An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:46 pm

An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby BLUERUFiO » Wed Dec 11, 2013 3:36 pm

"Last weekend, storms across the country impacted many LSAT centers and caused numerous test cancellations. Through the LSAC Candidate Referral Service, I know you were scheduled to take the December LSAT and I realize your plans may have been derailed by these cancellations. We have heard from many candidates who have been impacted and we are taking steps to make things easier on those who have been affected. First, while HLS does not normally allow first-time February LSAT scores in the admissions process, we will accept the February 2014 administration this year. Second, since we will be accepting the February LSAT we are also extending the application deadline from February 1, 2014 to March 1, 2014."

My cynicism says they are hurting for applicants too. Maybe their rejection ratio is in peril? Thoughts?

EDIT: "But, I've heard reports that they are rejecting a lot of applicants and are all full." (I read this from a poster here on TLS yesterday. I can't remember where though. It has been disproved in this thread VIA LSN.)
Last edited by BLUERUFiO on Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby drawstring » Wed Dec 11, 2013 3:42 pm

BLUERUFiO wrote:But, I've heard reports that they are rejecting a lot of applicants and are all full.


Who did you hear this from?

notalobbyist
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby notalobbyist » Wed Dec 11, 2013 3:43 pm

I would take at face value, Harvard doesn't NEED to do anything like this. If they were hurting they would just admit more splitters at their GPA floor.

User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby BLUERUFiO » Wed Dec 11, 2013 3:43 pm

drawstring wrote:Who did you hear this from?

Somewhere, someone said it here on TLS.

User avatar
kitkat288
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 5:43 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby kitkat288 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 3:50 pm

I just got this email too... It says it went out to everyone who was signed up for the Dec. LSAT

User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby BLUERUFiO » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:06 pm

notalobbyist wrote:I would take at face value, Harvard doesn't NEED to do anything like this. If they were hurting they would just admit more splitters at their GPA floor.

Agreed. But, what about keeping their rejection ratio? Could that be a motivator?

User avatar
midwest17
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby midwest17 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:07 pm

drawstring wrote:
BLUERUFiO wrote:But, I've heard reports that they are rejecting a lot of applicants and are all full.


Who did you hear this from?


Yeah, I don't think they've rejected a single person yet.

User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby BLUERUFiO » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:15 pm

midwest17 wrote:Yeah, I don't think they've rejected a single person yet.

My forum sarcasm meter is thinking this is sarcasm?

User avatar
wealtheow
Posts: 1034
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 1:45 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby wealtheow » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:20 pm

Rejecting a lot of people I can see. But for their class to already be full? Can you recall where you read that, Rufio?

User avatar
Carter1901
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 11:32 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby Carter1901 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:26 pm

BLUERUFiO wrote:
midwest17 wrote:Yeah, I don't think they've rejected a single person yet.

My forum sarcasm meter is thinking this is sarcasm?


Nope.

http://harvard.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/1314

http://mylsn.info/whenwilliknow.php

User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby BLUERUFiO » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:27 pm

wealtheow wrote:Rejecting a lot of people I can see. But for their class to already be full? Can you recall where you read that, Rufio?

If I run into the comment again, I'll post it here. I know I lurked into it yesterday on TLS. But, man, I read so many posts. I read the entire Dec. 2013 LSAT waiting post. That's 80 pages long. Yikes.

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:29 pm

Have they EVER changed the deadline? I don't know so I'm genuinely curious.

User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby BLUERUFiO » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:31 pm


Boom! Thanks much. No rejections reported.

erroneousreasoning
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:15 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby erroneousreasoning » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:33 pm

dude how did a 2.8 with a 148 get in? is that president obama's kid or something?

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby drawstring » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:50 pm

erroneousreasoning wrote:dude how did a 2.8 with a 148 get in? is that president obama's kid or something?


I'm thinking

Image

User avatar
midwest17
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby midwest17 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 5:56 pm

Carter1901 wrote:
BLUERUFiO wrote:
midwest17 wrote:Yeah, I don't think they've rejected a single person yet.

My forum sarcasm meter is thinking this is sarcasm?


Nope.

http://harvard.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/1314

http://mylsn.info/whenwilliknow.php


Yeah, I haven't heard about a single rejection... the only ones on LSN are miscategorized by cycle.

There's only been one round of acceptances so far, pre-Thanksgiving. My understanding is that rejections go out much later.

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

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby amc987 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:37 pm

Interesting. HLS doesn't usually reject people until after the new year. The first round of dings is usually in mid-January.

