- Report: #652682
Complaint Review: Johns Hopkins - Washington District of Columbia
-
Author Not Confirmed
Why?
Johns Hopkins
1717 Massachusetts Ave NW Washington, 20036 District of Columbia, United States of America
Phone:
Web:
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Johns Hopkins Advanced Academic Programs --Application Bungled-- Washington, District of Columbia
The application process to the advanced writing program is
deceptively easy. The site states "While students may apply throughout the
year and begin study during any of the three semesters/terms, there are
application dates to be aware of" (Step 3 Admissions). When the applicant
visited the Admissions office, the applicant was told that he could submit
application materials piecemeal. The application submitted some materials.
Later the applicant had references mail letters in. Still later, the
application submitted a complete application in person, having revised
materials from before and with additional references. Upon visiting the
Admissions office, some materials had been misplaced. The earlier reference
letter was never received. Nevertheless, since the application was complete, it
was accepted. When the applicant asked about repaying the admission fee, the
officer said it was unnecessary should there be a check within the folder.
(Interesting point). The senior admissions officer generated a curt
one-paragraph email stating "all materials were now received and the
application would be forwarded." The review process for the writing
program normally requires several weeks. Within a couple weeks, the applicant
received a letter from the senior admissions officer which contained only a
curt paragraph of rejection. (The office claims that the review process
normally allows for six weeks).
Evidently the writing faculty do not even do applicants the honor of writing letters themselves (unlike any other graduate program the applicant applied to). Further notes are that applicants should study the quality of the faculty (http://advanced.jhu.edu/academic/writing/contact/?lid=783) since this has a bearing on the type of applicants accepted (as opposed to rejected); if one has earned a similar masters degree can one seriously believe that these inbred faculty will challenge you to write your uncontested best? If you are a graduate student or higher and have published a book or blog (as I have), it counts as a disqualification, although that will never be openly stated. The application process required a writing sample, and the fact that the faculty provided no evidence of having received, read, or reviewed the writing sample personally reflects poorly. Usually the faculty are willing and do prepare reviews or reasons for rejection or acceptance (that is my experience). The shut-off or shut-out by mere admissions officers conveys that not only are they inbred, but hired staff are incapable of writing, since their rejections leave no room for reconsideration to apply to related university programs. In short, the applicant believes that the staff incompetency is a reflection of the faculty; in particular, the applicant could work as staff but is not a person of color. With regard to ignoring applicant email? Most likely, the faculty are too busy practicing snob appeal to respond.
Evidently the writing faculty do not even do applicants the honor of writing letters themselves (unlike any other graduate program the applicant applied to). Further notes are that applicants should study the quality of the faculty (http://advanced.jhu.edu/academic/writing/contact/?lid=783) since this has a bearing on the type of applicants accepted (as opposed to rejected); if one has earned a similar masters degree can one seriously believe that these inbred faculty will challenge you to write your uncontested best? If you are a graduate student or higher and have published a book or blog (as I have), it counts as a disqualification, although that will never be openly stated. The application process required a writing sample, and the fact that the faculty provided no evidence of having received, read, or reviewed the writing sample personally reflects poorly. Usually the faculty are willing and do prepare reviews or reasons for rejection or acceptance (that is my experience). The shut-off or shut-out by mere admissions officers conveys that not only are they inbred, but hired staff are incapable of writing, since their rejections leave no room for reconsideration to apply to related university programs. In short, the applicant believes that the staff incompetency is a reflection of the faculty; in particular, the applicant could work as staff but is not a person of color. With regard to ignoring applicant email? Most likely, the faculty are too busy practicing snob appeal to respond.
