McCombs (UT Austin) Class of 2016 Calling all applicants!

It would be interesting to know how long people on the wait list that receive offers have to decide. I think you would have to know that before being able to answer your question.

Say after the May 30 deadline there were 20 spots (have no idea how many). I can't imagine them making many more than 20 WL offers. My thinking is that the chance of an offer being accepted at this time is pretty high relative to earlier in the process.

Then they will just continue that process till they decide they are done.

Do you think they filled all of their spots yesterday and the rest will be people that get in when WL people declined? Or is it possible that they didn't fill in all of their spots yesterday? This is so frustrating. I think I'm losing hope AGAIN.

I will say that going by last year's waitlist thread a lot of people were getting accepts pretty late in the game, and many of the people that got correspondence did. And I got correspondence from McCombs. Maybe it's too early to lose hope.

I think its a slow process. I'm sure there are a lot of variables they have to take into consideration including the diversity of the class both in race/gender and desired concentration...they probably have to reevaluate those issues after each new round of offers. With out being in the room with them you just never know...including where you are on the WL.

They sent an email saying mid to late june is when we can expect to hear...i would try not to over analyze until then.

I feel you though

Yeah, I got that e-mail, though some people got calls yesterday and it didn't fit in the time frames they mentioned. Also, not everyone got that e-mail, I hope that's good news for me.

About 3 days(ish). I got accepted yesterday and have until Thursday to respond.

That is a little misleading though, because the deposit invoice isn't generated until you accept the position, so for all intents and purposes, you have more like a week to a week and a half (I'm not sure how long the invoice generation will take and how long I have after that, but I think it is a couple days).

Anyone else find it troubling that admissions would send an update on waitlist timelines to only some of those on the waitlist? I mean if the email were in the nature of "hey, we're checking in to gauge your continuing interest," I could understand that. But to exclude at least some waitlisters from an email offering guidance as to general timeframes for decisions strikes me as both inconsiderate and bizarre.

I've heard not a single word from UT since receiving my waitlist decision. McCombs admissions administers what is by far the most oblique waitlist policy I've encountered. I'd expect better. Then again, from what I've read, Rodrigo's not exactly been playing to rave reviews during his tenure leading admissions. Perhaps he's on the way out.

I feel you. IMO, if you didn't get e-mails because you're not seriously considered anymore they should just ding you. The worst thing is being on the waitlist without hope. Otherwise, I think it would only be fair for you to get the e-mails.

That said, I'm aware that the Adcoms have a really tough job to do, it's a HUGE school and a top school. I can see why this isn't the most pleasant process for us, because it isn't for them.

Totally agreed that a ding would be preferable if it is indeed the case that those who haven't received any correspondence from admissions are not under serious consideration. As could be deduced from my post, I find the entire waitlist process to be deeply inconsiderate across many programs. Waitlisting 400 applicants with the knowledge that in a best case scenario, 50 get admitted? Hard to describe that course of action as anything but unethical, not to mention hypocritical given these programs' ostensible focus on ethics.

Sounds like sour grapes. Admittedly, to some extent it is. But the more salient point is that there's no excuse for keeping waitlisted applicants in the dark, then subdividing the group, and treating one of the groups like second class citizens. The solution? In a word, transparency. I'm not asking for programs to adhere to a ranked waitlist. But it's not too much to ask that all waitlisted students be kept in the loop and apprised of new information when it becomes available.

Finally, while UT is indeed a huge school, the MBA program is relatively small. Having the mixed blessing of being on the waitlist at several larger programs (2X and 3X UT's size), I can say without reservation that UT is alone in its oblique approach (no contact, no guidance, and now selectively provided general info) to waitlist admissions. Candidly, I don't see how the process is unpleasant for them. They wait for someone to choose another program, and pick one name from a list of hundreds of well qualified applicants. Won't lose any sleep over their plight.

That's weird because McCombs has been the most accommodating school for me. I was WLed in 2 other schools and last time neither sent me an e-mail telling me that I will continue to be on the waitlist on time and one didn't sent me such an e-mail at all. McCombs sent 2 e-mails to me, one telling me "where they are in the process" and what I can do. Of course you didn't get those e-mails, so I can understand your frustrations.

[/quote] That's weird because McCombs has been the most accommodating school for me. I was WLed in 2 other schools and last time neither sent me an e-mail telling me that I will continue to be on the waitlist on time and one didn't sent me such an e-mail at all. McCombs sent 2 e-mails to me, one telling me "where they are in the process" and what I can do. Of course you didn't get those e-mails, so I can understand your frustrations.[/quote]

I'm totally good with targeting a given number of waitlisters for that second email (i.e., gauging continued interest, offering advice to improve candidacy). It's the exclusion from the process update email that I find baffling. Everyone deserves that much.

Actually the second e-mail was the process update e-mail, the first was gauging interest and asking about career goals. I feel you man. I stand a very real chance of getting shutout and 2 schools have left me totally in the dark. If you by any chance got in somewhere you're ahead of me.

Got it. Fortunately, I did get into a few programs more or less on par with UT. Really loved Austin and career opportunities there, so that's the source of disappointment. It's actually my experience as an admitted student that underlies my criticism of the waitlist process (UT's in particular). Once admitted, they'll bend over backwards to sell you on their program. There's good sense to that, but if, as adcoms often say, waitlisters are qualified for their program but lost a numbers game, it's tough to reconcile what I perceive to be abysmal treatment of those on the waitlist who poured hours into applications, and in many cases spent good money to visit the program. It's not just UT -- with few exceptions, waitlisters deserve much better. MBA programs frequent admonitions about ethics need to extend to waitlisted applicants. Ethics aren't about how you treat those you need something from (i.e. accepting an admit); it's about how you comport yourself with those from whom you need nothing at all. Stepping off my soapbox...

@JuliusCaesar Why do you care so much? Is Texas your #1 Program?

Well, first of all, my GMAT expires after this year, so if I get shutout, I'd have to either forget b school or start the whole process over completely and this time without Kaplan resources such as a bunch of tests. So I feel you.

Second, I'm not sure "unethical" is the right word, though it would be nice to have some transparency, but at least for me I guess I have to remember that I sometimes have to be patient in life (I'm just about the least patient person on earth). This has indeed been agonizing for me, but I don't think unethical is the correct word for it, unless you have a loose definition, at least IMHO.

Well, first of all, my GMAT expires after this year, so if I get shutout, I'd have to either forget b school or start the whole process over completely and this time without Kaplan resources such as a bunch of tests. So I feel you.

Second, I'm not sure "unethical" is the right word, though it would be nice to have some transparency, but at least for me I guess I have to remember that I sometimes have to be patient in life (I'm just about the least patient person on earth). This has indeed been agonizing for me, but I don't think unethical is the correct word for it, unless you have a loose definition, at least IMHO.[/quote]

Hmmm…I would suggest that keeping far more applicants on the waitlist than it could possibly admit (while providing zero guidance and suggesting that we refrain from contacting them) well into the summer is highly self serving. In my book, a degree of selfishness that knowingly and unapologetically disregards the effects of one's decisions on a large group of people - e.g., it's tough to make plans of any sort while waiting for a decision- is among the quintessential forms of unethical behavior. Requesting patience is one thing. Purposefully overpopulating and largely disregarding the waitlist is quite another.