DO NOT apply to Wisconsin Madison

[Vene]

I have a problem with a school charging somebody $130 despite the fact that they have zero probability of acceptance (in years where domestics fill all available spots).

Because they totally know that ahead of time.

Not only is it unfair to the student, but I think it's bad for the department. They're willing to fill their seats with domestics without considering that a few of the international applicants could be head and shoulders more qualified than the domestics. If I was in the adcom's shoes I would be more inclined to go after the best of the best, as opposed to finding 12 "good enough" domestic applicants.

I find it highly unlikely that there are so many international applicants that much better qualified than domestic. If there are, by all means admit them (and UW-Madison does admit international students) but if a student costs twice as much to fund they really do need to be better in order to be worthwhile.

[NWFreeheel11]

I think we should agree that we all have slight variations of opinions on this. No one is going to change their mind and I think this forum should be about supporting and answering each other when we need help and insight into applications and grad school. 

 

I am a culprit of this argument, but lets strike a deal. 

 

Its understood that international applicants are to fill spots not used to educate US citizens for whom the universities were established. 

 

We all agree that they should be reviewed at some level. 

 

We disagree as to whether or not they are just thrown out instead of reviewed, and all evidence in the debate is conjecture and personal opinion about the wording of an email that none of us have actually seen first hand. 

 

Can we shake hands and start posting in sections other than this one and leave the program bashing to less public mediums of communication? 

[Igotnothin]

No, I'm sorry -- I'm not trying to argue that determining that an app is from an international student constitutes a review.

I meant to say: how are you sure that these schools didn't give you a full evaluation? I don't know how one would obtain that information, so I'm curious.

 

I guess I'm not talking about a specific case that is likely to come up, I'm more looking at the hypothetical scenario. In this case the OP's e-mail exchange with a person from the department suggested that some years all of the spots fill up with domestics, and international applications are therefore not even reviewed. Some members here expressed the opinion that if this happened to them, and they found out about it, they would not have a problem with it. I was surprised by that as I view a rejection without review as a very unfair event.

[Igotnothin]

Because they totally know that ahead of time.

I find it highly unlikely that there are so many international applicants that much better qualified than domestic. If there are, by all means admit them (and UW-Madison does admit international students) but if a student costs twice as much to fund they really do need to be better in order to be worthwhile.

 

And how do you determine whether international applicants "really are" better than your best domestic applicants if you don't review them?

[Igotnothin]

I think we should agree that we all have slight variations of opinions on this. No one is going to change their mind and I think this forum should be about supporting and answering each other when we need help and insight into applications and grad school. 

 

I am a culprit of this argument, but lets strike a deal. 

 

Its understood that international applicants are to fill spots not used to educate US citizens for whom the universities were established. 

 

We all agree that they should be reviewed at some level. 

 

We disagree as to whether or not they are just thrown out instead of reviewed, and all evidence in the debate is conjecture and personal opinion about the wording of an email that none of us have actually seen first hand. 

 

Can we shake hands and start posting in sections other than this one and leave the program bashing to less public mediums of communication? 

 

haha nope. In my view UW is doing a shady and unethical thing and I have no problem discussing it in a public forum. I doubt anybody from the UW adcom will ever see this but I hope they do. And I have absolutely no connection to the school or department - I am not "out to get" UW.

[Vene]

And how do you determine whether international applicants "really are" better than your best domestic applicants if you don't review them?

I'm 100% certain UW-Madison has reviewed international applicants and that the stats of its applicants don't dramatically change from year to year. When the domestic students that apply are above average or funding is below average it may not be worth spending significant time reviewing internationals. But, for years when funding is plentiful or domestic applicants are below average internationals can bolster the incoming cohort. Also, nothing is preventing international applicants from reaching out to professors of interest. That is a good way to bypass hurdles in the application process.

[Igotnothin]

I'm 100% certain UW-Madison has reviewed international applicants and that the stats of its applicants don't dramatically change from year to year. When the domestic students that apply are above average or funding is below average it may not be worth spending significant time reviewing internationals. But, for years when funding is plentiful or domestic applicants are below average internationals can bolster the incoming cohort. Also, nothing is preventing international applicants from reaching out to professors of interest. That is a good way to bypass hurdles in the application process.

