Any risk in telling a school you're unhappy with them? Forum

[dvd]

`

[secant]

Should these adcoms be told when we're unhappy?

No upside; large, albeit unlikely, downside; bad risk/reward profile - don't.

[Sias]

You ever see one of those "Ally" Bank commercials where they mistreat kids? There's one that just came on where some cute kid is sitting there staring at Mr. Suit. Then a new kid comes in a second later and is offered a delicious looking chocolate ice cream cone...he takes it, enjoys it, and stares at the other kid who is CLEARLY feeling used and abused. That is definitely unfair.

Did either of those kids deserve the chocolate cone in the first place? Nope, neither of them really did anything to deserve it. In fact, the second kid supposedly just got it because he arrived after the first kid, representing the "incentives" banks use to gain new customers while ignoring their existing ones.

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

I still don't think you get it.

You are comparing yourself to the kid who didn't get the ice cream. That kid feels cheated because the decision to give the other kid the ice cream was capricious and arbitrary. Sure, he didn't have to give that kid the ice cream... but if he is going to give it to that other kid, then he needs to give it to you also. Otherwise it is unfair.

But the problem with your argument is that this isn't a commercial. The decision about who to give ice cream wasn't capricious and arbitrary, it was made based on an evaluation using criterion that you are not privy to. And unlike the commercial, the kids applying for the scholarship/admissions were not all equally deserving of the ice cream.

I agree completely. BUT, I still don't feel I deserved the ice cream/scholarship. I just think the ice cream/scholarship was given out unfairly. Maybe the second kid coming into the commercial had just run a marathon and needed some sugar, I don't know...and I FULLY admit that I don't know all of the information about these applicants...and I have included this in my hypothetical letter all the time, requesting to be corrected if I was wrong. But just because I don't have ALL the information an adcom is privy to doesn't mean I shouldn't write something saying that on the surface it seems unfair. The practices of Iowa admissions seem SO different from other law schools based on the information I can gather that it may warrant someone saying something.

Besides, my biggest complaint has always been about telling me I was nominated for something (ie. probably getting something...this is what they told me in the very beginning), then being ignored/strung along, then being told I got nothing, then being made aware that (maybe, according to internet sources) that waitlisters got scholarships, then being made aware that they gave out tons of money to people whose numbers were very similar to mine (but yes, maybe they cured cancer)....

It seems unfair.

How is being nominated the same as "probably getting something"? Do you think that all of the films nominated for best picture are "probably getting" the award? Regardless, even "probably getting" leaves room for "possibly not getting" which you seem unwilling to accept. And again, your inability to understand basic vocab here does not augur well for your legal career.

And why do you keep going on and on about it being unfair? It's perfectly fair for Iowa to give money to whomever they want. It's their money, not yours. They don't have to explain themselves to you anymore than you should have to explain yourself to the charities who didn't benefit from your donations in a given year.

Your sense of entitlement is really unbelievable.

Edited to fix typo

[Bildungsroman]

I agree completely. BUT, I still don't feel I deserved the ice cream/scholarship. I just think the ice cream/scholarship was given out unfairly.

So, you don't think you deserve it, you just don't think they deserve it either? Would you prefer that Iowa had just burned that money in a big pile at ASD?

There seem to be four scenarios:

1. Neither you nor this possibly-made-up other person (let's call him Steve) gets money.
2. You get money, Steve does not.
3. Steve gets money, you do not.
3. You and Steve both get money.

So, taking what you said about not feeling you deserved it yourself at face value, the option you think would have been fair is scenario 1.

What do you have against Steve?

[d34d9823]

I agree completely. BUT, I still don't feel I deserved the ice cream/scholarship. I just think the ice cream/scholarship was given out unfairly.

So, you don't think you deserve it, you just don't think they deserve it either? Would you prefer that Iowa had just burned that money in a big pile at ASD?

There seem to be four scenarios:

1. Neither you nor this possibly-made-up other person (let's call him Steve) gets money.
2. You get money, Steve does not.
3. Steve gets money, you do not.
3. You and Steve both get money.

So, taking what you said about not feeling you deserved it yourself at face value, the option you think would have been fair is scenario 1.

What do you have against Steve?

God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, that's what.

[Matthies]

I agree completely. BUT, I still don't feel I deserved the ice cream/scholarship. I just think the ice cream/scholarship was given out unfairly.

So, you don't think you deserve it, you just don't think they deserve it either? Would you prefer that Iowa had just burned that money in a big pile at ASD?

There seem to be four scenarios:

1. Neither you nor this possibly-made-up other person (let's call him Steve) gets money.
2. You get money, Steve does not.
3. Steve gets money, you do not.
3. You and Steve both get money.

So, taking what you said about not feeling you deserved it yourself at face value, the option you think would have been fair is scenario 1.

What do you have against Steve?

God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, that's what.

