nwebb22 Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 This kind of statement bothers me. I have seen it on many forums, not just this one. Why would you ask someone to rush their own process, just to suit your needs? You were wait-listed for a reason. That reason being that you were not good enough to be offered the first time around. So don't take your frustration out on those that were initially accepted. If you've been accepted somewhere, you probably understand the feeling that you would like plenty of time to make your decision. Those that have been accepted deserve to have all of the allotted time to make their decision. You would demand the same, don't act like you wouldn't. In my opinion, it is extremely selfish and unprofessional to partake in such behavior. Wait your turn; it is a wait-list, after all. Just my two cents. Carry on. Prospective Soc Student, nbrown07, waitforit and 42 others 15 30
starmaker Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 Your overall point is a valid one - the pleas from the wait-listed people annoy me sometimes too - but the way you put it is really jerkish. Grad admissions decisions aren't some straight ranking of merit where all of the people who get accepted are "better" than the people who were waitlisted. They're influenced by things like whether your particular advisors of interest know that they're going to have enough funding to bring on a new grad student (or for that matter, how much influence your particular advisors of interest have on the admissions committee). Or the random chance of who on the admissions committee happened to be the one to do the initial read of your app. I'm not trying to claim that merit plays little or no role in admissions decisions - obviously it plays a very large role - just that it's less straightforward than you seem to think. I got accepted to multiple good programs in my field, and was not waitlisted anywhere, so this isn't my own self-interest or defensiveness talking here. largo, psychgurl, sareth and 8 others 11
3point14 Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 Hm, I agree with starmaker. I think a lot of times the difference between being on a waitlist and being accepted has more to do with funding than quality of the applicant. obsessovernothing, phonology_rocks and tiredwaiting 3
nwebb22 Posted April 5, 2012 Author Posted April 5, 2012 Points taken. Please note that I was not trying to be jerkish, I was simply being honest. I only said "not good enough". In comparison to the other applicants, would this statement not hold a significant amount of truth? I didn't define "good enough" as higher GPAs and GREs. I'm talking about overall package here. For instance, I am wait-listed at a school right now. If that means that there is not enough funding for me, that means I was not good enough (in whatever fashion) to make the cut. This isn't Little League; not everyone makes the team -- I know that, and that was my point above. I wasn't trying to be rude or nasty. I'm just callin' it like I see it. This is far from the discussion I was introducing, though. It was more of an ethical question about how to act while on a wait-list. And my opinion is that it is disrespectful to rush others for your own benefit. Thank you for your responses, though. Don't mind me -- I'm only posting because it's another boring Spring Break day for me. I'll be gone next week. contretemps, ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid, go3187 and 14 others 5 12
3point14 Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 Erm, I think you may have missed a little of the point. But good luck to you in your applications and future studies! Also, this is completely off topic, but nwebb2, I noticed that you posted that you were from TN but going to VT. That's funny because I'm currently living in Blacksburg, but I'm originally from northeast TN Chronos and 3point14 1 1
surefire Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 I feel compelled to add, just so that wait-listers and decision-makers are both stressing out in an informed fashion... This is not a 1:1 ratio thing. Depending on the flexibility that a department has, and/or its expectations regarding its offers, the admission committee may make a number of offers that TAKES INTO ACCOUNT the likelihood that a few of these will be declined by those in the first round. When I was on an admission committee, we were aiming to put together a cohort of 12. We extended 15 offers, assuming that a couple of people would decline. We had 5 prospective students that, for varying reasons, declined the offer. So we sent out 3 more offers, picking out the top three from our ranked waitlist. Two of these accepted (one had already accepted elsewhere). So there it was, our cohort of 12, assembled and finalized! In this case, 5 first-round declines only worked out to 3 more offers. There's a lot of room for variance (there's actually more complexity behind this anecdote, but I'll spare you the exacting requirements and limits pertaining to extending offers for international students...). These decisions are all huge, life-altering prospects, and they totally qualify for a latent level of stress. This is compounded by the fact that the process is obscured from us. This is why people flock to places like grad cafe - to get support and empathy but also input from others as we attempt to divine the adcomms decisions and decision-making process. I would not fault, or be hostile to, anyone who is trying to articulate a pattern to try and get some insight into their own outcome. With this in mind, I re-iterate: a declined acceptance does not a wait-lister offer make. If you're going to stress, at least stress in an informed fashion, lest the anxiety be ill-communicated/misdirected/only good for an ulcer. Chronos, psychgurl, obsessovernothing and 4 others 7
