Tulane bans HS from ED for 1 year after student backs out

[Anonymous]

No one takes Tulane seriously as a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

Not necessarily. The kid could have applied EA at other schools before submitting the Tulane ED, especially if it was ED2. Counselor would have already submitted the information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

Not necessarily. The kid could have applied EA at other schools before submitting the Tulane ED, especially if it was ED2. Counselor would have already submitted the information.

If it's true the EA submissions were for UC schools, that's allowed. Breaking the ED agreement is not allowed, however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

Not necessarily. The kid could have applied EA at other schools before submitting the Tulane ED, especially if it was ED2. Counselor would have already submitted the information.

Every school requires the final transcript at the end of the year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a gut feeling that the Colorado Academy College Counseling Office turned a blind eye to more than one of its own students who rejected an early decision offer for a better deal. This is a small world among independent schools, and college counselors and admissions officers talk. Tulane would not randomly single out a school like this for no reason. There must have been evidence of a pattern of skirting the rules.

That’s a good point. I cannot imagine any of the DMV area schools doing this. They are much more in the spotlight.

What’s a guidance counselor supposed to do? They can’t force a student to act for the collective good, especially one that’s graduating. I suspect this happens much more frequently than people suspect, even in the DMV.

They can refuse to send grades/ recs and other information to schools beyond the ED

Not meaningful if the noncompliant kid applied ED and EA to several schools and the issue is that the kid liked one of the EA options he got better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

Not necessarily. The kid could have applied EA at other schools before submitting the Tulane ED, especially if it was ED2. Counselor would have already submitted the information.

Every school requires the final transcript at the end of the year.

And that transcript in most cases will be accessible to a student. A private school isn’t going to refuse a transcript to a student who legit graduated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

Not necessarily. The kid could have applied EA at other schools before submitting the Tulane ED, especially if it was ED2. Counselor would have already submitted the information.

If it's true the EA submissions were for UC schools, that's allowed. Breaking the ED agreement is not allowed, however.

UCs do not have EA only RD. If the student did break an ED with Tulane to go to UCLA, the student would have only been able to break the ED agreement in late March at the earliest, when UCLA acceptances go out. If this is the scenario, no wonder Tulane was upset. Letting someone in ED in mid-December or mid-February, and then not finding out the student was going to break the agreement until the last week of March, would have been pretty annoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Given that UCs give accepted students until May 1 to put down a deposit for enrollment, Tulane may have only found out after May 1st.

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

Not necessarily. The kid could have applied EA at other schools before submitting the Tulane ED, especially if it was ED2. Counselor would have already submitted the information.

If it's true the EA submissions were for UC schools, that's allowed. Breaking the ED agreement is not allowed, however.

UCs do not have EA only RD. If the student did break an ED with Tulane to go to UCLA, the student would have only been able to break the ED agreement in late March at the earliest, when UCLA acceptances go out. If this is the scenario, no wonder Tulane was upset. Letting someone in ED in mid-December or mid-February, and then not finding out the student was going to break the agreement until the last week of March, would have been pretty annoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am fine with Tulane doing this. Seriously, all the kid had to do was make up some reason and send it via email. I wish there is a way for the kid to be punished too.

+1 Same here. It's not like this Colorado private school can't have its kids accepted at all. It's just that they can't apply ED. For 1 year. This is hardly a tragedy. The NYT article even talks about how the guidance counselor is advising students to say "I would have applied ED if I could" in their essays. So they don't have the binding constraint of ED but can still claim it's their "first choice."

Yes, but if you know anything about Tulane admissions, you know that kids rarely get in unless they ED1 or ED2. There are something like 50 or fewer RD admits in a class of about 2000.

Tulane lets in a fair number of kids EA. It has gotten larger the last 3 cycles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane getting huffy and punishing so many other students from this high school is childish and unethical.

Not that Tulane interests me, but now we have one less reason to consider it.

Tulane didn't do this to the junior class, the high school counselor did. The Junior class should demand that person be fired and that the school withhold the offending students' transcripts. Then maybe Tulane will be able to trust the school, take the school and its students at their word, and change course. No college wants to admit unethical people and if you are coming from an unethical high school, its a huge red flag.

