DO NOT apply to Wisconsin Madison

[jeffcross]

I'm an international student living outside US but I got the offer from UWM. By the way, I rejected the offer because it was very late (~mid april).

I think it depends on the program u are applying to. Mine is Endocrinology and Reproductive PhD program.

[Igotnothin]

The application fee is not to have his application reviewed. It's to cover the costs of processing his application. This has already been said, several times. 

 

Similarly, the leap from "frequently" to "always" isn't a good logical one to make. The OP never got any direct confirmation that the admissions committee did not look at his, or other, international student applications. 

 

Chances are, they looked at them generally before the first round of invites, to see if there were any outstanding international students that they might want to make an exception for. 

 

Generally, schools can fall into tight spots because most extend more offers than they can take students, to start with, knowing that a percentage of the students won't accept. Most schools have the flexibility to take one or two more students than they had planned. If, for some reason, the acceptance rate was unusually high in their first batch of invites this year, they may not have had room anyone else. 

 

It sucks, but it's not particularly unfair. 

 

Also, I see a lot of logical gaps- you seem to be inferring that US citizens living abroad would not be considered in the first batch, but I don't see any evidence of that from what you've given of the schools policies. Domestic usually refers to US citizens, no matter where they're living. 

 

You're contradicting yourself here. First you say that the fee is just for processing, i.e. you are not entitled to a review. Then you say the OP should not be upset because "chances are" the ADCOM scanned his application.

 

The question is, is it unethical for a grad school to accept a $100 application fee and not even open the application? I think we all know the answer to that.

[TakeruK]

You're contradicting yourself here. First you say that the fee is just for processing, i.e. you are not entitled to a review. Then you say the OP should not be upset because "chances are" the ADCOM scanned his application.

 

The question is, is it unethical for a grad school to accept a $100 application fee and not even open the application? I think we all know the answer to that.

 

In my opinion, it is ethical for a grad school to accept a $100 application fee, if at the time of the application solicitation, they had every intention of reviewing each candidate for admission. Similarly, it is ethical for a graduate student to accept a school's offer to fly them out, buy them dinner, show them around the campus and city if at the time of the offer, they still have intention to consider that school for their final decision.

 

However, things change between solicitation and final decision. For example, a program might decide that they have no money to support any students in Subfield X and thus reject every student applying to Subfield X within their program without much more review than glancing at it to determine it is a "Subfield X" applicant. Or, the department might have a limit on the number of international students it can support (either financially or because of policy), and it turns out that one of the international students needs another year so they can't accept international students any more. So, they might only review these applicants by determining that yes they are international and then reject (or put aside in case things change again).

 

Similarly, a student might first get an offer from School B, their last choice school, and School B might ask them to visit and the student would agree because at that time, they do have every intention to consider School B. However, let's say just before student is about to leave to visit School B, they get an offer from School A which they are sure to accept over School B. I would say it's still ethical for the student to carry on with the visit to School B (at school B's expense) even though there is almost no chance of the student attending B, because at the time of the offer, the student did plan to consider School B.

 

I think in the very rare case where a department decides that it cannot make any offers at all, to anyone, then the applicants are entitled to a refund (as they are applying for positions that don't exist). Otherwise, if you are going to complain that a school prioritizes students in the US over students from overseas, then you are saying that every applicant who does not get their file reviewed because it's automatically trashed due to a low GPA/GRE/whatever deserves their money back too. Again, the money is for processing the application (i.e. creating that application software, paying for people to update it, paying for staff to compile application package and/or doing some filtering etc.). 

[Eigen]

You're contradicting yourself here. First you say that the fee is just for processing, i.e. you are not entitled to a review. Then you say the OP should not be upset because "chances are" the ADCOM scanned his application.

 

The question is, is it unethical for a grad school to accept a $100 application fee and not even open the application? I think we all know the answer to that.

 

Just because my post addressed two different points does not mean my post is contradictory. 

 

On the first part, a fee does not entitle you to a review. It's for processing, it does not pay for the admissions committee to review your application. 

 

On the second part, even if the fee does not entitle you to a review, you might still feel put out if your application wasn't even reviewed. 

 

As to your second paragraph, I don't know why people seem to bring application fees into this. It's not like the school makes money off of them, it's not like anyone in the department sees that money and it pays a salary. The fee is for the graduate school to process and file your application. That's it. 