As for why they're extending this deadline, I have no idea. It seems like they're probably hoping to get more applicants in addition to just helping out the people whose December test dates were cancelled. It seems like, if HLS was only concerned about the test whose test was postponed, they wouldn't change the whole deadline. Those people were allowed to take a make-up test that wouldn't have affected their ability to apply to Harvard well before the Feb 1st deadline.

luckystar84
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:00 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby luckystar84 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:49 pm

deleted
Last edited by luckystar84 on Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:55 pm

luckystar84 wrote:what I was saying was that the type of applicants hls goes for (3.8 173) would've applied regardless of the extension. that is, the extension probably won't induce too many of these applicants to apply where they otherwise wouldn't have before Feb 1, unless the weather cancellation logistically prevents them


I just don't see how the makeup affects their ability to apply by feb 1. It's only off by a week.

luckystar84
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:00 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby luckystar84 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:32 pm

deleted
Last edited by luckystar84 on Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
midwest17
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby midwest17 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:41 pm

luckystar84 wrote:well do we know that it's take this makeup or nothing? I've seen previous posts about refunds and taking Feb for free. if those are options then it only makes sense to allow Feb.

if they're doing it partly to get more applicants...just who do you think they'll get between Feb 1 and March 1?

people who would've applied anyway before Feb 1, but think "I could use the extra time"

people applying to hls would have already planned to submit by Feb 1, taken a previous administration, etc. the people signed up for the Feb admin are probably people looking at the next cycle. I can't imagine anyone thinking "well the last few months I've been planning to submit next cycle...well, now that I know I can take the Feb test, let me just study for the next 2 months, get that 174, and apply this cycle instead"

the theme (agreeing to disagree) is that it takes an unusual TLS cynic (like the OP self-reflectively acknowledges) to think "they're doing this to improve their app pool" when there are much more plausible & honest explanations than using the weather as a cover for an under-the-table operation.

and people wonder why JS (and JR before her) doesn't like TLS


I don't think people are denying that they're trying to get applicants who got weather-canceled in December and might not be able to submit before the current deadline. The discussion is just about the motivation. Is Harvard really that motivated by a debatable notion of fairness, or do they just think that the people in that boat might include enough people with good numbers/softs to noticeably improve their applicant pool?

luckystar84
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:00 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby luckystar84 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:08 pm

deleted
Last edited by luckystar84 on Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:11 pm

luckystar84 wrote:well do we know that it's take this makeup or nothing? I've seen previous posts about refunds and taking Feb for free. if those are options then it only makes sense to allow Feb.

if they're doing it partly to get more applicants...just who do you think they'll get between Feb 1 and March 1?

people who would've applied anyway before Feb 1, but think "I could use the extra time"

people applying to hls would have already planned to submit by Feb 1, taken a previous administration, etc. the people signed up for the Feb admin are probably people looking at the next cycle. I can't imagine anyone thinking "well the last few months I've been planning to submit next cycle...well, now that I know I can take the Feb test, let me just study for the next 2 months, get that 174, and apply this cycle instead"

the theme (agreeing to disagree) is that it takes an unusual TLS cynic (like the OP self-reflectively acknowledges) to think "they're doing this to improve their app pool" when there are much more plausible & honest explanations than using the weather as a cover for an under-the-table operation.

and people wonder why JS (and JR before her) doesn't like TLS


I am fairly cynical about the admissions game - why wouldn't I be? I have seen minimal (if any) evidence to suggest that schools are not acutely aware of, and primarily motivated by, their rankings, and by extension, LSAT scores.

If HLS were satisfied with what it is seeing, why extend it? Why reach out and specifically ask people to apply in an email to EVERY December test taker?

As you say, the people taking February were likely not going to appy this cycle anyway. They would not normally be HLS's target. Unless HLS realized they needed more apps. But what would get them to apply? What if they were to realize that the 175 they just received on the February test was still good for this cycle at HLS? They know this cycle will probably be wonderful for applicants, so maybe they should apply. But they still need that little nudge, since they weren't planning on applying yet. Well I can't think of a better nudge than an email from HLS saying "we want that February score."

You don't think HLS considered this when sending it out?

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:12 pm

luckystar84 wrote:
midwest17 wrote:
luckystar84 wrote:well do we know that it's take this makeup or nothing? I've seen previous posts about refunds and taking Feb for free. if those are options then it only makes sense to allow Feb.

if they're doing it partly to get more applicants...just who do you think they'll get between Feb 1 and March 1?

people who would've applied anyway before Feb 1, but think "I could use the extra time"

people applying to hls would have already planned to submit by Feb 1, taken a previous administration, etc. the people signed up for the Feb admin are probably people looking at the next cycle. I can't imagine anyone thinking "well the last few months I've been planning to submit next cycle...well, now that I know I can take the Feb test, let me just study for the next 2 months, get that 174, and apply this cycle instead"

the theme (agreeing to disagree) is that it takes an unusual TLS cynic (like the OP self-reflectively acknowledges) to think "they're doing this to improve their app pool" when there are much more plausible & honest explanations than using the weather as a cover for an under-the-table operation.

and people wonder why JS (and JR before her) doesn't like TLS


I don't think people are denying that they're trying to get applicants who got weather-canceled in December and might not be able to submit before the current deadline. The discussion is just about the motivation. Is Harvard really that motivated by a debatable notion of fairness, or do they just think that the people in that boat might include enough people with good numbers/softs to noticeably improve their applicant pool?


well they would think that even if their current projections are rock solid. if they think that that boat will improve their app pool, and it's also the "fair" thing to do, then they would try to get those apps even if they can meet their targets without that boat. hence their decision doesn't give us a good reason to infer anything about their app pool's strength, beyond what we already know


Not necessarily. If their app pool was rock solid, wouldn't they rather those people apply next cycle since they wouldn't be needed this cycle?

luckystar84
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:00 pm

Re: An E-mail I just Received From Harvard

Postby luckystar84 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:42 pm

deleted
Last edited by luckystar84 on Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:31 am, edited 2 times in total.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: patrickkpaul and 6 guests