 

I think implicitly you're assuming that above some threshold all prospective students are pretty much equal. If we can fill our class with domestic students that are qualified enough, why bother with international students? Well, because there is still a gradient in talent and credentials among those people who are deemed "good enough" to accept. There may very well be outstanding applicants from other countries who would accomplish more in your program, and do more for your program, than the 12 domestics who are "good enough." 

[Vene]

I think implicitly you're assuming that above some threshold all prospective students are pretty much equal. If we can fill our class with domestic students that are qualified enough, why bother with international students? Well, because there is still a gradient in talent and credentials among those people who are deemed "good enough" to accept. There may very well be outstanding applicants from other countries who would accomplish more in your program, and do more for your program, than the 12 domestics who are "good enough."

Your reading comprehension concerns me. There is nothing in what I said that suggests Wisconsin is settling for those who are "good enough." I suppose it's possible that during a year with above average domestic applicants a truly phenomenal international student may be overlooked. But, ask yourself, is it likely that somebody that far beyond what they see year after year is going to apply? Is this applicant really going to go to Wisconsin if they're that phenomenal? Is it worth the resources year after year to search for a needle in a haystack when Wisconsin is already able to recruit fantastic students?

Speaking of resources, somebody is going to have to be paid to look through all of their applicants in detail. That is not a trivial cost. Where is that money going to come from? My bet is that it means an increase in application fees.

[ballwera]

I think implicitly you're assuming that above some threshold all prospective students are pretty much equal. If we can fill our class with domestic students that are qualified enough, why bother with international students? Well, because there is still a gradient in talent and credentials among those people who are deemed "good enough" to accept. There may very well be outstanding applicants from other countries who would accomplish more in your program, and do more for your program, than the 12 domestics who are "good enough."

I'm sorry, but if there are enough qualified domestic students to fill the slots then the school should be filling the slots with domestics. Wisconsin is a public university...if I were applying outside the us I would expect to be treated in the same manner.

[Igotnothin]

Your reading comprehension concerns me. There is nothing in what I said that suggests Wisconsin is settling for those who are "good enough." I suppose it's possible that during a year with above average domestic applicants a truly phenomenal international student may be overlooked. But, ask yourself, is it likely that somebody that far beyond what they see year after year is going to apply? Is this applicant really going to go to Wisconsin if they're that phenomenal? Is it worth the resources year after year to search for a needle in a haystack when Wisconsin is already able to recruit fantastic students?

Speaking of resources, somebody is going to have to be paid to look through all of their applicants in detail. That is not a trivial cost. Where is that money going to come from? My bet is that it means an increase in application fees.

 

1. Yes, in any given year, it is very likely that there is at least 1 international applicant that is clearly more qualified than at least one of the 12 domestics that are good enough. Very very likely.

 

2. Yes this applicant may very well go to Wisconsin. Depends on how the program at Wisconsin is ranked, and whether the applicant was also overlooked/robbed by other programs he or she applied to.

 

3. If it is not worth the resources, then don't accept international applications. Don't accept them and pocket the $100 without review.

 

4. If Wisconsin can already recruit fantastic students, then presumably it IS prestigious enough that (2) applies and an outstanding international applicant may very well enroll if accepted.

 

5. How much time do you really need to spend with each application to get a decent idea of the person's credentials? 5 minutes? Check GPA and GRE, major, school, list of publications (probably none), read three short letters, and scan a 1-page personal statement. $100 for 5 minutes corresponds to $1200 per hour.

 

Any other brain busters?

Edited December 28, 2014 by Igotnothin

[Ragneo]

1. Yes, in any given year, it is very likely that there is at least 1 international applicant that is clearly more qualified than at least one of the 12 domestics that are good enough. Very very likely.

 

2. Yes this applicant may very well go to Wisconsin. Depends on how the program at Wisconsin is ranked, and whether the applicant was also overlooked/robbed by other programs he or she applied to.

