In a classic example of playing the man rather than playing the ball, my last post about my Wharton admission feedback drew the ire of some people who alleged I was being bitter about my ding rather than me calling a spade a spade.
To put things in perspective, I felt a follow up post was called for, to answer some pertinent questions about my allegations.1. Am I bitter about being dinged by Wharton.
A. Most emphatically no, sad yes, but bitter no! I gave it my best possible shot and while I am unhappy it failed, I blame myself for not ironing the last vestiges of doubt in the mind of the admissions committee as compared to blaming the school. 2. Did I deserve to go to Wharton?
A. This was one of the comments I received from 'anonymous', and my answer is, depends on who you talk too? Ask my mother, and she will beat you ass for even doubting, ask Alex Brown and he might have a different opinion. But if you break the question down into its more component parts, "Was I qualified enough to apply to Wharton, to even dream about going to school there"? The answer quite simply is yes. I have a GMAT score that is well within the average for Wharton, a superb extra-curricular record and the full 9 yards as far as work progression and GPA is concerned. To put an end to this discussion, even Ms. Snooty Pants admitted several times, if I might add, that a decision in my case fell into the toughest category, and that there wasn't anything she could give me in terms of feedback because there wasn't anything she felt was lacking. Which translates into some members of the admissions committee waking up on the right (or wrong - depending upon your perspective) side of the bed, the day of my decision.3. Did I have a problem hearing that I wasn't good enough?
A. Again one of the questions left for me, which goes to show that the poster was more concerned about playing the man versus playing the ball. My post, was a simple, real simple portrayal of the conversation between me and the admission committee member. The issue I was trying to bring to light was the attitude that I was faced with right from the start. This, even before my feedback session started. So I doubt it was a situation of me having a problem hearing I wasn't good enough. 4. Was I irritated that the feedback session dint quite pin down specifics (BritChick)?
A. I wasn't in the least bit annoyed by the fallacies that came to light, the post was all about the attitude I received, which I felt was unwarranted. 5. Was I wrong to generalize and comment on the whole school on the basis of this one incident and quote a random magazine article to defend my views?
A. Obviously the whole story of my dealings with Wharton hasn't been told. This was just the last straw that broke the camel's back. The application process involved several instances that left a bad taste in my mouth, and I know for a fact that I wasn't alone in getting a taste of the underside of the beast. Those instances pretty much went undocumented mostly to ward of unwanted outing of my online persona and to prevent possible repercussions. But all those incidents, including this one I don't consider as being representative of the school as a whole but more as a reflection of the people I dealt with. But these are the people who are the face of the school and their behavior does reflect back on the school, more than anything else. This particular incident, I brought to light, mainly because it was one of the most obnoxious situations I have ever been in. If the adCom, hadn't been so rude, so mean or so condescending, I would probably have just pushed it under the carpet as usual and moved on. The article I quoted was a foot note to my post, and I had it in there as a documented proof of other unsavory behavior not as conclusive proof of my claims. 6. Are attacks like 'mine' an unwanted after effect of bending over backwards to offer feedback to dinged candidates?
A. I think that is a botched up argument. Wharton should not offer feedback until and unless it is confident of having people trained to do what is a very sensitive job. Wharton has the unique distinction of having the maximum number of re-applicants in its application pool every year. So obviously offering feedback fits in well with what the school sees as its USP. In which case, it has to be very professional about it. You can't give half assed, unprofessional feedback, and expect the applicant to feel happy because they are getting something over nothing. Remember the school needs applicants as much as the applicant needs the school and basic courtesy and manners are not something to be grateful off when received, it is expected as a right!
When you judge class in a person, it isn't by the way a person behaves to people who are doing well in life or above them in stature, rather you compare them to how they deal with the 'underlings'. I doubt that if you go and ask Thomas Caleel
(the new Wharton admissions director), how he feels about the image Wharton showcases in feedbacks, he will condone such behavior. Specially when it is obvious (from the other comments), that this kind of behavior is a lot more rife than is being credited.