I was going to say that maybe Steve got money becuase he was actaully Betty before the surgery, but u ruined it for me

[SaintClarence27]

While I can sympathize with the thoughts expressed by a lot of people in this thread who think sending the letter is a bad idea, I find it odd that many who have accused the OP of immaturity or a sense of entitlement cannot seem to communicate their point of view in a legitimate, mature way themselves. Points may be valid, but I find it strange that when someone speaks to the OP in such a tone, they find it to be further proof of the OP's "immaturity" when he/she responds in kind. But hey, the internet is serious business. TLS is what it is.

OP, the decision to send the letter is your own. I know and have been affected by what you are referring to and have been irked by it myself. I will not be sending a letter though because of the exact thoughts expressed by Matthies. (Thanks again, Matthies, for great insight.)

I'm not going to lie, I'm glad I'm going to school with you next year.

What about me, you're not excited to go to school with MEEEEE???

[krj02004]

I understand you are upset. But I don't think you have a full understanding of Iowa's scholarship program. 3 of the 5 scholarships you listed below are "LOF"... or legal opportunity fellowship awards. They are for URM's only. I'm going to assume (since you haven't mentioned on TLS before) that you don't qualify as an URM. Technically, that money isn't available to you.

Iowa shouldn't have said you were going to be awarded scholly money, and then not give you any. But as far as OP's #'s go.... no one got awards that they didn't deserve. Opposed to what most people think, law school isn't strictly about #'s. That's an overwhelming part of the process obviously, but if someone got awarded a scholaship over you and only had SLIGHTLY lower #'s, chances are they just liked that OP's file better. Or probably your percentile rank is literally the same. Perhaps she or he had better work experience or something else. This whole admissions game seems like a crap shoot anyways half the time. I would also like to add the Iowa heavily considers your undergraduate program. You may have a decent GPA, but the college maybe doesn't have the academic reputation of a peer student who had a slightly lower GPA. I graduated from a T7 liberal arts college, and in EVERY interview or phone conversation I've had with any law school dean, they always mention, "Wow, great undergraduate academic program". I have a good GPA, but it's not a 4.0 at all.

Anyways, I wouldn't write a seperate angry letter. I would send an email to Dean Collins directly saying you would have liked to have attended Iowa, but because of the way they handled your specific financial aid package and rescinded (sp?) a scholarship award you are very disappointed. Consequently, in light of other offers, you feel as though you will have to withdraw your offer of admission. THen, ask Dean Collins if he could take another look at your file and see what he can do before you make a final decision, since Iowa is your top choice.

At least you will get a final answer, make your point professionally, and perhaps you will be pleasantly surprised! Best of luck...

Hi all,

So I am withdrawing from a school today and in the end I have felt they have handled their admissions process with me pretty terribly. Is there a risk in sending them a withdrawal email and giving them a polite piece of my mind in the withdrawal? I feel like I have nothing to lose with regards to this specific school, and the only risk might be if they told other schools.

Should these adcoms be told when we're unhappy?

What happened during the admissions process that you felt was poorly handled? I personally find it difficult to give advice without knowing, as some people tend to be less reasonable than others.

A few things.
1) I was told I was nominated for a scholarship and that I would receive info about it shortly...it took them two months (with me regularly calling in) for them to tell me I wouldn't be receiving any scholarship whatsoever...after I had deposited.
2) I have heard on TLS that Iowa has been awarding FULL scholarships to people they are taking off the wait list despite being told that once money was "returned to the pot" they would be issuing scholly's to those nominated for partial ones.
3) I emailed and called them multiple times about my financial aid status only to hear nothing from them for over a week despite being told that they would get back to me asap
4) They are giving out full scholarships, FULL rides, to people with only slightly better (or sometimes not better at all) numbers than many people nominated for partial scholly's who in the end received nothing despite being told they were probably going to get something (fully within Iowa's rights...but something that definitely doesn't rub any of the 70+ partial scholly nominees the right way)

This is me whining and ranting but I do feel it's very stupid the way they handled all of this. They don't OWE me anything, and they have every right to conduct their admissions process however they want, but as a customer (a term one poster used to describe our relationship with the admissions offices after our application fee and before our tuition payment) I feel like it's very unfair and stupid business practices.

Why tell someone they are nominated for scholarship they aren't sure they can give out? What purpose does this serve except potentially pissing an admitted student off if they don't end up getting anything? Are we supposed to feel sympathy for them that they ran out of money before they got around to giving us any? Is Iowa surprised they ran out of money when they're giving away FULL scholly's to people (according to LSN, some of the more surprising examples):

thepcv N 163 3.08 $117,906 Accepted A
MoSeph 164 3.72 $117,906 Accepted A
traehekat 164 3.59 $123,966 Accepted A
ronakkk 164 3.97 $117,906 Accepted
mattbradshaw 165 3.8 $118,000 Accepted

My numbers: 163, 3.64.