I'm not sure why people are blaming Tulane for enforcing its rules. At least they're being transparent about it. What's the point of binding ED if the students are just going to take the advantage of being admitted ED while also going to the best school/taking the best offer they get (the reason most kids don't apply ED in the first place).

Given that UCs give accepted students until May 1 to put down a deposit for enrollment, Tulane may have only found out after May 1st.

Let me make this clear. If by chance it was the student who was in the wrong then punish the student, not the innocent ones who had nothing to do with this! Disgusting move by Tulane.

If the student wasn't in "the wrong," the private school can clearly contest its ban. But since the Colorado Academy guidance counselor was asking other guidance counselors "how to deal with this" rather than saying that Tulane's assertions were false, it doesn't appear to be the case.

I don't know how you suggest Tulane "punish the student." Clearly the action Tulane is able to take that's within its powers as a university is to ban other kids from that school from doing ED for one year. You can suggest others, but I would suggest the university has thought more about this than you have. And as others have said upthread, these private school kids can still apply EA or RD if they want.

This seems the appropriate punishment as the school counselor was a signatory to the agreement, and facilitated the kid breaking it by providing transcript, etc .. . to the college the kid is attending. It’s impossible for Tulane to punish the kid directly.

Not necessarily. The kid could have applied EA at other schools before submitting the Tulane ED, especially if it was ED2. Counselor would have already submitted the information.

If it's true the EA submissions were for UC schools, that's allowed. Breaking the ED agreement is not allowed, however.

UCs do not have EA only RD. If the student did break an ED with Tulane to go to UCLA, the student would have only been able to break the ED agreement in late March at the earliest, when UCLA acceptances go out. If this is the scenario, no wonder Tulane was upset. Letting someone in ED in mid-December or mid-February, and then not finding out the student was going to break the agreement until the last week of March, would have been pretty annoying.

The Tulane ED break situation I am aware of is with the UC's, UCLA specifically. It isn't that UC's have ED/EA, they don't it's that their regular decision application is due on November 30th so students must apply before/in tandem with any ED applications. Meaning the application and all of the school components, transcripts are in. UC is not part of Common App, it's a single application but a separate account/password for each campus applied to. Also UC's don't take first semester senior year grades so there was nothing else for the school to submit. Kid told counselor and parents had withdrawn other apps and had for the Common App ones but had not for UC's.

[Anonymous]

What if this student applied to another school ED1 was deferred and then applied ED2 to Tulane. The HS would send all transcripts and rec letters to all the school they applied to before Jan 1. Then in April the ED1 school took them RD or off the waitlist because the student did not pull it applications after getting accepted from Tulane. What wad the High school supposed to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if this student applied to another school ED1 was deferred and then applied ED2 to Tulane. The HS would send all transcripts and rec letters to all the school they applied to before Jan 1. Then in April the ED1 school took them RD or off the waitlist because the student did not pull it applications after getting accepted from Tulane. What wad the High school supposed to do?

Tell the kid that they signed an agreement to do ED with Tulane which is binding. And that while they can legally accept another school, the repercussions for his school and his fellow students for not adhering to that agreement could be severe--as it was in the case of Colorado Academy, a school which I've never heard of, but now know has at least one student who refused to abide by the agreement they made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am fine with Tulane doing this. Seriously, all the kid had to do was make up some reason and send it via email. I wish there is a way for the kid to be punished too.

+1 Same here. It's not like this Colorado private school can't have its kids accepted at all. It's just that they can't apply ED. For 1 year. This is hardly a tragedy. The NYT article even talks about how the guidance counselor is advising students to say "I would have applied ED if I could" in their essays. So they don't have the binding constraint of ED but can still claim it's their "first choice."

Yes, but if you know anything about Tulane admissions, you know that kids rarely get in unless they ED1 or ED2. There are something like 50 or fewer RD admits in a class of about 2000.

Tulane lets in a fair number of kids EA. It has gotten larger the last 3 cycles.

The PP quoting the 50 kid stat was wrong about their knowledge of Tulane admissions. The NY Times article said :

About two-thirds of the more than 1,800 freshmen in the class were admitted through early decision, and only 106 with regular decisions, according to a report by Inside Higher Ed. (Others got in through early action, a preferential way to apply without committing to enrolling.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one takes Tulane seriously as a school.

Actually, no one takes YOU and your opinions seriously.