 

And yes, I think with or without the fee, you would have a right to be upset if the institution tossed your application without looking at it. But there's absolutely no evidence that that happened here, or has happened anywhere else. 

[bsharpe269]

I think in the very rare case where a department decides that it cannot make any offers at all, to anyone, then the applicants are entitled to a refund (as they are applying for positions that don't exist). Otherwise, if you are going to complain that a school prioritizes students in the US over students from overseas, then you are saying that every applicant who does not get their file reviewed because it's automatically trashed due to a low GPA/GRE/whatever deserves their money back too. Again, the money is for processing the application (i.e. creating that application software, paying for people to update it, paying for staff to compile application package and/or doing some filtering etc.). 

 

This is a great point. Applications are thrown out all the time with a simple glance at GPA. I dont think that the school did anything unethical here. They are not required to review your complete application. I agree with others who mentioned that they at least probably skimmed them over quickly, checking for outstanding applicants like someone with a first author publication in science for example. I doubt this process is all that different than how domestic applications are handled. I bet the knock off half of the applications with a quick glance through the pile.

 

I do agree with the OP that it would be great if the school was more upfront about their policies. For example, they could mention on their webiste that they only accept X number of international students on average each year. If this number is less than 1 then many international applicants might reconsider applying.

[Igotnothin]

Just because my post addressed two different points does not mean my post is contradictory. 

 

On the first part, a fee does not entitle you to a review. It's for processing, it does not pay for the admissions committee to review your application. 

 

On the second part, even if the fee does not entitle you to a review, you might still feel put out if your application wasn't even reviewed. 

 

As to your second paragraph, I don't know why people seem to bring application fees into this. It's not like the school makes money off of them, it's not like anyone in the department sees that money and it pays a salary. The fee is for the graduate school to process and file your application. That's it. 

 

And yes, I think with or without the fee, you would have a right to be upset if the institution tossed your application without looking at it. But there's absolutely no evidence that that happened here, or has happened anywhere else. 

 

Okay, so you at least concede that "you would have a right to be upset" which is close enough to "it is unethical" for me. Here is the evidence that has happened here:

 

 

Hi X,

 

Thank you for your patience. We complete reviews, interviews, and admissions for applicants within the U.S. borders first. We then review external applicants. Frequently, this first phase fills the slots available. I will email you when a decision is made.

 

Thank you for your interest in our program.

 

X

[GeoDUDE!]

Okay, so you at least concede that "you would have a right to be upset" which is close enough to "it is unethical" for me. Here is the evidence that has happened here:

 

Four points:

 

1) The email you described above shows that they expect to review external applicants at least some of the time. There is no way of knowing before hand how many quality applicants from the first round will accept, and, if there are enough quality applicants from the first round.

 

It would be "unethical" (in your definition) for them to not review your application if they knew they wouldn't take on any external applicants before hand. They obviously didn't.

 

Lets take a corollary example that was already used in this thread, but flesh it out more. Say you scored 305 combined on the GRE and were applying to MIT. You then email MIT, asking if there is a cutoff for GRE scores. They respond, like most top programs, that there is no cutoff and they look at applications holistically. You then find yourself rejected from MIT, because the score they  gave your GPA+ GRE put you very low on the list, because the average MIT applicant might score 320+. You never had a chance to be admitted. Is this "unethical" ? I would suggest no. On rare occasions, someone with a low GRE gets into MIT, and that brings up the possibility of admissions for someone with a low GRE but perhaps not you. 

 

2) There is no evidence they did not at least look over external applicants to see if they were missing out on a "special" applicant.  It all depends on their definition of "review" applicants, but generally that means that someone from the Adcomm looks at it. Before all that happens, applicants are processed, and weeded out. The secretary ( or head of grad admissions from the dept) often looks for outstanding applicants from the get go, no matter where they are from.  But deciding to give someone an interview requires a review first, and that generally involves a few members of the adcomm discussing the applicant, if it be by email or at a round table. 

 

3) If you got a rejection letter, chances are your application was processed which is what the fee is for. I think it is worse when you don't get any notice of your rejection, but that also happens. 

