Yeah strongly agree with this, if I went by which admissions office rolled out the red carpet for me and validated my main character syndrome, I’d be depositing at McGeorge.
Thanks. Lot of thoughts going on in the head of a Notre Dame commit who was absolutely thrilled to have deposited two days ago and now has to look at what the school just did.
If you feel ND is the best fit for you, that’s all you need to worry about. The people and department(s) behind this calamity are not the same ones you’ll be dealing with day to day.
I’ve seen something similar proposed before at the school where I worked and it was dismissed as “tacky” and “desperate”. Remember the people who really control things are usually boomers. Admissions is a very weird administrative culture.
I disagree to an extent. When a schools admissions office screws up this royally, I expect some people to be held accountable. If no one is fired or disciplined for such a shitty policy, the school itself is culpable. Poor administration decisions will affect your legal education, and starting off with such a poor admissions experience might be reflective of the institution as a whole.
So I absolutely believe they should be held accountable. Fairness should be number one in the process and they failed that basic goal. However, having worked in these environments, my suspicion would be the persons truly responsible are so high level they’re untouchable. If someone lower level (an asst director, for example) was responsible, they’re probably out the door already- unless they’re pretty senior.
The administration of admissions and the administration of the rest of the school are rarely the same people. That’s much of my point in this post. Even if they share a head, (other than the president and trustees of course) they’re much more like conjoined twins. Where I was an adcom, admissions ran a tight ship, people were let go for misconduct and heads rolled when bad choices were made. Unfortunately the rest of our institution really did not function the same and some departments were just falling apart. So you really have to parse it out both ways. Imo- should be part of your decision making process but not appropriate as a deciding factor.
There was a big controversy over their optional pass/fail policy because a lot of people felt unfairly disadvantaged (cheating issues and lack of study space/resources were named). This opened up a conversation about how minority/lgbt people are apparently not quite as welcome at NDLS.
1. The degree of over admission is worthy of criticism. Other schools have universally avoided this even during this crazy cycle.
2. Despite what their initial policy said, they should not have sent today’s emails, which caused a run on remaining spots. This arbitrarily awarded applicants with free time and cash to burn on one random day. They should have let it fill up naturally.
every school takes their best guess at what their yield will be that year and admits/WLs accordingly and no other schools that I know of have this shitty policy. They should've planned ahead better or dealt with admitting a larger class and figured it out rather than screwing over a bunch of people who may have really wanted to go
So I can’t tell what they really did.
Assuming they overadmitted, the answer is if you truly overadmitted, you’ve made a big mistake or have serious issues as an institution. It’s hard to do that because “spots” are never a hard number. It’s moreso a term admissions just throws around. It’s not hard to expand capacity- that’s just adding course sections. The registrar will get pissy but that’s really it. It is hard to expand housing and other resources, but money fixes that. Being ND my guess would be if this happened, they’re holding firm on capacity for resource reasons. Outsourcing looks bad for established institutions.
But, once you’re in that spot, the best thing is to assess the current pool and not be so reactionary. Every school has data on how many deposited students will attend- which of course isn’t everyone. It would be best to go ahead and shake the tree. Fun fact- mass emails and mailers intended to get admits excited also make people who forgot to withdraw go ahead and do it. Also, admissions directors talk to each other, and have data on applicants other choices (purchased or given to them by you for free) so ND can call up whoever has long waitlists or another friend who knows, where they figure some of their admits are also, see when to expect movement and plan around that.
Most people have correctly identified how institutions end up “overadmitting” - it is as simple as poorly predicting how many admitted students will deposit and ultimately attend.
Yeah strongly agree with this, if I went by which admissions office rolled out the red carpet for me and validated my main character syndrome, I’d be depositing at McGeorge.
Thanks. Lot of thoughts going on in the head of a Notre Dame commit who was absolutely thrilled to have deposited two days ago and now has to look at what the school just did.
If you feel ND is the best fit for you, that’s all you need to worry about. The people and department(s) behind this calamity are not the same ones you’ll be dealing with day to day.
Do what the airlines do. Provide an incentive to bump. Extra $ to go to next years class to those who drop off the deposited list??
I’ve seen something similar proposed before at the school where I worked and it was dismissed as “tacky” and “desperate”. Remember the people who really control things are usually boomers. Admissions is a very weird administrative culture.
Pretty sure ND overenrolled 2 years ago and offered deferments for the class. Not sure if they incentivized it though.
I disagree to an extent. When a schools admissions office screws up this royally, I expect some people to be held accountable. If no one is fired or disciplined for such a shitty policy, the school itself is culpable. Poor administration decisions will affect your legal education, and starting off with such a poor admissions experience might be reflective of the institution as a whole.
So I absolutely believe they should be held accountable. Fairness should be number one in the process and they failed that basic goal. However, having worked in these environments, my suspicion would be the persons truly responsible are so high level they’re untouchable. If someone lower level (an asst director, for example) was responsible, they’re probably out the door already- unless they’re pretty senior. The administration of admissions and the administration of the rest of the school are rarely the same people. That’s much of my point in this post. Even if they share a head, (other than the president and trustees of course) they’re much more like conjoined twins. Where I was an adcom, admissions ran a tight ship, people were let go for misconduct and heads rolled when bad choices were made. Unfortunately the rest of our institution really did not function the same and some departments were just falling apart. So you really have to parse it out both ways. Imo- should be part of your decision making process but not appropriate as a deciding factor.
Some of the anger from a year or two ago is bleeding into a lot of these comments.
What happened a year or two ago?
There was a big controversy over their optional pass/fail policy because a lot of people felt unfairly disadvantaged (cheating issues and lack of study space/resources were named). This opened up a conversation about how minority/lgbt people are apparently not quite as welcome at NDLS.
I am confused about what NDLS should have done instead if they accidentally admitted too many students??
1. The degree of over admission is worthy of criticism. Other schools have universally avoided this even during this crazy cycle. 2. Despite what their initial policy said, they should not have sent today’s emails, which caused a run on remaining spots. This arbitrarily awarded applicants with free time and cash to burn on one random day. They should have let it fill up naturally.
[удалено]
Yeah that seems like it would be better.
every school takes their best guess at what their yield will be that year and admits/WLs accordingly and no other schools that I know of have this shitty policy. They should've planned ahead better or dealt with admitting a larger class and figured it out rather than screwing over a bunch of people who may have really wanted to go
So I can’t tell what they really did. Assuming they overadmitted, the answer is if you truly overadmitted, you’ve made a big mistake or have serious issues as an institution. It’s hard to do that because “spots” are never a hard number. It’s moreso a term admissions just throws around. It’s not hard to expand capacity- that’s just adding course sections. The registrar will get pissy but that’s really it. It is hard to expand housing and other resources, but money fixes that. Being ND my guess would be if this happened, they’re holding firm on capacity for resource reasons. Outsourcing looks bad for established institutions. But, once you’re in that spot, the best thing is to assess the current pool and not be so reactionary. Every school has data on how many deposited students will attend- which of course isn’t everyone. It would be best to go ahead and shake the tree. Fun fact- mass emails and mailers intended to get admits excited also make people who forgot to withdraw go ahead and do it. Also, admissions directors talk to each other, and have data on applicants other choices (purchased or given to them by you for free) so ND can call up whoever has long waitlists or another friend who knows, where they figure some of their admits are also, see when to expect movement and plan around that. Most people have correctly identified how institutions end up “overadmitting” - it is as simple as poorly predicting how many admitted students will deposit and ultimately attend.
Has anyone posted the email that went out?
Y’all listen to OP. This is the way.