 

3. If it is not worth the resources, then don't accept international applications. Don't accept them and pocket the $100 without review.

 

4. If Wisconsin can already recruit fantastic students, then presumably it IS prestigious enough that (2) applies and an outstanding international applicant may very well enroll if accepted.

 

5. How much time do you really need to spend with each application to get a decent idea of the person's credentials? 5 minutes? Check GPA and GRE, major, school, list of publications (probably none), read three short letters, and scan a 1-page personal statement. $100 for 5 minutes corresponds to $1200 per hour

 

Any other brain busters?

 

At what point does "clearly more qualified" translate to being worthy to spend more money on this student? It's difficult because nobody can directly quantify how well one is going to do in grad school; all of these variables--GPA, GRE score, publications, etc. are just proxies for future achievement, and none of it is guaranteed. And unless the committee is absolutely certain that this student will do wonders in their program, they're not going to risk investing so much money into someone that could fail. Obviously, this is the case only some times. 

 

And I disagree, it is not very likely that there will be an international  applicant that is clear cut better than one of the 12 domestics. More qualified? Sure. But so qualified that the money invested in them is worth it--probably not. This is partially the reason why it is so hard for international applicants to get accepted. This seriously happens everywhere else.

[Igotnothin]

At what point does "clearly more qualified" translate to being worthy to spend more money on this student? It's difficult because nobody can directly quantify how well one is going to do in grad school; all of these variables--GPA, GRE score, publications, etc. are just proxies for future achievement, and none of it is guaranteed. And unless the committee is absolutely certain that this student will do wonders in their program, they're not going to risk investing so much money into someone that could fail. Obviously, this is the case only some times. 

 

And I disagree, it is not very likely that there will be an international  applicant that is clear cut better than one of the 12 domestics. More qualified? Sure. But so qualified that the money invested in them is worth it--probably not. This is partially the reason why it is so hard for international applicants to get accepted. This seriously happens everywhere else.

 

Wisconsin has every right to decide that it is not worth the extra cost to admit international students, and simply stop accepting applications from international students. But that's not what they are doing. They are letting international students apply, accepting $100 per application, and rejecting without review (in some years). That is very clearly unethical.

 

Obviously admissions committees can't perfectly predict which students are going to be the most successful. But prior grades, awards, and accomplishments are correlated with likelihood of future productivity. And a key part of assessing an applicant's prior accomplishments is opening their application.

Edited December 28, 2014 by Igotnothin

[TakeruK]

Wisconsin has every right to decide that it is not worth the extra cost to admit international students, and simply stop accepting applications from international students. But that's not what they are doing. They are letting international students apply, accepting $100 per application, and rejecting without review (in some years). That is very clearly unethical.

 

Obviously admissions committees can't perfectly predict which students are going to be the most successful. But prior grades, awards, and accomplishments are correlated with likelihood of future productivity. And a key part of assessing an applicant's prior accomplishments is opening their application.

 

I agree with you that if say, in October 2014, they know for a fact that they will not be able to admit any international graduate students for Fall 2015, they should clearly indicate this on the website. However, what if they don't know this ahead of time. The following example is what might have happened at Wisconsin and many places:

 

In Fall 2014, they are still open to all students and accept applications from everyone.

 

They close applications on Dec 15, 2014.

 

In January 2015, they start to decide on the applications. The school splits the pool into domestic and international applicants. They evaluate the domestic students first because they don't intend to invite international students to visit the program (too expensive). They want to notify domestic students ASAP so that they can make travel plans. At this point, they can also easily reject/ put aside a lot of domestic applicants without actual review by professors. After all, if there are 20 spots, there's no need to review in detail anyone not in the top 100 in terms of GPA, etc. There is no reason to carefully review the bottom of the pile to distinguish the 175th best application vs. the 180th best application. This filtering might be automatic (i.e. the committee might say "just show us the top 100 domestic applicants" first and then only go lower in the list if they can't find enough good candidates from the first set).

 

They plan visits for February 2015. At this time, they might also start planning for funding and determining how many spots they actually have. International students cost more and most schools have a Graduate School-wide grant to help the department offset these costs. Usually, the Grad School might offer money to offset the cost for X students, and sometimes the department might have other funding sources to supplement this funding for Y students. Thus, there is an effective maximum quota of X+Y=Z international students in the department at any one time. 