yoshiko Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 (edited) This PhD application season has been one of the most emotional processes I've ever been through - when I applied to these programs, I thought I had them all ranked out and was sure I knew where I wanted to go if I received a good offer. Wow was I wrong. This is one of the biggest decisions of our lives and there is no right or wrong way to make it at this point (unless you say yes to all your offers!). All we can do is trust ourselves in the end...and that scares the shit out of me and so I am taking my time. Edited April 5, 2012 by yoshiko obsessovernothing and felicidad 1 1
felicidad Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 I accidentally upvoted this, and meant to downvote it.... Negative attitudes like yours are why collegiality is such a concern in many departments. Please consider how unnecessarily negative your perspective is, and also whether or not it is truly a valid position to take (specifically your view that waitlisters were not good enough). ANLstyle, cogcul, obsessovernothing and 6 others 7 2
largo Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 (edited) Points taken. Please note that I was not trying to be jerkish, I was simply being honest. I only said "not good enough". In comparison to the other applicants, would this statement not hold a significant amount of truth? I didn't define "good enough" as higher GPAs and GREs. I'm talking about overall package here. For instance, I am wait-listed at a school right now. If that means that there is not enough funding for me, that means I was not good enough (in whatever fashion) to make the cut. This isn't Little League; not everyone makes the team -- I know that, and that was my point above. I wasn't trying to be rude or nasty. I'm just callin' it like I see it. This is far from the discussion I was introducing, though. It was more of an ethical question about how to act while on a wait-list. And my opinion is that it is disrespectful to rush others for your own benefit. Thank you for your responses, though. Don't mind me -- I'm only posting because it's another boring Spring Break day for me. I'll be gone next week. Apart from all the other points, no funding doesn't mean you were not good enough. It means that most of the schools run on a strict budget, the world economy is in a general state of crisis and especially international applicants cost more. You're soo wrong while you make assumptions about people's merits by simply taking their acceptance (or non-acceptance, for that matter) status. One of my friends was rejected by all the middle rank schools she applied (7 ones, and the only one she was accepted was without funding) and got accepted only to Yale. What would you say about that? Edited April 5, 2012 by largo go3187, foucaultmania, Eigen and 2 others 3 2
Darth.Vegan Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 Wow, I am not even going to state my opinion of the OP as it might get me reprimanded. To those wait-listed and freaking out, try and calm your nerves and don't take the callous comments of the OP to heart. Some people simply have NO TACT. SocMoon, Eigen, Darth.Vegan and 1 other 3 1
Eigen Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 I accidentally upvoted this, and meant to downvote it.... Negative attitudes like yours are why collegiality is such a concern in many departments. Please consider how unnecessarily negative your perspective is, and also whether or not it is truly a valid position to take (specifically your view that waitlisters were not good enough). Don't worry, we crossed. I meant to upvote it and actually downvoted it. While not the most tactfully written piece, I think the OP does have a valid point: It's really not professional to guilt someone else into rushing their decision so you can take their place. And I think a lot of the rancor generated has to do with the "not good enough" idea posited. I think the point that was trying to be made was that, given funding restraints, schools will make offers to those they feel would best fit the school. If you were waitlisted, it means they liked you and would like you to come, but not as much as someone not on the waitlist. It's not that you aren't good enough to go to the school- in fact, there are lots of people that get rejected every year that were more than "good enough" for the school, but admissions are competitive. In this case, "not good enough" means that you weren't as good as other applicants on the list. In general, I think everyone in here is way too worked up and needs to calm down a bit, and not see each others posts through such personally tinted lenses. Ladril, FertMigMort, contretemps and 7 others 7 3
RefurbedScientist Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 Speaking personally, the knowledge that people were on the wait list at programs to which I had been accepted actually motivated me to "tear off the band-aid", so to speak, and decline offers. Because writing to faculty at these programs, faculty with whom I had developed a rapport over several months, to tell them that I won't be working with them next year is very emotionally trying, I would have liked to put off the unpleasant task. However, because people I knew (mostly on these boards) were really enthusiastic about getting off the wait list at these programs, I sucked it up, got over my cold feet, and sent the hard email. I didn't necessarily need all the much time to make informed decisions about each and every one of the programs I wasn't going to attend. I understand that, for some programs, you do need all the time you can get. That's where I'm at now with my top two choices. But for the couple of programs that weren't on the top of my list, it was really important to me to decline the offer just to open up spots for my future colleagues. This might be a function of the fact that I am also personally familiar with being on the wait list, too. I just hope that, in all things, we can use our imaginations to empathize with those who we may not know in person. Two cents. FertMigMort, socscholar, largo and 10 others 12 1
