URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
User avatar
d330
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 10:30 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby d330 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:57 pm

I have a 168/3.7. Had my JS1 early January and still waiting. AA male. My softs are strong but complicated. Good luck to everyone else waiting.

User avatar
amc987
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:58 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby amc987 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:01 pm

BlaqBella wrote:Do you think JS was the reason behind Harvard's want for more applicants with work/post-grad life experiences?

I wonder if that has anything to do with the # of URM applicants that have been admitted thus far. I've never seen a wave like this before and the majority have/had post-grad experience (Peace Corp, TFA, opera singer, analyst, etc...).

Either way, I am not complaining.


If you look through last year's thread, you'll see that the general wisdom was that KB was a big fan of people with high GPAs and JS really valued work experience. I'm not sure where that line of thought came from (I'm guessing just through the types of people who were admitted), but it seemed to bear itself out last cycle.

I don't think it's the admits' post-grad experience that's rare as much as the numbers of this year's admits and the speed with which they're getting accepted. People like facileprinceps and worm are almost always competitive applicants--GPAs well over 3.8, LSAT 165 or higher, and URM--so I'm not surprised that HLS admitted them relatively quickly. There are some other admits from the past few days who have GPAs between 3.4 and 3.6 and LSATs between 160 and 166. While there are definitely URMs who have gotten into Harvard with those numbers in the past, it seems to be a much less common. I'm not throwing shade at those people--major congrats to them on their success--but their results this cycle seem to break with the results that applicants with similar numbers had during previous cycles. There were a lot of people last year who had similar GPAs (3.4-3.6) and higher LSATs (between 167 and 173) and also people with higher GPAs (3.8+) and similar LSATs (160-165) who had to wait much longer to get their good news.

I'm not sure there's any big conclusion to be drawn. Every cycle is different.

User avatar
TatNurner
Posts: 437
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:06 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby TatNurner » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:03 pm

amc987 wrote:
BlaqBella wrote:So is it just me or is Harvard showing some major kindness to URMs this cycle with low-mid 160 LSATs and 3.5+ GPAs? This is amazing! Hope this continues on for next cycle. I hope all new admits in this thread are planning to visit Harvard's ASW. Please report back! :mrgreen:


Yeah I think you're right. Last year Harvard made a lot of URMs with higher numbers wait much longer (think decisions between late-March and mid-June) than this year's admits. I'm not sure if this is happening because of the smaller applicant pool this year or a change in policy (since JS is running the show now where as KB was in charge for most of 2011-12) or just serendipity.


This is a good point about JS vs KB, you may be on to something.

In 2010-11 cycle JR was not afraid to let in people who were made to wait last year, and in fact tended to reward people who applied early. So I remember we had:

cnc2114 - 3.52/165 (applied 10/26, JR2 11/22)
CryingMonkey - 3.3/179 (applied 10/21, JR2 11/22)
annamayJD - 3.44/173 (applied 1/7, JR2 3/14)
DKT4 - Numbers now down, but was 3.49/172. He applied in February and was accepted in the 3/14 wave IIRC. Somebody could confirm this by trawling the URM thread from that year.

So looking at the past 3 cycles (counting this one), KB is actually the outlier. However, s/he was running things when it was really unclear how the numbers were gonna play out with the apps dropping. Their models where likely out of whack and it made sense to make URMs wait. Now that the direction that things are going is probably clear, it looks like they are comfortable being aggressive with the acceptances again.

Dumb question: Are JR and JS the same person? (i.e. name change after marriage perhaps?)

Bella wrote:I've never seen a wave like this before.


As I mentioned above, it has happened before. JR wasn't afraid to make acceptances rain if people fit.

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:10 pm

amc987 wrote:
BlaqBella wrote:Do you think JS was the reason behind Harvard's want for more applicants with work/post-grad life experiences?

I wonder if that has anything to do with the # of URM applicants that have been admitted thus far. I've never seen a wave like this before and the majority have/had post-grad experience (Peace Corp, TFA, opera singer, analyst, etc...).

Either way, I am not complaining.


If you look through last year's thread, you'll see that the general wisdom was that KB was a big fan of people with high GPAs and JS really valued work experience. I'm not sure where that line of thought came from (I'm guessing just through the types of people who were admitted), but it seemed to bear itself out last cycle.

I don't think it's the admits' post-grad experience that's rare as much as the numbers of this year's admits and the speed with which they're getting accepted. People like facileprinceps and worm are almost always competitive applicants--GPAs well over 3.8, LSAT 165 or higher, and URM--so I'm not surprised that HLS admitted them relatively quickly. There are some other admits from the past few days who have GPAs between 3.4 and 3.6 and LSATs between 160 and 166. While there are definitely URMs who have gotten into Harvard with those numbers in the past, it seems to be a much less common. I'm not throwing shade at those people--major congrats to them on their success--but their results this cycle seem to break with the results that applicants with similar numbers had during previous cycles. There were a lot of people last year who had similar GPAs (3.4-3.6) and higher LSATs (between 167 and 173) and also people with higher GPAs (3.8+) and similar LSATs (160-165) who had to wait much longer to get their good news.

