CMV: WashU sucks
This was inspired by an earlier post I saw comparing Mich Ross to WashU Olin -- it actually inspired me to such extents that I've opted to make a full-blown post discussing why WashU fucking sucks. I have 10 min of free time rn, so here we go.
WashU fucking sucks. Its administration employs shady admissions practices (similar to UChicago but not done nearly as well) by #1 not having need-blind admissions despite having a 10 billion dollar endowment when even schools like Gtown with 2 billion offer that, and #2 by having a lame/college rankings gamey admissions policy of having two early decision rounds to maximize yield of acceptances. The outcome is that WashU has the richest students (highest median/average family income) of any school in the US. It does this because it is a B-tier School in a C-tier location, and has to compensate for its lack of talent / OCR.
Change my view.
Do you actually go to WashU, or is this part of the dick measuring contest with UMich?
I go to neither.
Why do you care about needs blind admission again?
Because I think its lame when a school only wants to accept rich kids, despite having the money to bankroll less privileged people to get an education there.
I'm not on financial aid and don't need it, but a school can only ever be benefited by having greater socio-economic diversity --> more diverse interactions, cooler convos, new insights, etc.
It's really just an unnecessary barrier to entry that WashU is putting up. They clearly want richer kids on campus and are prioritizing the business / donation / capital raising aspect of their University, rather than idk, that whole thing University's do where they seek to educate people of all backgrounds and be an institution of learning/research.
Got it, so you weren’t rejected and aren’t blaming a rejection on that. Not every institution sets itself up as prioritizing diversity and the “cooler convos” that engenders as the main goal. It is beneficial that schools outside the norm like Hampden-Sydney, Notre Dame (still mostly Catholic), and Yeshiva exist, let alone Berea. If every school prioritized diversity in the manner (I think) you are using the term, education would not be “diverse” in its offerings. Maybe there should be a rich kids’ school.
Cuz its harder for someone thats poor to get in with the same stats as someone with a wealthy background
Not to mention its way easier / more straightforward to achieve those stats as a rich person due to private schools with grade inflation / competitive environments / cooler extra-curricular opportunities, ACT/SAT testing support, and college counseling.
Again, this is coming from someone who came from the background being described here. @ other viewers, miss me with those "another white privilege screamer" gaslighting/mockery shit -- I'm just self-aware.
Well WashU isn't really a business school. It's more preprofessional and engineering focused and has a top med program. How can you really compare WashU to UMich if WashU only has less than a quarter of UMich's undergrad size? You say that WashU sucks compared to Gtown in terms of need blind, but what's the difference between 100% to 90% need blind? I know a few kids who went there and they still paid sginificantly less than their respective state schools.
Sure you can say that the way they do rankings is gamey, but every school plays this game. They have staff that constantly thinks about this stuff and GTown/UMich are not excluded from that list. "B-tier School in a C-tier location" I'd say is fairly accurate, but none of the other schools you listed except maybe UChicago would be A tier.
– MIT Alum
Fair points, and yeah I'm inclined to agree on the Tier A/B comment you made, but generally speaking I think it's just HYPSM and the rest. To be honest, as best as I can manage, I don't really give a fuck about those things relative to individual talent / ambition --> just said that first comment as a playful jab.
Some counterpoints / points of clarification I have:
First, and perhaps you know better than I, and further I think I understand what you're getting at, but I've always really just viewed Need-based admissions stuff as all or nothing. I'm sure WashU gives some great offers, but that isn't clear to all potential applicants who aren't as deep in this game as us. Just by having a non-need blind policy marketed, I suspect that turns away / discourages some applicants who really have to be careful about which schools they use their application fee budget on (like 70+ USD per app.) For kids at the very bottom of the income ladder, they can just get waivers for those app fees, but for kids stuck in the shitty middle-rung of between Low/Middle or center of Middle Class, they get no waiver and pretty much no tangible benefits (relative to what rich kids get by virtue of being rich/private schooled and what lower class kids get by means of scholarship / other specialized and income determinant opportunities.) There's just a really shitty gray area of wealth that fucks over the first to even 2nd standard deviations of the people on the left-half of the "somewhat normal curve" of US familial wealth/income.
Second, to clarify, WashU does have its "Olin" business school with MBA/UG though and is pushing to make that a "big thing" to my understanding. That's where I'm coming from on that end. Also, you mentioned WashU being "preprofessional" to an extent and I fully agree, but also think most people would agree that that term is more or less synonymous with business culture / ambitions, though if you want to clarify on what you meant there I invite you to do so.
Thirdly, to address your point on "rankings game" playing, I totally agree it is widespread/the norm. However, I am highly reluctant to say that schools like Georgetown/Mich/MIT think about rankings to the extent of places like Chicago/Tufts/Washu and unfortunately now Dartmouth which has hired Tuft's OG "tufts' syndrome / yield protection guy" to run admissions.
Seriously though, I have many friends at all these schools, and I try to keep a keen eye on "the field" when it comes to this kinda stuff cuz I'm a fucking nerd, so I will say this: relative to other T20 range schools, Georgetown (not unlike MIT in fact), gives zero fucks at all about USNews. It has separate application from commonapp (could easily switch over and drop to a 5-7% acceptance rate if it wanted) --> no restrictive ED/EA policies (which could boost yield) --> just genuinely care about getting the best students / best fits for their school. The admissions offices at Gtown/MIT, both in their policies and in statements I've read, share this mentality of being like "fuck the rankings game", we know what we are about and only want people who love us to go out of their way and apply. Also, and akin to MIT, Georgetown gives almost zero fucks about Legacy and doesn't even consider it at all for the non-restrictive EA round, though I understand MIT does not consider it whatsoever across all application rounds.
K I think that's everything I wanted to hit. Thank you for your insightful comment and hopefully some further discussion!
Yea, i get what you mean. By preprofessional, I mean like going to grad school so like premed/prelaw/PhD track kids. But need-based is really not all or nothing (whether you think so or not), you get a certain percentage of aid. Moreover, need-based aid calculations are different. Hence, why people don't get the same financial packages at different schools. If all the other schools meet 100% need-based aid, why do some schools give more/less? WashU may be worse at this than others, but they are at least honest about it.
I go to wustl and I feel attacked
hahahah no beef
Quidem rerum magni odit aut ratione. Ab in et odio in perspiciatis. Dolore commodi sunt consequatur. Est delectus quaerat ipsam illum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...