 

Let's say the department learns the number of X in February 2015 and can then determine what Z is. At this point, they might also know how many of their current international students are planning to graduate this summer, so they know how many international students they can accept this year. The admissions committee can now look at the international applications pool with this number in mind. In years where this number is zero and no other professor is willing to pay the difference out of their own grant, the committee does not even need to evaluate the international pool. 

 

However, at this point, both the domestic and international applications have been processed by the University and department staff, which is what the application fee pays for. The only part that didn't happen is the evaluation of applications by professors themselves, which is part of their job description, not covered by the application fee.

 

Therefore, I do not think it is unethical for a school to collect an application (processing) fee and not have professors review the application. In addition, while I totally agree that in the ideal world, the school would know the value of Z at the start of the application season and therefore can just let international applicants know not to apply if Z is equal to the current number of international students, for reasons stated above, most schools just do not know this number until well into the decision period. I can think of only a few alternatives that would not involve collecting fees for applications not reviewed by professors, but I do not think they are desirable solutions (in my opinion). These alternatives are:

 

1. Only allow domestic applicants to apply in December. Wait until March 1 or whenever "Z" is known and then open the application to international students only if there is room for international students. International applicants will probably have only a very short time between notification to apply and deadline (in order for decisions to be made prior to April 15).

 

-- I do not think this is a good solution, because this will severely stress out international applicants even more. It means international applicants have to have a separate set of deadlines for many of their schools, and will have to be preparing applications from December through March. In addition, this is not good for the department because most quality international students will probably have offers from other schools at this point and they will not be wanting to put together an application in February. In addition, this might delay everyone (domestic and international) decision notification, making it hard for schools to stick to the April 15 CGS resolution. 

 

2. Refund the application fee for students if there are no spots for international applicants.

 

-- I also do not think this is a good solution because this means international applications are still processed and incur a cost. In order to offset the cost of processing but not collecting a fee, they will likely have to raise the application fee for domestic applicants. I don't think the cost outweigh the benefits here.

 

-- Also, by this logic, I would argue that the school should also refund the application fee for the domestic students who are filtered out by GPA, GRE, whatever because they did not get a careful review (or any review) by professors either. This does not sound sustainable.

 

-- Overall, many schools DO NOT publish GRE cutoffs yet they might still implement GRE cutoffs. I would argue it is the applicant's responsibility to determine if their profile is worth the risk applying to the school. With resources like gradschoolshopper, applicants can learn the median GRE score accepted and determine if they want to take that risk. Similarly, international applicants can learn the fraction of international students at a school (through the school's international program webpage normally), realise the extremely low numbers, see that in some years, no international students are accepted at all. They can then decide whether or not the risk is worth it. 

 

3. Do not collect any sort of application fee at all.

 

-- I think this will result in too many applications and it will mean more time taken away from the professors and staff members other duties, such as research and teaching. This will result in negative consequences for the currently enrolled students (international and domestic). Part of the reason the application fee exists is to prevent people from just applying to 50 schools each year. I agree that having a financial barrier is usually bad in academia, but most schools try to offset this by waiving fees in cases where there is financial need and I think this is one instance where a financial disincentive to apply is useful (for the benefit of currently enrolled students and professors and staff).

 

That is, when most schools do not know "Z" until Spring, I believe the cons of implementing either alternative above are even worse than collecting money from students who do not get their application reviewed. Do you have another alternative solution? In my opinion, when balancing priorities for current students, domestic applicants and international applicants, it makes complete sense that international applicants have the lowest priority (with current students at the highest priority). I am also an international applicant myself.

 

Finally, to address the discussion about quality of international graduate students, most graduate programs do not simply admit the best X students. They usually admit the students that best fits their needs, which change from year to year, and might involve many other factors than qualifications. So I don't think it is very relevant to be concerned about the fact that by rejecting the entire international pool, they might reject some applicants that are better than any of their admitted domestic students.