I'm not sure there's any big conclusion to be drawn. Every cycle is different.


I think we're underestimating how few qualified URMs there are. For example, according to LSAC data the group who has experienced the single biggest decline in numbers (even more than 175+ scorers) is the number of 168+ AA URMs.

Considering that the number of 170+ URMs was smaller than the number of 175+ non-URMs to begin with, that leaves a very very small number for the T14s to take.

Throw in how many less of those applicants have 3.5+ GPAs and the pool is pretty small.

Add to that the fact that Harvard is historically the most URM friendly school of the T14 with a very large class, and, well, I guess that sort of explains it.

talesofyore
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:21 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby talesofyore » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:15 pm

Where did you find the info about the decline in URMs with greater than 168?

User avatar
BlaqBella
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:41 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby BlaqBella » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:17 pm

amc987 wrote:I don't think it's the admits' post-grad experience that's rare as much as the numbers of this year's admits and the speed with which they're getting accepted.


It's not so much a matter of being rare but brings to light, perhaps, the transition Harvard is making to admit more applicants with post-grad work experience. I believe GAIA briefly spoke of this in her sticky thread.

amc987 wrote:their results this cycle seem to break with the results that applicants with similar numbers had during previous cycles. There were a lot of people last year who had similar GPAs (3.4-3.6) and higher LSATs (between 167 and 173) and also people with higher GPAs (3.8+) and similar LSATs (160-165) who had to wait much longer to get their good news.


This is why I am surprised. Usually those with numbers below both 25% percentile of the LSAT and GPA would have to wait until at least March/April to hear word from Harvard. I am no doubt pleasantly surprised by this and hope this cycle is no outlier of its own. :D

User avatar
TatNurner
Posts: 437
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:06 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby TatNurner » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:19 pm

talesofyore wrote:Where did you find the info about the decline in URMs with greater than 168?


+1. Hook us up a link please J-Rizzy

User avatar
BlaqBella
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:41 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby BlaqBella » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:23 pm

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:
amc987 wrote:
BlaqBella wrote:Do you think JS was the reason behind Harvard's want for more applicants with work/post-grad life experiences?

I wonder if that has anything to do with the # of URM applicants that have been admitted thus far. I've never seen a wave like this before and the majority have/had post-grad experience (Peace Corp, TFA, opera singer, analyst, etc...).

Either way, I am not complaining.


If you look through last year's thread, you'll see that the general wisdom was that KB was a big fan of people with high GPAs and JS really valued work experience. I'm not sure where that line of thought came from (I'm guessing just through the types of people who were admitted), but it seemed to bear itself out last cycle.

I don't think it's the admits' post-grad experience that's rare as much as the numbers of this year's admits and the speed with which they're getting accepted. People like facileprinceps and worm are almost always competitive applicants--GPAs well over 3.8, LSAT 165 or higher, and URM--so I'm not surprised that HLS admitted them relatively quickly. There are some other admits from the past few days who have GPAs between 3.4 and 3.6 and LSATs between 160 and 166. While there are definitely URMs who have gotten into Harvard with those numbers in the past, it seems to be a much less common. I'm not throwing shade at those people--major congrats to them on their success--but their results this cycle seem to break with the results that applicants with similar numbers had during previous cycles. There were a lot of people last year who had similar GPAs (3.4-3.6) and higher LSATs (between 167 and 173) and also people with higher GPAs (3.8+) and similar LSATs (160-165) who had to wait much longer to get their good news.

I'm not sure there's any big conclusion to be drawn. Every cycle is different.


I think we're underestimating how few qualified URMs there are. For example, according to LSAC data the group who has experienced the single biggest decline in numbers (even more than 175+ scorers) is the number of 168+ AA URMs.

Considering that the number of 170+ URMs was smaller than the number of 175+ non-URMs to begin with, that leaves a very very small number for the T14s to take.

Throw in how many less of those applicants have 3.5+ GPAs and the pool is pretty small.

Add to that the fact that Harvard is historically the most URM friendly school of the T14 with a very large class, and, well, I guess that sort of explains it.


I thought NYU got the title of being the most URM friendly? Interesting.


Did you watch Profs Alex Johnson's (UVA Law) commentary on Youtube about African American/black applicants and the LSAT? Depending on when we apply (earlier the better) anything above 160/3.0 puts us in a very good position to crack into the T14.

