rhyme wrote:
supersonic wrote:
Is it me, or am I the only one who's starting to think Chicago Booth's waitlist has gotten out of control?
While I understand your frustration, wouldn't you rather still be in the running than just be arbitrarily denied based on some other criteria -- e.g. no one can be on the waitlist more than 3 months? At least this way you still have a chance.
Rhyme, I would love to agree with you, but this isn't an issue of just 3 months. This isn't even an issue of just 6 months. The reality is that this "process" can be as long as 9 months or more depending on when you submitted your application and how long Rose, her team and Chicago Booth choose to abuse the waitlist process. It's crazy, but I found a thread from last year where the very first post was from someone waitlisted in R1 who continued to be on the waitlist into the summer (and presumably was rejected since no one came off of the waitlist that year). So no, Rhyme, this has moved beyond just me being frustrated to Rose unnecessarily alienated a large recruiting base and arguably undercuts Chicago Booth's overall reputation.
I get it. Chicago Booth is a difficult place to recruit. It's clearly below H/S, and at best, competitive with W. And no knock to Chicago Booth or its students, but for most applicants Chicago Booth is a hedge against being reject from H/S/W. Add to it it's in the Mid-West and it's obvious Chicago Booth is at a disadvantaged compared to its peers. However, this doesn't mean Rose and her team need to apply unnecessary, and in some cases, unreasonable tactics to recruit students. For instance, I have a friend who works as an admissions officer at a top 3 liberal arts college (read: Amherst, Swarthmore, or Williams), and although the undergraduate level is different from the graduate level, many of the practices remain the same. According to him, one such example is NOT double waitlisting a student. At the undergraduate level, this would be akin to deferring a student during early decision then waitlisting him or her again during the regular season. This does NOT occur at his institution and he's been told by the Dean that it's tacitly understood among all elite college admissions officers that this tactic is both unreasonable and unfair. In light of these expectations and my clear sense of what is reasonable and what is not, Rose continues to undercut Chicago Booth's reputation by abusing the waitlist. Chicago Booth doesn't command a yield comparable to that of the top 3, yet it continues to set deadlines that coincide with the likes of H/S/W. As a result, Chicago Booth unduly forces itself to not only carry a deep waitlist, but also regularly double/triple waitlist students. That's fine if your end goal is to artificially enhance the school's yield, but one needs to understand that this comes at the expense of the school's reputation.
In short, Chicago Booth is unnecessarily monkey-barring each and every one of its waitlist students not for the better good of the school, but because of a lack of institutional control, lack of foresight, and lack of leadership to compete in this difficult space. By failing to adequately address these challenges and instead, choosing to abuse the use of the waitlist, Rose unduly alienates its prospective students.