 

4) You have a strange definition of 'unethical'. Generally, when someone is unethical, he/she does not adhere to some sort of standard that a group of people or profession make common place; what you have described here is fairly common at public institutions in the united states, so by admissions standards its easily ethical. when you say 'upset' is close enough to 'unethical', I find that alarming. These two things couldn't be further apart! I get upset when my dog dies. Is it unethical for dogs to die? It is unethical when someone gets paid more to do the same job I do, and sure, I get upset because of that, but that is secondary. One is an emotional reaction, the other is a classification of an action. 

 

 

What this all boils down to is someone crying over split milk, in my opinion. I would say that trying to slander a school just because you are upset you didn't get in is more "unethical" than anything the school did.

[sacklunch]

Lots of international schools do the same. Canadian schools, for example, often take citizens first because international students cost a lot more. I think this is somewhat common across the board, though admittedly the way they addressed this 'issue' was less than diplomatic. Move on, mate. 

[Igotnothin]

Four points:

 

1) The email you described above shows that they expect to review external applicants at least some of the time. There is no way of knowing before hand how many quality applicants from the first round will accept, and, if there are enough quality applicants from the first round.

 

It would be "unethical" (in your definition) for them to not review your application if they knew they wouldn't take on any external applicants before hand. They obviously didn't.

 

Lets take a corollary example that was already used in this thread, but flesh it out more. Say you scored 305 combined on the GRE and were applying to MIT. You then email MIT, asking if there is a cutoff for GRE scores. They respond, like most top programs, that there is no cutoff and they look at applications holistically. You then find yourself rejected from MIT, because the score they  gave your GPA+ GRE put you very low on the list, because the average MIT applicant might score 320+. You never had a chance to be admitted. Is this "unethical" ? I would suggest no. On rare occasions, someone with a low GRE gets into MIT, and that brings up the possibility of admissions for someone with a low GRE but perhaps not you. 

 

2) There is no evidence they did not at least look over external applicants to see if they were missing out on a "special" applicant.  It all depends on their definition of "review" applicants, but generally that means that someone from the Adcomm looks at it. Before all that happens, applicants are processed, and weeded out. The secretary ( or head of grad admissions from the dept) often looks for outstanding applicants from the get go, no matter where they are from.  But deciding to give someone an interview requires a review first, and that generally involves a few members of the adcomm discussing the applicant, if it be by email or at a round table. 

 

3) If you got a rejection letter, chances are your application was processed which is what the fee is for. I think it is worse when you don't get any notice of your rejection, but that also happens. 

 

4) You have a strange definition of 'unethical'. Generally, when someone is unethical, he/she does not adhere to some sort of standard that a group of people or profession make common place; what you have described here is fairly common at public institutions in the united states, so by admissions standards its easily ethical. when you say 'upset' is close enough to 'unethical', I find that alarming. These two things couldn't be further apart! I get upset when my dog dies. Is it unethical for dogs to die? It is unethical when someone gets paid more to do the same job I do, and sure, I get upset because of that, but that is secondary. One is an emotional reaction, the other is a classification of an action. 

 

 

What this all boils down to is someone crying over split milk, in my opinion. I would say that trying to slander a school just because you are upset you didn't get in is more "unethical" than anything the school did.

 

SMH.

[Eigen]

Also, as has been pointed out in this thread, they did review international applicants this year, as at least one got in. 

 

So the evidence points to the fact that they did at least review all the applications the received, you just didn't get accepted. 

 

Also, "you have a right to be upset" does not equal "unethical". There are lots of things you would have a right to be upset about that are perfectly ethical. Doesn't mean they might not upset you. 

[Igotnothin]

Also, as has been pointed out in this thread, they did review international applicants this year, as at least one got in. 

 

So the evidence points to the fact that they did at least review all the applications the received, you just didn't get accepted. 

 

Also, "you have a right to be upset" does not equal "unethical". There are lots of things you would have a right to be upset about that are perfectly ethical. Doesn't mean they might not upset you. 

 

Again, you're implying that the grad school isn't at fault because they in fact did review everybody's application. But that's not what we're arguing. The question is whether it is unethical for a grad school to accept $100 then drop your unopened envelope in the trash (which the OP's e-mail indicates happens at least some of the time). Poll 1,000 non-academics and you might have one person say it's ethical.

 

The issue of "processing" is unimportant unless processing involves some sort of evaluation, i.e. looking at test scores, and in that case the application actually has been reviewed.

[GeoDUDE!]