So, in the end I can do two things: 1) not attend (doing that) 2) tell them how I feel (considering doing this)

How would you all feel if this happened to you? (I'm prepared for all those tough folks out there who accuse me of pointlessly whining! I'd like to see how you'd feel about this if it happened to you)

[krj02004]

FYI... the $117,906 awards are the LOF's. So there are URM's on your list. This is, I think, what people are trying to nicely (or not so nicely) tell you on this thread. You really don't know the whole story, so writing a seperate letter to the dean could be very risky. You may end up looking very foolish or worse. I would take my advice in the comment above and just write that quick email to Dean Collins (lol... my that sounded self-promoting, hmmm?).

[Moxie]

No upside; large, albeit unlikely, downside; bad risk/reward profile - don't.

+1. I don't see what benefit one would receive out of this (unless you're hoping for increased scholarship money - if so, this isn't the right way to ask)

[SaintClarence27]

FYI... the $117,906 awards are the LOF's. So there are URM's on your list. This is, I think, what people are trying to nicely (or not so nicely) tell you on this thread. You really don't know the whole story, so writing a seperate letter to the dean could be very risky. You may end up looking very foolish or worse. I would take my advice in the comment above and just write that quick email to Dean Collins (lol... my that sounded self-promoting, hmmm?).

There are likely 4 and possibly 5 URMs on the list.

[krj02004]

FYI... the $117,906 awards are the LOF's. So there are URM's on your list. This is, I think, what people are trying to nicely (or not so nicely) tell you on this thread. You really don't know the whole story, so writing a seperate letter to the dean could be very risky. You may end up looking very foolish or worse. I would take my advice in the comment above and just write that quick email to Dean Collins (lol... my that sounded self-promoting, hmmm?).

There are likely 4 and possibly 5 URMs on the list.

LOL... so her information is even more incorrect. Well, there you go... they probably need to heavily recruit URM's in Iowa. Just saying

[blurbz]

While I can sympathize with the thoughts expressed by a lot of people in this thread who think sending the letter is a bad idea, I find it odd that many who have accused the OP of immaturity or a sense of entitlement cannot seem to communicate their point of view in a legitimate, mature way themselves. Points may be valid, but I find it strange that when someone speaks to the OP in such a tone, they find it to be further proof of the OP's "immaturity" when he/she responds in kind. But hey, the internet is serious business. TLS is what it is.

OP, the decision to send the letter is your own. I know and have been affected by what you are referring to and have been irked by it myself. I will not be sending a letter though because of the exact thoughts expressed by Matthies. (Thanks again, Matthies, for great insight.)

I'm not going to lie, I'm glad I'm going to school with you next year.

What about me, you're not excited to go to school with MEEEEE???

Ohhhhh yeaahhhhhhh.

Haha, no, really, I am.

[krj02004]

Regionality... just curious, have you decided to go to W&L over Iowa then... even though it will cost you more and is much lower ranked? Reasons??

[Regionality]

Regionality... just curious, have you decided to go to W&L over Iowa then... even though it will cost you more and is much lower ranked? Reasons??

Nope, actually I'm going to Wisconsin with a small scholarship...unless I get into a waitlist! Thanks for asking though!

[Yacht_Party]

Wow. Stop whining.

[Regionality]

Wow. Stop whining.

As someone who is as logical as a soon-to-be or current law student, you can understand how someone can have a gripe with one situation while not being completely screwed in the general sense, correct?

IF my gripe with Iowa is valid, does the fact that I have a good alternative make it less of a reasonable complaint?

Whether you agree with me or not, don't tell me to stop whining simply because I have another solid option. I would have preferred Iowa with a partial scholarship.

[SaintClarence27]

Wow. Stop whining.

As someone who is as logical as a soon-to-be or current law student, you can understand how someone can have a gripe with one situation while not being completely screwed in the general sense, correct?

IF my gripe with Iowa is valid, does the fact that I have a good alternative make it less of a reasonable complaint?

Whether you agree with me or not, don't tell me to stop whining simply because I have another solid option. I would have preferred Iowa with a partial scholarship.

Here's the issue. It's not. That means that you are whining.

[Regionality]

Wow. Stop whining.

As someone who is as logical as a soon-to-be or current law student, you can understand how someone can have a gripe with one situation while not being completely screwed in the general sense, correct?

IF my gripe with Iowa is valid, does the fact that I have a good alternative make it less of a reasonable complaint?

Whether you agree with me or not, don't tell me to stop whining simply because I have another solid option. I would have preferred Iowa with a partial scholarship.

Here's the issue. It's not. That means that you are whining.

/thread.

[Yacht_Party]

Whether you agree with me or not, don't tell me to stop whining simply because I have another solid option. I would have preferred Iowa with a partial scholarship.

What.

I'm telling you to stop whining because...you're whining.

Edit: see Saint Clarence's post.