felicidad Posted April 5, 2012 Posted April 5, 2012 Don't worry, we crossed. I meant to upvote it and actually downvoted it. While not the most tactfully written piece, I think the OP does have a valid point: It's really not professional to guilt someone else into rushing their decision so you can take their place. And I think a lot of the rancor generated has to do with the "not good enough" idea posited. I think the point that was trying to be made was that, given funding restraints, schools will make offers to those they feel would best fit the school. If you were waitlisted, it means they liked you and would like you to come, but not as much as someone not on the waitlist. It's not that you aren't good enough to go to the school- in fact, there are lots of people that get rejected every year that were more than "good enough" for the school, but admissions are competitive. In this case, "not good enough" means that you weren't as good as other applicants on the list. In general, I think everyone in here is way too worked up and needs to calm down a bit, and not see each others posts through such personally tinted lenses. I wasn't on any waitlists, and I don't think I'm the only one in the thread who can say that. Furthermore, the 10 downvotes suggest that more people disagreed than replied. I don't know what the acceptance status is of the people who have not posted in the thread, but I don't think we can assume that they are all waitlisters who took the post personally. There is nothing personal about what I posted, other than that I found the OP distasteful. I'm not particularly swayed by the "valid point without tact" argument, either. Most people on waitlists have not asked other people to hurry up with their decisions, so the OP mostly succeeded in insulting a wide swathe of people, while not really calling anyone out. I don't take issue, by the way, with the assertion that people have the right to use the time they've been given as they see fit. I just have a problem with the specious assertion that people on the waitlist weren't good enough when there's abundant evidence that highly qualified candidates outnumber available spots. Also, someone may be crossing their fingers to get off the waitlist into one school while having gotten accepted to "better" ones. obsessovernothing 1
avee Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 I accidentally upvoted this, and meant to downvote it.... Negative attitudes like yours are why collegiality is such a concern in many departments. Please consider how unnecessarily negative your perspective is, and also whether or not it is truly a valid position to take (specifically your view that waitlisters were not good enough). Thank you felicidad. I am shocked by what you wrote, nwebb. I think you need to change your attitude and reevaluate the experience for all of those applying. Being waitlisted does not have much to do with "not being good enough"-- I can't believe you would even say that! Good luck in your academic career. I am sure your attitude toward your future colleagues will get you far. FertMigMort, avee, socscholar and 1 other 4
princesspi Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 (edited) <p> Speaking personally, the knowledge that people were on the wait list at programs to which I had been accepted actually motivated me to "tear off the band-aid", so to speak, and decline offers. Because writing to faculty at these programs, faculty with whom I had developed a rapport over several months, to tell them that I won't be working with them next year is very emotionally trying, I would have liked to put off the unpleasant task. However, because people I knew (mostly on these boards) were really enthusiastic about getting off the wait list at these programs, I sucked it up, got over my cold feet, and sent the hard email. I feel the same way. I don't feel like the board "rushed" me, but they did make me realize that I should make my decision promptly. (Those were hard emails to send :/ ) I don't know, I don't really see the annoyance with waitlist people. This board provides them a space to vent and have hope. I wish them all the best because this whole graduate school process was so "AAHHHHH!!!" Edited April 6, 2012 by princesspi psychgurl, cogcul, SocMoon and 3 others 6
psychgurl Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 <p> I feel the same way. I don't feel like the board "rushed" me, but they did make me realize that I should make my decision promptly. (Those were hard emails to send :/ ) I don't know, I don't really see the annoyance with waitlist people. This board provides them a space to vent and have hope. I wish them all the best because this whole graduate school process was so "AAHHHHH!!!" Yes, exactly. This is the place for people to vent. If you don't like a thread, I say just move on. I mean, how much pressure are the gradcafe threads really putting on you to make a decision? If anyone should know the "AHHHHHH!!!" feeling it's us! obsessovernothing and princesspi 2
RefurbedScientist Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 This is somewhat off-topic, but I had this bizzarre half-waking stress dream about grad school decisions last night (normal occurrence these days). I came up with this hypothetical where two applicants, let's call them Jack and Jill, have been accepted to School A and School B respectively and wait listed at the other. That is, Jack got into School A and was waitlisted at B. Jill got into School B and got waitlisted at A. But Jack really wants to go to school B and Jill really wants to go to school A. So both of them sit on their respective offers, waiting to get off the waitlist at their dream school. But because neither is taking action and declining their offer, no spots are opening up for them to get off the waitlist. Jack would have to take some wild chance and decline his offer at School A, thus opening up a spot off the waitlist at A for Jill, who would subsequently turn down her offer from School B, thus opening up a spot off the waitlist at B for Jack. Or vice versa. But, assuming Jack and Jill aren't in communication and can't collude, no rational prospective grad student is going to turn down a bird in the hand! When you start dreaming in game theory about grad school decisions, you know April 15 is just 10 days away... (also, insofar as grad cafe if a medium for prospectives to collude, then it may actually help people make informed decisions, rather than pressure them into rushing, as we can potentially consult others about their decisions first) Quant_Liz_Lemon, avee, tomatoonwheat and 2 others 5