 

That is, the system we currently have is not perfect. Far from it. But I don't think actions like Wisconsin's are unethical. I think it is almost the best solution currently possible. I do agree that it would be nice if Wisconsin and all other schools are much more transparent in their admission process. In fact, if I was Supreme Ruler of the Ivory Tower, I would make it mandatory that all departments write a set of policies/rules for their admission committees (to ensure consistency through the years) and publish this set of rules/policies online so that all applicants know what will happen to their applications!

[Igotnothin]

Let's not overcomplicate things here. At some point, UW decided that it was worthwhile financially/logistically to include students from other countries in their applicant pool. As a result, international students spend time and money preparing an application for UW. They owe it to these students to spend 5 minutes evaluating their credentials. Which means reading beyond the line that says China or India or Canada on it.

[NWFreeheel11]

1. Yes, in any given year, it is very likely that there is at least 1 international applicant that is clearly more qualified than at least one of the 12 domestics that are good enough. Very very likely.

 

2. Yes this applicant may very well go to Wisconsin. Depends on how the program at Wisconsin is ranked, and whether the applicant was also overlooked/robbed by other programs he or she applied to.

 

3. If it is not worth the resources, then don't accept international applications. Don't accept them and pocket the $100 without review.

 

4. If Wisconsin can already recruit fantastic students, then presumably it IS prestigious enough that (2) applies and an outstanding international applicant may very well enroll if accepted.

 

5. How much time do you really need to spend with each application to get a decent idea of the person's credentials? 5 minutes? Check GPA and GRE, major, school, list of publications (probably none), read three short letters, and scan a 1-page personal statement. $100 for 5 minutes corresponds to $1200 per hour.

 

Any other brain busters?

 

I'm just glad we won't end up working together in grad school. 

[Maxtini]

I agree with you that if say, in October 2014, they know for a fact that they will not be able to admit any international graduate students for Fall 2015, they should clearly indicate this on the website. However, what if they don't know this ahead of time. The following example is what might have happened at Wisconsin and many places:

 

In Fall 2014, they are still open to all students and accept applications from everyone.

 

They close applications on Dec 15, 2014.

 

In January 2015, they start to decide on the applications. The school splits the pool into domestic and international applicants. They evaluate the domestic students first because they don't intend to invite international students to visit the program (too expensive). They want to notify domestic students ASAP so that they can make travel plans. At this point, they can also easily reject/ put aside a lot of domestic applicants without actual review by professors. After all, if there are 20 spots, there's no need to review in detail anyone not in the top 100 in terms of GPA, etc. There is no reason to carefully review the bottom of the pile to distinguish the 175th best application vs. the 180th best application. This filtering might be automatic (i.e. the committee might say "just show us the top 100 domestic applicants" first and then only go lower in the list if they can't find enough good candidates from the first set).

 

They plan visits for February 2015. At this time, they might also start planning for funding and determining how many spots they actually have. International students cost more and most schools have a Graduate School-wide grant to help the department offset these costs. Usually, the Grad School might offer money to offset the cost for X students, and sometimes the department might have other funding sources to supplement this funding for Y students. Thus, there is an effective maximum quota of X+Y=Z international students in the department at any one time. 

 

Let's say the department learns the number of X in February 2015 and can then determine what Z is. At this point, they might also know how many of their current international students are planning to graduate this summer, so they know how many international students they can accept this year. The admissions committee can now look at the international applications pool with this number in mind. In years where this number is zero and no other professor is willing to pay the difference out of their own grant, the committee does not even need to evaluate the international pool. 

 

However, at this point, both the domestic and international applications have been processed by the University and department staff, which is what the application fee pays for. The only part that didn't happen is the evaluation of applications by professors themselves, which is part of their job description, not covered by the application fee.