User avatar
HankBashir
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:01 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby HankBashir » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:23 pm

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:
amc987 wrote:
BlaqBella wrote:Do you think JS was the reason behind Harvard's want for more applicants with work/post-grad life experiences?

I wonder if that has anything to do with the # of URM applicants that have been admitted thus far. I've never seen a wave like this before and the majority have/had post-grad experience (Peace Corp, TFA, opera singer, analyst, etc...).

Either way, I am not complaining.


If you look through last year's thread, you'll see that the general wisdom was that KB was a big fan of people with high GPAs and JS really valued work experience. I'm not sure where that line of thought came from (I'm guessing just through the types of people who were admitted), but it seemed to bear itself out last cycle.

I don't think it's the admits' post-grad experience that's rare as much as the numbers of this year's admits and the speed with which they're getting accepted. People like facileprinceps and worm are almost always competitive applicants--GPAs well over 3.8, LSAT 165 or higher, and URM--so I'm not surprised that HLS admitted them relatively quickly. There are some other admits from the past few days who have GPAs between 3.4 and 3.6 and LSATs between 160 and 166. While there are definitely URMs who have gotten into Harvard with those numbers in the past, it seems to be a much less common. I'm not throwing shade at those people--major congrats to them on their success--but their results this cycle seem to break with the results that applicants with similar numbers had during previous cycles. There were a lot of people last year who had similar GPAs (3.4-3.6) and higher LSATs (between 167 and 173) and also people with higher GPAs (3.8+) and similar LSATs (160-165) who had to wait much longer to get their good news.

I'm not sure there's any big conclusion to be drawn. Every cycle is different.


I think we're underestimating how few qualified URMs there are. For example, according to LSAC data the group who has experienced the single biggest decline in numbers (even more than 175+ scorers) is the number of 168+ AA URMs.

Considering that the number of 170+ URMs was smaller than the number of 175+ non-URMs to begin with, that leaves a very very small number for the T14s to take.

Throw in how many less of those applicants have 3.5+ GPAs and the pool is pretty small.

Add to that the fact that Harvard is historically the most URM friendly school of the T14 with a very large class, and, well, I guess that sort of explains it.


I pulled this from another topic, but in 09-10 cycle, there were only 63 AAs with a GPA 3.5+ AND a LSAT of 165+

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/ ... eckdam.pdf

With the drop in applicants, it isn't unreasonable to think that this number is even smaller this cycle.

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:24 pm

TatNurner wrote:
talesofyore wrote:Where did you find the info about the decline in URMs with greater than 168?


+1. Hook us up a link please J-Rizzy


For a general idea on this - viewtopic.php?f=14&t=195443

More specific to recent LSAT takers - viewtopic.php?f=6&t=199581

Scroll through that topic for some very amateur stat analysis by me and some others. There are other threads like that as well. Also, feel free to go through the link in that second thread's OP and do the math yourself. It's pretty alarming stuff.

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:31 pm

BlaqBella wrote:I thought NYU got the title of being the most URM friendly? Interesting.


Not according to the data we have - viewtopic.php?f=7&t=191773&p=6354585#p6354585

Harvard, statistically provides a 4783% boost between a non-URM and URMs numbers. That's 600% more than NYU. Elterrible put a similar analysis graph in every T14 page, just scroll through his posts.

If you parse it a bit (and you can see this analysis if you scroll down through that page and the next in the Harvard thread), Harvard provides about an 8 point LSAT boost and/or .4 GPA URM boost. I think that may be the maximum boost (AA).

User avatar
2012applicant2013
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 12:25 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby 2012applicant2013 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:33 pm

[/quote] Did you watch Profs Alex Johnson's (UVA Law) commentary on Youtube about African American/black applicants and the LSAT? Depending on when we apply (earlier the better) anything above 160/3.0 puts us in a very good position to crack into the T14.[/quote]

Link?

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:38 pm

HankBashir wrote:I pulled this from another topic, but in 09-10 cycle, there were only 63 AAs with a GPA 3.5+ AND a LSAT of 165+

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/ ... eckdam.pdf

With the drop in applicants, it isn't unreasonable to think that this number is even smaller this cycle.


Great post. I literally didn't understand the full reasoning and extent of need for the URM boost until I read the decision from Grutter v. Bollinger and the various amicus briefs filed by the ABA, LSAC, Harvard, Yale, etc in Fisher v. Texas.

But think of that number: 63 applicants with 3.5+/165+.

Harvard accepts ~80 URMs.
Stanford and Yale take ~10-20 each.
Then you've got another 11-14 elite schools in the country.

The math is self-explanatory.

User avatar
BlaqBella
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:41 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby BlaqBella » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:38 pm

2012applicant2013 wrote:
Blaqbella wrote:Did you watch Profs Alex Johnson's (UVA Law) commentary on Youtube about African American/black applicants and the LSAT? Depending on when we apply (earlier the better) anything above 160/3.0 puts us in a very good position to crack into the T14.


