Why do they do this to us? (not American, emotionally tortured and genuinely curious)

[t1racyjacks]

Here's the thing I don't understand about the unis. The way they notify students who got accepted first and rejections MUCH later (up till 2 months). Now I can understand if the late rejection is on a waitlist. But that doesn't explain the usual gap (relatively huge) between acceptances and rejections or even emails telling the students that they are waitlisted.

 

I'm thinking that once the committee makes its decisions they can just tell us the statuses regardless of whether we've been accepted, rejected or waitlisted. This slow roasting does nothing but turn us into particularly unsavory pieces of charred meat (I don't suppose we'll be edible once we're done, as the stress hormones would've ruined any chance of that). Given the acceptance rates of many departments (I'm english/comp lit) there will be a huge number of applicants rejected immediately once their applications have been evaluated. Won't it be more humane to just tell these applicants that they've been rejected at the same time as those who are told they are accepted? (same with waitlist even).

 

I don't get this, at all. I'm so sick of feeling horrible and thinking about the way the system works makes it seem particularly inhumane. I can't find any rational explanation for the 'lag', unless they read applications in batches. But this doesn't work, because if indeed they do we should be seeing more of a spread regarding acceptance and rejection dates. Just what the hell is going on and what is the use of this system? How does it even work? Are they just sadistic? Because if they didn't care (and most likely I suspect indifference) I don't understand how this system helps the uni be more efficient in any way.

[HistoryMystery]

If you're looking for Universities to be efficient then you're in the wrong business

[t1racyjacks]

If you're looking for Universities to be efficient then you're in the wrong business

I'm not... I'm just trying to understand the inefficiency. I can't even see any explanation for it

[HistoryMystery]

I'm not... I'm just trying to understand the inefficiency. I can't even see any explanation for it

 

Mostly because they can. I bet none of them like being on adcoms. So once they pick who they want they probably start to procrastinate on the rejections.

[fuzzylogician]

Partly it's because specific departments do acceptances, but it's the graduate school that does the rejections. Acceptances need to be approved by the graduate school too, but accepted students are normally contacted by the departments earlier on about the good news. You probably wouldn't want to unofficially contact someone about a rejection, for legal reasons. The graduate school appears to first take care of acceptances and then rejections, which makes some sense since there are fewer acceptances and there is other bureaucracy that needs to get started once a student is admitted (e.g. immigration docs for international students, all kinds of funding issues, etc). There are (unofficial) waitlists that some departments utilize. The form rejection emails somehow don't seem to be high on anyone's to-do list. But yes, universities can be much better about informing applicants of outcomes.* 

 

* This is also true when applying for jobs post-PhD, btw. Normally you never hear back at all, you just find out that others moved on to an interview round that you didn't and figure things out from there. There are wikis, kind of like the gradcafe results website, where people update what they know about different jobs. If others got an interview invite and you didn't, well, then, you do the math. Or, you might find out that someone else got the job that you interviewed for, and no one bothered to let you know. It sucks, but happens pretty often.

[t1racyjacks]

thanks.... that kinda makes sense, in a bureaucratic and odious way. but at least it makes a little more sense to me now

[Eigen]

Also, universities don't want to reject someone until they're absolutely sure. 

 

Most admissions committees go through and look for their top picks. Then notify those people right away. 

 

Then maybe they have a few more spots open up, and look further down, or have an unofficial waiting list. Then maybe some of the top choices decline, and they have more spots open up, and go back through applicants. 

 

Admissions is rarely an absolute ranking-type process- there's rarely some numerical list of people who  did and didn't make the cut, in order. 

 

Especially because of fit and field. If, say, one of our top choice organic students turns us down, we're not going to admit another physical student. We're going to want to look for another organic student. I'm sure the same is true in your field- you can't oversaturate one advisor if you end up with a cohort that all wants to work in the subspecialty.

[jujubea]

Maybe they expect some people to accept their offers right away, AND expect some people to reject offers right away. If that happens, then the waitlist and rejections list changes dramatically. Why notify #15 on the waitlist that they're waitlisted? Now, if 7 offers are rejected, they move up to 8, that's actually in the realm of possibility. 

 

Also, it's not necessarily just about efficiency, but about how BUSY these people are.

 

For sure acceptances are a sure thing, but the waitlist and rejections list aren't always so sure, and could require double and triple work if the wrong thing is said to the wrong applicant.

 

Also, perhaps it's just one office manager sitting there entering the rejections into the online system. If a school gets hundreds of applicants, that would take weeks, or even months depending on how busy that person normally is (and believe me, an office manager working in a bureaucratic institution such as academia, military, or government, is REALLY BUSY).

 

And, I know this sounds awful, but, universities are probably more concerned about being respectful and courteous to the people they know they want in their school, than to the people they know they don't want. Which doesn't make it suck any less, but maybe there's some truth to it?

[Vene]

And, I know this sounds awful, but, universities are probably more concerned about being respectful and courteous to the people they know they want in their school, than to the people they know they don't want. Which doesn't make it suck any less, but maybe there's some truth to it?

That's kind of what I assume. We want to court those we like and make them happy during interviews and such. So, they get top priority and if you're rejected, well, that's a low priority and can be put off after people working on admissions get a break from recruits, current grad students, and faculty concerns.

[t1racyjacks]

that makes total sense, but after my UK experiences, I wish the system were more humane. When there's some delay in response the DGS actually got back to me, explaining why and with a sweet note that he knew it was hard and students are anxious. The first email I got, I was like 'omg! they recognise I'm a person' (and in honour of this I have switched to British spelling. Unless they don't offer me a fellowship and America does then.... well).

[Eigen]

TBH, most UK programs probably don't get nearly as many applicants as most US universities, especially looking at the ones you applied to.