 

Therefore, I do not think it is unethical for a school to collect an application (processing) fee and not have professors review the application. In addition, while I totally agree that in the ideal world, the school would know the value of Z at the start of the application season and therefore can just let international applicants know not to apply if Z is equal to the current number of international students, for reasons stated above, most schools just do not know this number until well into the decision period. I can think of only a few alternatives that would not involve collecting fees for applications not reviewed by professors, but I do not think they are desirable solutions (in my opinion). These alternatives are:

 

1. Only allow domestic applicants to apply in December. Wait until March 1 or whenever "Z" is known and then open the application to international students only if there is room for international students. International applicants will probably have only a very short time between notification to apply and deadline (in order for decisions to be made prior to April 15).

 

-- I do not think this is a good solution, because this will severely stress out international applicants even more. It means international applicants have to have a separate set of deadlines for many of their schools, and will have to be preparing applications from December through March. In addition, this is not good for the department because most quality international students will probably have offers from other schools at this point and they will not be wanting to put together an application in February. In addition, this might delay everyone (domestic and international) decision notification, making it hard for schools to stick to the April 15 CGS resolution. 

 

2. Refund the application fee for students if there are no spots for international applicants.

 

-- I also do not think this is a good solution because this means international applications are still processed and incur a cost. In order to offset the cost of processing but not collecting a fee, they will likely have to raise the application fee for domestic applicants. I don't think the cost outweigh the benefits here.

 

-- Also, by this logic, I would argue that the school should also refund the application fee for the domestic students who are filtered out by GPA, GRE, whatever because they did not get a careful review (or any review) by professors either. This does not sound sustainable.

 

-- Overall, many schools DO NOT publish GRE cutoffs yet they might still implement GRE cutoffs. I would argue it is the applicant's responsibility to determine if their profile is worth the risk applying to the school. With resources like gradschoolshopper, applicants can learn the median GRE score accepted and determine if they want to take that risk. Similarly, international applicants can learn the fraction of international students at a school (through the school's international program webpage normally), realise the extremely low numbers, see that in some years, no international students are accepted at all. They can then decide whether or not the risk is worth it. 

 

3. Do not collect any sort of application fee at all.

 

-- I think this will result in too many applications and it will mean more time taken away from the professors and staff members other duties, such as research and teaching. This will result in negative consequences for the currently enrolled students (international and domestic). Part of the reason the application fee exists is to prevent people from just applying to 50 schools each year. I agree that having a financial barrier is usually bad in academia, but most schools try to offset this by waiving fees in cases where there is financial need and I think this is one instance where a financial disincentive to apply is useful (for the benefit of currently enrolled students and professors and staff).

 

That is, when most schools do not know "Z" until Spring, I believe the cons of implementing either alternative above are even worse than collecting money from students who do not get their application reviewed. Do you have another alternative solution? In my opinion, when balancing priorities for current students, domestic applicants and international applicants, it makes complete sense that international applicants have the lowest priority (with current students at the highest priority). I am also an international applicant myself.

 

Finally, to address the discussion about quality of international graduate students, most graduate programs do not simply admit the best X students. They usually admit the students that best fits their needs, which change from year to year, and might involve many other factors than qualifications. So I don't think it is very relevant to be concerned about the fact that by rejecting the entire international pool, they might reject some applicants that are better than any of their admitted domestic students.

 

That is, the system we currently have is not perfect. Far from it. But I don't think actions like Wisconsin's are unethical. I think it is almost the best solution currently possible. I do agree that it would be nice if Wisconsin and all other schools are much more transparent in their admission process. In fact, if I was Supreme Ruler of the Ivory Tower, I would make it mandatory that all departments write a set of policies/rules for their admission committees (to ensure consistency through the years) and publish this set of rules/policies online so that all applicants know what will happen to their applications!

 

Pre-application policy could address this problem (sort of). Although you aren't guaranteed admission, you're guaranteed that your application will be reviewed. 

A lot of departments use this tactics so that they will not be overwhelmed by "unqualified" applications. It is also fair for applicants who won't waste time and money applying to schools that won't review their application. It's a win-win solution in my opinion.

 

The more I see is that the University afraid they will "lose" money by doing this. If you can squeeze US$130 by selling hope, why not? And this is where it becomes unethical/unjustified. The price tag should not be that expensive.

Edited December 28, 2014 by Maxtini

[TakeruK]

Pre-application policy could address this problem (sort of). Although you aren't guaranteed admission, you're guaranteed that your application will be reviewed. 

