Corps
Piper Jaffray Cos.
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Principal Financial Group
Procter & Gamble Co.
Protiviti Inc.
Publicis USA
Ralcorp Holdings
Raymond James & Associates
Raytheon Systems Co.
RBC Capital Markets
Robert W. Baird and Co.
RubinBrown LLP
Saatchi & Saatchi
Sage Capital LLC
Sagent Advisors
Samsung Group
SAP AG
Sara Lee Corp.
Scottrade
Southwest Airlines
St. Louis Regional Arts Commission
Standard & Poor’s Corp.
State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance
Stifel Nicolaus
Stryker Corp.
Susquehanna International Group
Synovate
Target Corp.
TBWA Worldwide
Teach for America
Thomson Financial
Towers Perrin
Turner Broadcasting System
Twist Marketing
U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
UBS AG
Wachovia Corp.
Weber Shandwick Worldwide
Wells Fargo & Co.
Woodbury Financial Services
Yahoo! Inc.</p>
<p>interestingguy, your rankings from the Wall Street Journal “feeder schools” was from 2003. 6 year old data is not relevant here.</p>
<p>this past year, WUSTL was ranked as #1 MBA feeder school by another publication (forbes or businessweek… can’t remember which?)</p>
<p>each ranking guide is different in terms of methodologies and goals, and should generally not be looked upon as the most reliable way to assess a university. but, if you really do choose to cite them, please try to use more relevant data. </p>
<p>wustl is a great school, and yet isn’t a school for everyone. no one is trying to lie or misrepresent facts or opinions. most of us are trying to answer questions on this forum in a balanced and informed way. i believe that the vast majority of us posters are either current wustl students, graduates, or parents… those who have significant experience with the school. wustl has an extremely spirited, involved, and happy campus. we are trying to our best to share our enthusiasm and information with prospective students. it is a highly selective, top-tier research university with an extensive liberal arts focus. if students are looking for those aspects in a college, then wustl should be on their list of colleges to at least consider. </p>
<p>feel free to continue flaming on these WUSTL boards, but please know that no reasonably educated and informed prospective high school kid is likely listening to you by this point on the WUSTL boards.</p>
<p>The looong version (by you):
</p>
<p>The short version (by me):
</p>
<p>Do you bother to read or understand the arguments to which you are responding? Or, do you enjoy arriving at random (“straw men”) interpretations of these arguments?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“Crying wolf”…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know exactly what you mean by “confirm.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This list is not very useful. Of course, some companies HIRE WashU students. My point is that top banking and consulting firms do not RECRUIT WashU students. FWIW, the list does not tell us in what capacity the WUSTL students were hired. My guess is that WUSTL business undergrads have trouble getting the more highly sought after positions in, say, private equity, venture capital, hedge funds, etc. because the top firms do not treat WUSTL as a “target school.”</p>
<p>How interesting that in the same line that interestingguy speaks of a straw man fallacy he quotes himself rocking out a marvelous If-By-Whiskey. </p>
<p>The reason that there are no Nobel Laureates from wustl really has been stated time and time again - thirty years ago WashU was a regional school at best. It was not ranked highly, it was not well known. Twenty years before that it was a street car university and a continuing education school, a trend you can still see present in the University College night classes. That is not to say that there are not any notable individuals who graduated there - they’re just more sparse than Harvard, Yale, Princeton and the like. </p>
<p>Personally I tend to agree with Interestingguy that WashU does play the ranking system. They certainly found a way to use the US News & World Report rankings to benefit their institution. I do not see this in a negative light though, perhaps because I was not affected by it. In fact, I would argue that it is a necessary tool to break into the upper echelon of schools. By gaming their way into the top 15 universities they gain massive amounts of free publicity and interest. After a time this will no longer be needed to enhance admission statistics. </p>
<p>Washington University in St. Louis is in fact an old school that is beginning its new life. Thanks to Chancellor Danforth, corporations like Malinkrodt Chemical, Ralston-Purina, Peabody Energy, and others the endowment grew by a factor of 10 over 30 years. Since the end of Danforth’s tenure, Chancellor Wrighton has continued the trend and WashU shows signs that it will continue to grow in prominence. Personally I would advise students ignore completely the US News rankings when looking at a school. Go somewhere that will make you happy. If the place for you is your state school’s football stands screaming and covered in face paint instead of bundled up rushing to the science center in Harvard, more power to you. I knew that WashU was right for me. It’s not perfect, but I couldn’t be happier with my decision.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Relative to other schools, how has WUSTL changed so much in the last six years that this data is no longer relevant???</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is not necessarily a good thing for a school that offers an undergraduate business program. If WUSTL students are still heading for MBAs in droves, this suggests that their undergraduate business education is inadequate in some way. For example, the University of Pennsylvania does not do well as an MBA feeder school because most Wharton grads find their undergraduate business degrees to be sufficient. (Less than a third of them return for MBAs). Last, the WSJ feeder school rankings show that WUSTL grads are not attending the top MBA programs.</p>