Again, you're implying that the grad school isn't at fault because they in fact did review everybody's application. But that's not what we're arguing. The question is whether it is unethical for a grad school to accept $100 then drop your unopened envelope in the trash (which the OP's e-mail indicates happens at least some of the time). Poll 1,000 non-academics and you might have one person say it's ethical.

 

The issue of "processing" is unimportant unless processing involves some sort of evaluation, i.e. looking at test scores, and in that case the application actually has been reviewed.

 

 

processing = acceptance of the application. It does not involve any evaluation. 

[Vene]

Again, you're implying that the grad school isn't at fault because they in fact did review everybody's application. But that's not what we're arguing. The question is whether it is unethical for a grad school to accept $100 then drop your unopened envelope in the trash (which the OP's e-mail indicates happens at least some of the time). Poll 1,000 non-academics and you might have one person say it's ethical.

 

The issue of "processing" is unimportant unless processing involves some sort of evaluation, i.e. looking at test scores, and in that case the application actually has been reviewed.

At this point why don't you ask if application fees are even ethical in the first place? Compare it to applying for a job, you should never even consider applying to a job where you have to pay a fee, even though it costs the company (or other organization) money to process and review your resume.

 

Besides, the application was reviewed to at least some degree as when an applicant is classified as an international student they have been, strictly speaking, reviewed. What degree of review is required for it to be ethical to accept the fee?

[Igotnothin]

processing = acceptance of the application. It does not involve any evaluation. 

 

Yeah that's what I'm saying. I don't think there is any important distinction between the application being processed and then not reviewed and it not even being processed. Either way, the acceptance probability is 0.

[Igotnothin]

At this point why don't you ask if application fees are even ethical in the first place? Compare it to applying for a job, you should never even consider applying to a job where you have to pay a fee, even though it costs the company (or other organization) money to process and review your resume.

 

Besides, the application was reviewed to at least some degree as when an applicant is classified as an international student they have been, strictly speaking, reviewed. What degree of review is required for it to be ethical to accept the fee?

 

Yeah, good question. I'm not sure whether app fees in general are ethical. You could make the argument that by having an app fee, you control the number of applications you get. Otherwise everyone would apply everywhere and it would put a strain on the admissions committees. But I think $100 is too high, and introduces a bias against lower SES applicants. I know a lot of schools will waive the fee for low-income applicants, but that's extra paperwork and could still sway such applicants to not apply at all.

 

Putting an "international" label on the envelope and then throwing it in the trash isn't a meaningful review. I know that it is common practice to have higher requirements for international applicants, but at the very very least you need to give them some non-zero probability of acceptance. Otherwise you're taking money for nothing.

[Vene]

Putting an "international" label on the envelope and then throwing it in the trash isn't a meaningful review. I know that it is common practice to have higher requirements for international applicants, but at the very very least you need to give them some non-zero probability of acceptance. Otherwise you're taking money for nothing.

I think your conclusion doesn't quite follow, nothing here said internationals never get further review, but that they get lower priority and it's possible for there to be a sufficient number of domestic students who fill the slots. If not, then they are considered. I think the GRE comparison is apt, it's a criterion where it weeds out applicants for round one, but doesn't mean they're not going to be selected during round two.

[Eigen]

The email(s) from the OP have done nothing to demonstrate that there were any international students who did not get a review. 

 

As to why the application fee is for processing and not a "meaningful" review- it's who it pays. 

 

The processing is done by a full time employee who takes, sorts, collates and checks application packages. Their salary is largely covered by the application fees. 

 

The "meaningful" review is done by a committee of faculty who receive no compensation for reviewing your applications. 

 

If your application was received, processed, entered into the system, sorted, and made it to the admissions committee, that's what your application fee paid for. If the admissions committee took a quick glance at your application, and didn't like the GRE scores, saw you were from a country they'd already taken enough students from, or that they couldn't support and tossed you into a rejection pile, you have gotten the service you "paid" for. 

 

As to whether application fees are worthwhile or not.... I think a lot fewer borderline cases would get review without it. The full time person who processes applications for our program is likely to pull out one or two as she gets them that might not make the cutoffs that are otherwise in place, but stand out as deserving a review. 

 

The alternate would be to not have application fees, not have that person, and have a computer system with strict cutoffs. I think it would serve a lot of people much more poorly. 

 

The other alternative would be to only take people by referral from an academic who has worked with that student and knows them, I suppose, but I don't think that would serve the majority of students well either. 