A lot of departments use this tactics so that they will not be overwhelmed by "unqualified" applications. It is also fair for applicants who won't waste time and money applying to schools that won't review their application. It's a win-win solution in my opinion.

 

The more I see is that the University afraid they will "lose" money by doing this. If you can squeeze US$130 by selling hope, why not? And this is where it becomes unethical/unjustified. The price tag should not be that expensive.

 

I think this might be a good idea for a program that receives much more than 10 times the number of available spots. One potential problem might be that applicants are usually compared against each other, so the cutoffs for pre-application might not be known until all the applications are received. For example, a program might ask a computer (or a secretary) to sort through all the applications and only select applications that are at least the 70th percentile in one of GRE, Subject GRE, or GPA. If that returns something like 100 profiles and they only want to admit like 10 spots, that's probably a good enough initial cut. I think it would be hard to know what the cutoff would be beforehand. 

 

Alternatively, I think being transparent about cutoffs would be much more beneficial for applicants. If programs could say things like "In the last 5 years, the distribution of GRE scores accepted are ____" (and similar for GPA, subject GRE etc.) then that would allow applicants to decide for themselves whether they think their application will be deeply reviewed. One problem with this might be that they are not allowed to report data on their applicants. 

 

I do not think a school makes that much money on application fees. I think almost all of it goes right to the cost of paying the third party (applyyourself, embark, etc.) for using their system. Assuming that a school admits 5% of its applicants, this means for every grad student they admit, they collect roughly 20*100 = $2000 in application fees. That is pretty much nothing compare to how much a graduate student costs for tuition waiver + stipend over the entire length of their degree. 

 

I think the primary purpose of an application fee is to offset third party software costs. And the secondary purpose is to provide a financial disincentive against students applying to all of their dream schools without serious consideration whether they are realistic goals. I would agree that a financial disincentive might not be the best or most fair way, but it is one of the few options available to the graduate school. Financial disincentives should always be accompanied by fee waivers for those with financial need so that it doesn't become an actual unsurmountable barrier. I notice that most current fee waiver programs only applies to American citizens and I think that is fair if the funding from these fee waiver programs come from government programs (i.e. American tax dollars). But I do remember seeing some programs that waive application fees if the applicant is from a list of countries that have more financial need.

[peachypie]

So you gather information on the department and decide to apply. You spend 5-10 hours filling out the application, writing essays, etc. You have 3 professors submit letters on your behalf. You pay $30 for GRE scores and $100 for the app fee. Three months later, you (somehow) find out that you were rejected without any review. You have no issue with it? That's just how the cookie crumbles? 

 

That's not how I would react.

As geodude wrote, it shouldn't take you that much time to submit an app for one school.  

Also again, I see no evidence that they didn't review the application.  That is currently justin123's assumption.

There are a myriad of ways to screen applicants and sometimes you just don't make the cut.  Again I wonder if maybe the applicant would have spent some more time talking to profs in the program maybe the application would have gotten more consideration as well.  there is no saying that some of the onus of a rejection was not with the applicant and not the school's issues, but rather the performance of the applicant.

[peachypie]

My point is that sorting the applications into a "domestic" and "international" stack and throwing away the international ones does not constitute a meaningful review. I have no problem with GPA or GRE filters. I have a problem with a school charging somebody $130 despite the fact that they have zero probability of acceptance (in years where domestics fill all available spots). Not only is it unfair to the student, but I think it's bad for the department. They're willing to fill their seats with domestics without considering that a few of the international applicants could be head and shoulders more qualified than the domestics. If I was in the adcom's shoes I would be more inclined to go after the best of the best, as opposed to finding 12 "good enough" domestic applicants.

 

Congrats to GeoDUDE for spending a total of 6 hours on grad school applications. One solid afternoon of work?

How in the world do YOU KNOW that all the international stack was thrown out?  Were you sitting there when it happened?  

There are plenty of international PhD students at the University of Wisconsin, how did they slip through the "throwaway stack" you speak of?