moraurora Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 "You were wait-listed for a reason. That reason being that you were not good enough to be offered the first time around." So I guess those who are rejected totally suck, right? Because they are not good enough even to enter the wait list. I will not say that your attitude is negative, it is, but there is more: You are wrong. I know people who made it to the #1 program but rejected and wait listed from other departments. The program I am in right now (top 5) rejected a friend of mine, but that friend of mine entered into two other programs (top ten) which wait listed and rejected me. Now that's a riddle! Being wait listed or even rejected more often than not doesn't have anything to do with you being good enough or not. I wrote elsewhere, this application process is first of all about luck. I have a friend who is in top 3 program, but if she didn't apply in 2010-2011 but say apply this year, she would not be there right now, because her advisor only accepts students in every 5 years. Last year she was accepting students, this year she is not in the committee. I am not going to say anything else on this topic. I only needed to write this post because there might be people who read the stuff written about and feel horrible. My words are to those: being wait listed or rejected is not related to your "quality". I have had enough experience with this whole application process for years, and I have seen enough to prove that statement wrong. If you're wait listed, hope for the best, if you're rejected, try to find other schools with better fit, and apply again. Best of luck to all of you. Ladril, tt503, Eigen and 1 other 3 1
JohnBom Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 being wait listed or rejected is not related to your "quality". don't you think that's too strong of a statement? of course, luck is a big component of the admissions, but I think it's fair to say that the "quality" also plays some role.
Darth.Vegan Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 don't you think that's too strong of a statement? of course, luck is a big component of the admissions, but I think it's fair to say that the "quality" also plays some role. Of course it does, but many of the applicants are so close together in qualifications that is a pretty weak argument to make. largo 1
moraurora Posted April 8, 2012 Posted April 8, 2012 in the previous paragraph I said: "Being wait listed or even rejected more often than not doesn't have anything to do with you being good enough or not." I meant, usually, this is the case. Of course there are exceptions. to sum up, i definitely agree with what xdarthveganx says.
Ladril Posted April 12, 2012 Posted April 12, 2012 Why would you ask someone to rush their own process, just to suit your needs? I think some of us read those posts differently between the lines. What people are saying is not: "hurry up so you can open a slot for me", but rather "don't sit on an offer you know you're not going to accept". This happens much more often than it should. ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid, largo, obsessovernothing and 1 other 4
Ladril Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Don't believe people sit on their offers for no good reason? Read the following: http://science-professor.blogspot.mx/2008/03/omg-you-dont-suck.html
davolicious Posted November 4, 2012 Posted November 4, 2012 When I was applying, the last school I visited didn't have their official weekend until the end of March. Although I was leaning torward that school, it's hard to make a decision without visiting, yet several people posted (off-topic) in threads telling me to decline my offers at specific schools because they or their friend were waitlisted there. Some of these were single-posters (you can check stats), and I'm guessing one person created multiple accounts to bother me. I got several private messages as well. Needless to say, I recognize other people are stressed about being waitlisted, but there are good ways and bad ways to handle it.
Guest Gnome Chomsky Posted November 4, 2012 Posted November 4, 2012 People are really taking the OP's "not good enough" statement out of context and too personally. Sure, the OP could have selected his/her words more carefully, but I think the point he/she was trying to make is pretty clear. Yes, schools have a certain level of standards. Don't apply to MIT with a 2.5 GPA and bottom 10 percentile GRE scores. However, if you were good enough to make the wait-list you more than likely met all the school's standards and some, and you ultimately were "good enough" to get in. I think what the OP was trying to say is that the school you were applying to felt that you were not a good enough fit (or choice) for them as some of the applicants who weren't wait-listed. This has nothing to do with you not being smart enough or hard working enough, but it has to do with the school feeling another applicant better fits the direction the school wants to take. I don't see how this is so hard to understand. Yes, the OP was careless in his/her choice of words, but many people were careless in their comprehension of what the OP meant. firstsight 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now