Stanford Early Notication, Waitlisted by Wash U!

jazzymom
Sun, 18 Mar 2007 13:30:14 +0000

That isn’t how Washu measures "good"ness.



And it isn’t how a lot of other top colleges, including the Ivy pantheon, define "good"ness either. If you were able to peruse the piles of accepted, rejected, waitlisted applications from Yale, Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Brown, etc., you would find something very similar. Students who were waitlisted despite stellar grades, scores, accomplishments and personal characteristics. They don’t have enough spots in the freshman class to take everyone who is qualified to be there so they look for other ways to make the selection among equally wonderful candidates.

Wonder123: Is Washu obligated in your mind to accept every one of the stellar candidates that apply, unlike the other top colleges who we all know turn away valedictorians and perfect SAT scorers left and right?

Why is Washu the one college that should be admitting every single one of the most outstanding candidates it receives? Even if two-thirds of them are applying for one particular career track…and even if that means the college would reject many other applicants it needs for its art school, its architecture school, it’s humanities and languages programs, etc. In your mind, Washu and Washu alone is obligated to admit every one of the top students on its waitlist or else it is doing something wrong that needs to be investigated. Why?

And if you’ll concede that the college isn’t actually obligated to admit every single one of the outstanding applicants that apply, what criteria would you find acceptable for them to use to narrow the list. When is it okay by you for Washu to deny admittance to one of these stellar candidates? Or do they really have to admit every single one for Washu to be “right” with you?