Again school's can go do whatever they want when they want to have applicants, there is literally  no rule that they have to do anything to your application.  They choose what is best for the department.  The univeristy of wisconsin is in no way hurting for applicants or solid research students.  

 

Again remember international applicants cost more for the university and would likely mean the department would have to take less students than if they stuck to domestic.  

 

I honestly  believe if the applicant had touched based with a faculty member and showed some inclination to wanting to go there they'd probably get an invite.  If you throw your name into a pile as just another name, you'll be treated like one.  Its a competitive pool, you have to do more than the bare minimum and I think that is what we are looking at here.  

[Igotnothin]

How in the world do YOU KNOW that all the international stack was thrown out?  Were you sitting there when it happened?  

There are plenty of international PhD students at the University of Wisconsin, how did they slip through the "throwaway stack" you speak of?

Again school's can go do whatever they want when they want to have applicants, there is literally  no rule that they have to do anything to your application.  They choose what is best for the department.  The univeristy of wisconsin is in no way hurting for applicants or solid research students.  

 

Again remember international applicants cost more for the university and would likely mean the department would have to take less students than if they stuck to domestic.  

 

I honestly  believe if the applicant had touched based with a faculty member and showed some inclination to wanting to go there they'd probably get an invite.  If you throw your name into a pile as just another name, you'll be treated like one.  Its a competitive pool, you have to do more than the bare minimum and I think that is what we are looking at here.  

 

Sigh. I'm not arguing that in this particular case Justin123 did not get a fair shot. I'm arguing about the general scenario where a school uses a 2-stage evaluation whereby in some years the international apps aren't even reviewed. They pay $130 for an automatic rejection.

 

So the secret to getting into grad school is sending e-mails saying "I want to join your department." Learn something new every day!

[gliaful]

Sigh. I'm not arguing that in this particular case Justin123 did not get a fair shot. I'm arguing about the general scenario where a school uses a 2-stage evaluation whereby in some years the international apps aren't even reviewed. They pay $130 for an automatic rejection.

 

So the secret to getting into grad school is sending e-mails saying "I want to join your department." Learn something new every day!

Igotnothin, I am not sure what you are seeking to accomplish. It is evident that you firmly believe that there exists years in which the international stack is thrown out.

I don't know where you are getting this from -- yougotnothin, evidence-wise -- but I promise you that everybody on this topic is fully aware that you believe this.

Nobody pays "$130 for an automatic rejection", because even if there were years that the international stack was fated to the round file, this is unknown to both the applicants AND the admissions committee at the time of application. Many domestic applicants also have their applications disregarded entirely. This has been said before many times in the last few pages of this topic alone.

 

I'm not sure what you want to hear from us. I think you're alone in believing that all int'l apps get trashed. It's unfounded and yet you redundantly cite it without evidence -- the burden of proof is on you, not us. However, you're not alone in believing that the system could benefit from being changed. TakeruK explored alternative methods and concluded that the current system, while imperfect, is still much better for both applicants and departments than the alternatives.

 

And yeah, contacting departments is always a good idea. It's not a secret and it won't get you in for sure, but at least it's proactive.

[Igotnothin]

 

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!]

Igotnothin,

 

Perhaps you see something in that email that everyone else doesn't, but, that email does not show the department taking international application fees without having the possibility of admitting them, as been said many times as you have quoted that.

 

It would be helpful for us if you could show your syllogism on how you came to this conclusion, so we can address either our or your drastic misstep in logic. 

[Igotnothin]

A = event that all spots are filled by domestic students in stage 1 in a given year.

B = event that international applications are evaluated in a given year.

C = event that at least one international student is accepted in a given year.

 

P(B|A) = 0

P(C|A) = 0

[gliaful]

A = event that all spots are filled by domestic students in stage 1 in a given year.

B = event that international applications are evaluated in a given year.

C = event that at least one international student is accepted in a given year.

 

P(B|A) = 0

P(C|A) = 0

But what's P(A)? It's not 1.0!

 

Otherwise I wouldn't be asked for my TOEFL scores.

Otherwise programs wouldn't be boasting about their 30% international student population.

Edited December 29, 2014 by pasteltomato