 

Paying $20-$100 to have someone take the time to correctly process your application, pending giving you hundreds of thousands of dollars in tuition waivers and stipends seems like a very small opportunity cost to me. 

[Igotnothin]

The email(s) from the OP have done nothing to demonstrate that there were any international students who did not get a review.

 

All right let me highlight the part that demonstrates that international applications frequently do not get reviewed.

 

 

Hi X,

 

Thank you for your patience. We complete reviews, interviews, and admissions for applicants within the U.S. borders first. We then review external applicants. Frequently, this first phase fills the slots available. I will email you when a decision is made.

 

Thank you for your interest in our program.

 

X

[GeoDUDE!]

Guess frequently means that applicants are never reviewed.

[TakeruK]

All right let me highlight the part that demonstrates that international applications frequently do not get reviewed.

 

 

Hi X,

 

Thank you for your patience. We complete reviews, interviews, and admissions for applicants within the U.S. borders first. We then review external applicants. Frequently, this first phase fills the slots available. I will email you when a decision is made.

 

Thank you for your interest in our program.

 

X

 

Consider this email:

Hi X,

 

Thank you for your patience. We complete reviews, interviews and admissions for students with GPAs of 3.6 or greater first. We then review applicants with GPAs below 3.6. Frequently, this phase fills the slots available. I will email you when a decision is made.

 

Thank you for your interest in our program.

Or,

Hi X,

 

Thank you for your patience. We complete reviews, interviews and admissions for students with degrees in Biology first. We then review applicants with undergrad degrees from other fields. Frequently, this phase fills the slots available. I will email you when a decision is made.

 

Thank you for your interest in our program.

Or,

 

Hi X,

 

Thank you for your patience. We complete reviews, interviews and admissions for students who apply within our application deadline first. We then review applicants applying after the deadline. Frequently, this phase fills the slots available. I will email you when a decision is made.

 

Thank you for your interest in our program.

 

My argument is that all of these cases are ethical, standard practice and equivalent with the email you receive. Even if the program did not publish the 3.6 cutoff, or the preference for Biology degrees, or the fact that applicants prior to the deadline get priority (although they should indicate what the deadline is).

 

There is nothing in this email that indicates any sort of wrongdoing. 

 

As for application fees in general, I think the main concern about collecting them in order to dissuade students from applying to 50+ schools is the bias against students with financial difficulties. However, almost every school allows and grants application fee waivers to students in this case, and I think this is a great solution to that problem.

[Eigen]

All right let me highlight the part that demonstrates that international applications frequently do not get reviewed.

 

 

Hi X,

 

Thank you for your patience. We complete reviews, interviews, and admissions for applicants within the U.S. borders first. We then review external applicants. Frequently, this first phase fills the slots available. I will email you when a decision is made.

 

Thank you for your interest in our program.

 

X

 

And as I've pointed out, they may still review the rest of the records for any outstanding students to either wait list or find some way to admit?

 

Just because the first wave, which may include some international students, can fill all the slots they have available by default does not mean that any applications weren't reviewed.  

[Igotnothin]

The verdict is in: Grad Cafe has no problem with the prospect of an international student spending many hours on an application and paying $100 and having zero probability of acceptance.

[Eigen]

Strawman arguments don't really help your case.

 

Nothing you've shown so far indicates a zero probability of acceptance. The fact that at least one international student was admitted, in fact, shows the opposite.

[TakeruK]

The verdict is in: Grad Cafe has no problem with the prospect of an international student spending many hours on an application and paying $100 and having zero probability of acceptance.

 

Technically, almost all of academia has no problem** with the prospect of any applicant spending many hours on an application and paying $100 and having an almost zero probability of acceptance if they do not meet the criteria for acceptance. It's up to the applicant to make the right decision to apply to schools that are a good fit for them (whether it's research fit or fit for things like the chances of someone with their background [nationality, undergrad degree, GPA, GRE, etc.] getting in the program). 

 

(** "no problem" as in, this is not unethical. However, ideally an applicant would have some people to turn to for advice so that they don't waste their money and time on schools that are not a good fit for them)

Edited September 6, 2014 by TakeruK

[Catria]

Some physics students say that UCSB is afflicted by the same problems with international applicants (this time there is no inclement weather to cancel flights at the same frequency as it is in the upper Midwest winter).