<p>I believe that in admissions decisions, as in tenure cases, the different steps of the general process are publicized (e.g. what the criteria are, what the required components of the dossier are, when notification is due, and so on). But the deliberations on speficic candidates are supposed to be kept confidential.
Not to mention that adcoms read hundreds of folders and would have a very hard time reconstituting their thought processes even a week after the decisions were made.</p>
<p>This assumes that there is a credible reason. The reason may be as simple as different people read the folder or the political bias of the reader. Of course, state college admissions should be more transparent than private colleges and perhaps not use “holistic” approach to the same degree, but the fact is there not. There have been several posts about Cali students successfully appealing decisions at UCLA and Cal. Perhaps a request to thoroughly review application framed in most pleasant terms might yield some result, particularly if school has “summer melt”. I agree that application must not have major flaw to gain the acceptance it did. My son also fared better at reaches than matches. Yield, money, who knows the lurking factors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m curious why you think this is so. State universities do have an obligation to educate the sons and daughters of their particular state (though, again, this doesn’t mean they all get entrance into the flagship), but I’m not sure why they should not be as “holistic” in their admissions as any other school. And, really, why should they be more transparent? </p>
<p>As I said before, I do think an interesting question the OP should ask himself is, given the same set of circumstances (except substitute a private school here), would he still consider a lawsuit, or is this really all about taxes?</p>
<p>I do think there are plenty of universities out there that go “strictly by the numbers,” and surely the OP is aware of them. I also strongly suspect that his own state system has another campus that might be less “holistic” than the flagship; hence, his son could have gone there and still be educated by the state university to which his father/mother pays taxes…</p>
<p>BTW, my D was also in the position that she did better at her highest ranked schools and received her one waitlist (which she declined) at one slightly below the top.</p>
<p>sometimes ppl need to accept that not everyone wants them,… but there will always be a school that will accept you. sometimes even better. so don’t get to into the whole thing of trying to sue.</p>
<p>chioma999: I agree ^. I also think the whole idea of a lawsuit would say to the son, too, that the school that ultimately accepted him (and that he will presumably attend) is somehow the “lesser” school. Since this sounds like an equally impressive out-of-state public, this isn’t the case. I do suspect, though, that pursuing something like this would hurt his son in many ways, on many levels, for a long time.</p>
<p>I teach at several institutions of higher learning (one full-time; two part-time to fund non-state supported education of D and S) and have the highest respect for what we do. I think my colleagues are as gifted as any I’ve encountered at more elite universities. However, I do think the missions of public and private institutions are slightly different. Yes, I do feel that because the public institution is funded by public funds its procedures should be answerable to what is equitable, whereas the private institution is morally free to base decisions on institutional needs. I have seen so much inexplicable decision making in the college admissions game (not sour grapes – both kids in first choice schools) that I take the poster’s assertions that her son is the better candidate on face value. I don’t think public institutions should evolve into beauty contests because the first job of an academic institution is to educate. No, I don’t think numbers tell the entire story; more should be considered beyond GPA and SAT scores, but I assumed given poster’s son’s success as OOS at a comparable institution these were strong as well. I guess I feel that public monies should be distributed as equitably as possible, and if considerations include AA or first generation college attendance or response to serious obstacle in student’s dossier I’m more than okay with that, but I think school should articulate this, not on case by case basis but in terms of overall policy.</p>
<p>mythmom: I agree that the “missions” of public and private institutions are different. Absolutely. I also agree that the “first job of an academic institution is to educate.” And while I doubt many public institutions go so far as to take the violin player over the tuba player, or take a student because he/she expresses interest in a tiny department that desperately needs students (at least, I hope not)-- I do think there are many other “holistic decisions” that come into play, and well they should (my opinion). That almost certainly includes quality of essays; recommendation letters; legacies; first generation college; outstanding extracurriculars, etc. I also suspect most (all?) public universities do articulate the terms of their overall admissions policies and are much more transparent than private universities in this regard. </p>
<p>Still, I remain dumbfounded that people consider it quite natural and reasonable for private universities (for which people are willing to pay upwards of $45,000 a year to attend) to make non-transparent admission decisions every year–decisions that seem to leave people scratching their heads and at a complete loss. I just find this curious. I agree, though, that public institutions should not “evolve into beauty contests.” I don’t think private ones should, either.</p>
<p>The “public funding” in question is about 11% of the school’s budget. They get over 60% of the seats in each class. Sounds more than fair to me.</p>
<p>I find this a very strange reasoning, as if colleges somehow were choosing to go into something other than education when making admissions decisions.
Yes, the role of institutions of higher learning is to educate. In this particular case, the institution chose to educate–just someone other than the OP’s son.</p>
<p>"decisions that seem to leave people scratching their heads and at a complete loss. I just find this curious. "</p>
<p>The acceptances usually don’t leave people scratching their heads – it’s the denials. And when you consider the volume of applications versus the number of spots available in the private schools, then the head-scratching makes sense. They cannot accept all qualified students, but most, if not all, students who <em>are</em> accepted seem worthy.</p>
<p>momwaitingfornew:</p>
<p>Let me just say upfront that my daughter also got into her top choice school (as well as the other schools to which she applied), so I have no ax to grind here at all. I’m with others here who certainly believe that the OP has no case and probably could have received a (partially) state-funded education in his own state, just not at his flagship.</p>
<p>I’m merely stating that I find it curious that people seem to think that public universities do (and should?) go strictly by the numbers. They don’t (at least, some don’t), and I don’t think they should.</p>
<p>Sure they can be sued. The likelihood of winning is slim to none. The attorney will be happy to collect his fee though.</p>
<p>Agreed, Jack, although public schools tend to weigh the numbers more heavily than do the private schools. I think this emphasis is correct, given the mandate; however, it would be unrealistic to believe that they depend (or should depend) solely on stats, as you note. </p>
<p>Public schools, just like private ones, need their athletes, their performers, their . . . whatevers, and so they must discriminate among the thousands of applicants to find a diverse yet solid class.</p>
<p>Do you know what the recommendations for all the students involved looked like?</p>
<p>Wow, Zoosermom!</p>
<p>We do not know what our S’s recs contained (waived confidentiality) let alone what teachers and GCs wrote about other students!</p>
<p>“We do not know what our S’s recs contained (waived confidentiality) let alone what teachers and GCs wrote about other students!”</p>
<p>I’m speculating, of course, but I would imagine it would be possible that an incredibly stellar (or poor) recommendation might be a tipping factor? ZG didn’t apply to elite schools, but her rep at the college of her heart mentioned how incredible one of her recommendations was.</p>
<p>Zoosermom:</p>
<p>Yes, it could, as could a ho-hum essay, or a rec by a well-meaning but misguided teacher. For example, a teacher who wrote about a student who stayed after school to do extra work, was very diligent, conscientious and so on, might think s/he’s doing the student a favor by highlighting positive traits. But an adcom might interpret all these encomiums as depicting a student who is a hard worker but lacks a certain “spark.”</p>
<p>I understand your point (i.e., using the wrong code words), but its speaks to the surreal state of college admissions that a teacher who describes a student as “very diligent, conscientious and so on” could be considered misguided.</p>
<p>The process at UW–test scores low on list. Class rank high.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.admissions.wisc.edu/hsnews/hsnewsfall06.pdf[/url]”>http://www.admissions.wisc.edu/hsnews/hsnewsfall06.pdf</a></p>