After having gone through the whole process of admissions and seeing numerous threads and posts, i am inclined to believe that most universities may be co-ordinating their admissions.

For e.g.: If a student 'A' gets admission into 3 good univs, then he 'blocks' that seat in all 3 univs. for a while. Which means that apart from the univ. he is going to choose, the other 2 univs lose out on their power to make other applicants submit to their demands - even if this situation arises only for 3-4 weeks. In the admission business and going by the universities' main aim, apart from providing world class education, which is to raise fund vide tuition fees, these 3-4 weeks become crucial.

To add to the above, if the universities (especially private ones) collaborate together, they get the best brains from around the world...and the money. Once you have the best from around the world, you can then decide who to give the scholarships (free dough) to.

The same way, when public universities, which rely a lot on Govt. grant/funding, may be co-ordinating to ensure that one applicant does not occupy too many seats in different univs., thereby denyin entry to other candidates for those crucial 3-4 weeks, especially when public money is at stake.

What do you think?

Disclaimer: This is purely my opinion and thought and the outcome of my over worked brian[:)] This post does not in any way accuse any person/univ of doing anything that is not allowed by law/morals. This post does not intend to discriminate between persons/universities and also does not intend to hurt anyone's feelings and is written purely under rights conferred under the freedom of speech and expression.

I know from an insider... Universities are not allowed to exchange informaiton - but they do!

Thanx V-2007. I had applied to many universities and the time and way in which I got accepted/rejected somehow got me thinking....thanks for the info. Hope it helps those who read this thread.

I tend to disagree. I've applied for LLM Programs of eight different Universities and got admitted to all of them... Seems no communication among the schools...

I really doubt that coordinate largely because it would involve too much time and the universities are WAY too competitive with each other to coordinate on candidates. If anything, they are more likely to want someone if one of the other institutions do too.
It would be all over the NY Times by now if they did. There is no way they could keep it a secret.

With due respect...the best kept secrets...are the best ones....you dont get to know them....:)

Most of the law schools are private institutions and they compete among themselves for the students (i.e. for their tution). Just wondering whether the US anti-trust law would apply to the universities if they really were coordinating admission...

@kj008: That is true and I guess it would be difficult to prove otherwise if you make that argument. It is like saying God exists because we can't prove he doesn't. An unhelpful and intellectually bankrupt answer.

Given the high quality of investigative journalism in this country and the media's desire to draw Ivy League blood I would be surprised if such coordinate between universities could remain a secret.

I agree with your argument flygirl....but only to a certain extent. When we talk of media, have we ever tried to think as to why, for eg: NYU went up above CLS? What is the yardstick for ranking schools....?

also....my argument as regards co-ord. is only as far as llm admissions are concerned....please rememember that it is valuable inflow of funds from outside the country. this is true in most cases as the llms are mostly int. sudents. forget about the law, going purely by what v-2007 says, co-ord between univs will definately ensure more inflow of funds....and this for any capitalistic economy and society is a good thing .

and since i do not know the admission procedure for JDs, i cannot comment on it....

and flygirl, since you came up with the 'god' one, you may like to read this (sorry for the length - taken from a website) and hope it clears some doubts:
AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION.
An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem
science has with God, The Almighty.

He asks one of his new students to stand and.....

Prof: So you believe in God?
Student: Absolutely, sir.

Prof: Is God good?
Student: Sure.

Prof: Is God all-powerful?
Student: Yes.

Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him.
Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is
this God good then? Hmm?

(Student is silent.)

Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fellow. Is God
good?
Student: Yes.

Prof: Is Satan good?
Student: No.

Prof: Where does Satan come from?
Student: From...God...

Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student: Yes.

Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?
Student: Yes.

Prof: So who created evil?
Student does not answer.

Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible
things exist in the world, don't they?
Student: Yes, sir.

Prof: So, who created them?
Student has no answer.

Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the
world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?
Student: No, sir.

Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?
Student: No, sir.

Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have
you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?
Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.


Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student: Yes.

Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science
says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student: Nothing. I only have my faith.

Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.


Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Prof: Yes.


Student: And is there such a thing as cold?
Prof: Yes.
Student: No sir. There isn't.

(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)

Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega
heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything
called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we
can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is
only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold.
Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of
it.

(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)

Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?

Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You
can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if
you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't
it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make
darkness darker, wouldn't you?


Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?
Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?

Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is
life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the
concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science
can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has
never seen, much less fully understood either one.

To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that
death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of
life: just the absence of it.


Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a
monkey?


Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of
course, I do.

Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the
argument is going.)


Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work
and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not
teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?
(The class is in uproar.)


Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's
brain?
(The class breaks out into laughter.)


Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain;
felt it, touched or smelt it?
No one appears to have done so.
So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science
says that you have no brain, sir.

With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?

(The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face
unfathomable.)

Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.

Student: That is it sir... The link between man & god is FAITH. That is all
that keeps things moving & alive.

This is a true story, and the
student was none other than.........
Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam,
the present president of India."

no more comments from any1?

I would say no. Besides, I don´t think they can exchange information without an applicant´s consent.

I doubt it. The fact that some of the deadlines they give you when they offer admission are so short, and the colleges must know you are waiting on other decisions, is very frustrating for the student. I had to get several extensions which is majorly frustrating for both me and the administration. This can also lead to moral dilemmas about putting deposits down only to burn them if a better offer comes.

Maybe if the schools did actually coordinate a period of time when they would announce decisions so this whole situation can be avoided, and cause a lot less stress on the students.

However, the cynic in me feels that the early deadlines could be gamesmanship with regard to getting good students to accept the school. This is a completely unfair way of conducting the admissions process. When I applied to do my LL.B. in England, you made a decision only after all of the decisions had been communicated by the school. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

good point guys! but i also wonder as to why many schools ask the number/names of the other schools where the applicant has applied.

just a thought...

@Kj008, US universities have had a chequered history of coordination between them - see U.S v. Brown University, 5 F.3d 658 (3rd Cir. 1993). This was in regard to coordination on financial aid. The point being once competitors get together to talk about a focal point, then the discussion can wander to other matters.

With regards to LL.M (I think) there was a consent order (meaning, more or less, '' I won't do this again, if you let me go this time'') against a few who had an informal policy of not choosing candidates that had been admitted to a US State bar. Perhaps, an antitrust specialist on the board could inform better on this.

@Bober: Yes, antitrust can apply to private universities as they are market participants. State Universities may get away, if the State articulates a clear order that it wants competition suppressed in some sphere and for the State universities to benefit from such an order.

Overall, the search for bright students is fierce, particularly on the undergrads level. This is where scholarly reputation counts. Competition here is significantly head to head, which means your region does not count.

The latter factor, in terms of LL.M, is a weak point in admission process as it allows substandard candidates to attend highly regarded institutions.

Before any such persons start attacking my post I thought it would be good to provide a practitioner's view on the situation - see http://www.antitrustreview.com/archives/category/people/page/2/

- I think competition between universities is too high.
- What about privacy? Applicant's rights (chance on higher scholarship for instance)? --> too many people involved: if someone talks (for instance: case of extortion)...
- University's reputation


I think they don't cooperate.