The Anchor

February Admission Practices Case Study

As part of the PCACAC AP Committee's desire to proactively discuss ethics, we will be sending out monthly "case studies." In these cases, we will offer a situation and discuss whether the issue is in compliance with the new Statement of Principles of Good Practice (SPGP):  NACAC’s Code of Ethics and Professional Practices. These cases are submitted anonymously by PCACAC members. All questions and allegations are treated as confidential; therefore, cases have been adapted, when necessary, to protect the identity of the professional seeking advice. If you have a question about a situation or CEPP: SPGP, please contact a member of the AP Committee.

• I am very interested in Fave College
• I am somewhat interested in Fave College
• I am no longer considering Fave College

Want to review previous case studies?  
View all of the Admissions Practices Case Studies on The Anchor here.
Want to submit a case for consideration? Please e-mail the PCACAC AP Committee Chair at bittinge@umbc.edu.

February Case:  In mid-March, the “Your Admission Decision” email finally arrived in Keegan’s mailbox. Although disappointed to be put on Fave College’s waitlist rather than being accepted, she accepted her place on the waitlist…and waited. Hoping to be taken off the waitlist prior to May 1, she held off sending her deposit to another college. A month later, Keegan’s heart was in her throat as she opened the “Waitlist Update” email. But, it was not a decision, Fave College was asking her, “What is your level of interest in Fave College now that you have received your other admission decisions?” and she had to reply with one of the following answers:

Discussion:  Is it okay for Fave College to ask Keegan this question in the new CEPP:SPGP?

Conclusions:  Is this compliant with the SPGPs? Yes, it is. In the SPGPs approved in 2017, Section II. The Responsible Practice of College Admission states in the second paragraph, “Since the number of students willing to accept an offer of admission from the wait list declines each day that colleges wait to extend an offer of admission, the SPGP: NACAC’s Code of Ethics and Professional Practices permits colleges to assess in advance a waitlisted candidate’s level of interest and financial need and to require a timely verbal commitment once an offer of admission has been extended.” And in subsection C 3.” Colleges may ask students who have accepted a place on the wait list to indicate their level of interest, but must not ask them to rank order or identify their other college choices.” Fave College is able to assess Keegan’s level of interest from her response, but does not know what her other choices are.

If you wish to file a complaint, please complete a NACAC Confidential Complaint form. All personal information will be kept confidential, but the information will be forwarded to the appropriate affiliate AP committee. This committee will follow up on the issue.