Link?


Here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7_xHsce57c

Changed my whole perspective on admissions.

User avatar
2012applicant2013
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 12:25 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby 2012applicant2013 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:43 pm

BlaqBella wrote:
2012applicant2013 wrote:
Blaqbella wrote:Did you watch Profs Alex Johnson's (UVA Law) commentary on Youtube about African American/black applicants and the LSAT? Depending on when we apply (earlier the better) anything above 160/3.0 puts us in a very good position to crack into the T14.


Link?


Here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7_xHsce57c

Changed my whole perspective on admissions.


Thanks!

User avatar
BlaqBella
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:41 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby BlaqBella » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:56 pm

Wormfather wrote:
BlaqBella wrote:
2012applicant2013 wrote:
Blaqbella wrote:Did you watch Profs Alex Johnson's (UVA Law) commentary on Youtube about African American/black applicants and the LSAT? Depending on when we apply (earlier the better) anything above 160/3.0 puts us in a very good position to crack into the T14.


Link?


Here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7_xHsce57c

Changed my whole perspective on admissions.


But at the same time it did illuminate the fact that some URMs are getting into schools where the competition outmatches them.


Your point being...? :roll:

I most appreciate his break down of how 160+ URMs are most sought after in admission cycles.

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:59 pm

BlaqBella wrote:
Wormfather wrote:But at the same time it did illuminate the fact that some URMs are getting into schools where the competition outmatches them.


Your point being...? :roll:

I most appreciate his break down of how 160+ URMs are most sought after in admission cycles.


**This isn't the place for merits of AA debate so let's get back to other stuff.**
Last edited by John_rizzy_rawls on Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BlaqBella
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:41 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby BlaqBella » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:03 pm

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:
BlaqBella wrote:
Wormfather wrote:But at the same time it did illuminate the fact that some URMs are getting into schools where the competition outmatches them.


Your point being...? :roll:

I most appreciate his break down of how 160+ URMs are most sought after in admission cycles.


Point being that there is life after admittance and that URMs getting admitted only to get bottom of the class may be a huge detriment to social mobility for URMs, at least perceptually if not also functionally.

It is an important thing to note and a point worth talking about more.


You're joking right? You're inferring that URMs admitted to schools where competition outmatch them are more than likely going to be in the bottom of their class sections? :roll: :roll: :roll:

What a load of bull. Cite your evidence.

User avatar
TatNurner
Posts: 437
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:06 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby TatNurner » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:05 pm

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:
TatNurner wrote:
talesofyore wrote:Where did you find the info about the decline in URMs with greater than 168?


+1. Hook us up a link please J-Rizzy


For a general idea on this - http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=195443

More specific to recent LSAT takers - http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=199581

Scroll through that topic for some very amateur stat analysis by me and some others. There are other threads like that as well. Also, feel free to go through the link in that second thread's OP and do the math yourself. It's pretty alarming stuff.


Thanks, missed that second topic the first time around. A lot of great info in there.

User avatar
BlaqBella
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:41 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby BlaqBella » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:07 pm

When would some in this thread realize that every single 0L no matter the accomplishment, undergrad GPA or LSAT score starts at the same position as their colleagues? LSAT score does not determine one's potential or success law school. Nor does an undergrad GPA. The only thing that determines one's success is know what your professor wants on exams. Oh yeah, and effective outlines.

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:08 pm

BlaqBella wrote:You're joking right? You're inferring that URMs admitted to schools where competition outmatch them are more than likely going to be in the bottom of their class sections? :roll: :roll: :roll:

What a load of bull. Cite your evidence.


The video you linked? Opposing amicus briefs in Fisher v Texas? It happens to some URMs, as Worm said. It's part of the LSAT correlates to 1L grades debate.

But again: not getting into that in this thread.

User avatar
2012applicant2013
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 12:25 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby 2012applicant2013 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:10 pm

I like this threads previous dedication to celebrating and congratulating each other on all of our successes!

User avatar
BlaqBella
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:41 am

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby BlaqBella » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:16 pm

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:It's part of the LSAT correlates to 1L grades debate.


0L debate, actually.

Neither the place nor time.

User avatar
GW1010
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:07 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby GW1010 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:19 pm

bizzybone1313 wrote:"My people be projects or jail never Harvard or Yale." -Nas, Book of Rhymes. What do you know about that TLS?


Sounds like a lot of us URM's are proving Nas wrong. Nice work guys! :)

User avatar
2013hopeful:D
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:23 pm

Re: URM 2012-2013 Cycle... let's go!

Postby 2013hopeful:D » Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:49 pm

Accepted to Columbia via snail mail. 164/3.96




Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: badgalriri9, Barack O'Drama, musiclover123 and 6 guests