Trying to Understand Softs... Forum

[paperworkjim]

Hey all,

Had a quick question about softs for Yale and Stanford, which I know places more of an emphasis on them than other places. Is it safe to say that aside from things that really distinguish you (i.e: Rhodes, Marshall, etc.), even the job you have doesn't make much of a difference? Is it instead more important than the job you have contributes to a narrative? If none of this is important, what is? Just trying to understand what is viewed as a good soft for these two schools specifically.

Currently I am working as an executive assistant in a big charter school company -- which I think is a good gig, but I am thinking about quitting because the hours prevent me from studying for the LSAT. I'm wondering if having a job that might be a little less prestigious would at all diminish my chances at these two schools. Thank you so much for any advice on this!

[grades??]

The only softs that matter are Rhodes/Nobel/ Olympic Athlete. Otherwise anything else is meh.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I mean, the above is kind of simplistic. I think the ability to create a good, consistent narrative out of your softs is key when you're looking at schools that actually do a more holistic kind of review.

[Nebby]

Hey all,

Had a quick question about softs for Yale and Stanford, which I know places more of an emphasis on them than other places. Is it safe to say that aside from things that really distinguish you (i.e: Rhodes, Marshall, etc.), even the job you have doesn't make much of a difference? Is it instead more important than the job you have contributes to a narrative? If none of this is important, what is? Just trying to understand what is viewed as a good soft for these two schools specifically.

Currently I am working as an executive assistant in a big charter school company -- which I think is a good gig, but I am thinking about quitting because the hours prevent me from studying for the LSAT. I'm wondering if having a job that might be a little less prestigious would at all diminish my chances at these two schools. Thank you so much for any advice on this!

Get a good LSAT and stop worrying about shit that got can't change and really doesn't matter. I believe in you

[LikelyThrowaway]

I'm also curious about this. My stats are 3.8/178, which gives me just under coin-flip odds at both schools according to LSN. The conventional wisdom (nothing but amazing stuff matters) seems pretty dubious to me. I mean, how else are they going to pick between a bunch of similar candidates? So I feel like my softs (and LoRs) are going to matter, a lot in fact, because I'm so borderline.

I can't really change my situation too much anyways, but if I could be convinced that I'm overstating the importance of softs for S and Y I'd at least be a little less stressed about them.

[Vursz]

I go to Yale. TLS's definition of "good softs" (Rhodes, Olympic medal, etc.) is garbage, and I wince every time I see it cited recursively on this site.

My classmates are a pretty fascinating and brilliant bunch, but none of us exist on some higher plane of existence.

Good softs, based on what I've seen from folks here and in my own experience, can be as simple as having a quirky hobby or interest (not directly connected to your academic/professional accomplishments) that you've invested significant time in, in order to develop a certain respectable level of expertise. This could be as straightforward as being EIC of your college newspaper while simultaneously double-majoring in math and economics: it's about demonstrating an interesting breadth of competence outside the legal/white-collar "track."

The better question to ask, instead of "are my softs good enough?", is "how do I spend my free time?" If the answer to that question is something objectively pretty interesting, and you've gotten good at doing that thing, your softs might very well be just fine.

[theconsigliere]

I go to Yale. TLS's definition of "good softs" (Rhodes, Olympic medal, etc.) is garbage, and I wince every time I see it cited recursively on this site.

My classmates are a pretty fascinating and brilliant bunch, but none of us exist on some higher plane of existence.

Good softs, based on what I've seen from folks here and in my own experience, can be as simple as having a quirky hobby or interest (not directly connected to your academic/professional accomplishments) that you've invested significant time in, in order to develop a certain respectable level of expertise. This could be as straightforward as being EIC of your college newspaper while simultaneously double-majoring in math and economics: it's about demonstrating an interesting breadth of competence outside the legal/white-collar "track."

The better question to ask, instead of "are my softs good enough?", is "how do I spend my free time?" If the answer to that question is something objectively pretty interesting, and you've gotten good at doing that thing, your softs might very well be just fine.

yes. People on this site seem to think there are a couple hundred Olympians, highly decorated war veterans, foreign heads of state, and Rhodes scholars applying to law school every cycle. Literally one second of rational thought would tell you that many people without these types of softs get into Yale every year

[Hildegard15]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

[grades??]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

[LikelyThrowaway]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

[Nebby]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

Yes. You are very special. Here is a cookie

[LikelyThrowaway]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

Yes. You are very special. Here is a cookie

Thanks so much for making sure I'm not a snowflake. Really thoughtful advice.

Either they're picking borderline candidates out of a hat or the small stuff starts to matter. But obviously wondering whether the latter is true makes me a self-centered moron. Got it.

[Nebby]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

Yes. You are very special. Here is a cookie

Thanks so much for making sure I'm not a snowflake. Really thoughtful advice.

Either they're picking borderline candidates out of a hat or the small stuff starts to matter. But obviously wondering whether the latter is true makes me a self-centered moron. Got it.

Small stuff matters at the margins. Congratulations! That's common sense. Do you need to ask tls to confirm common sense? What are you hoping to get out of this? No one here cares about your mission trips to Africa or your tutoring children above 110th street

[A. Nony Mouse]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

You said it yourself, you're not really going to be able to change your softs. If you're applying next cycle you're not going to magically improve your softs in any way that makes a measurable difference (especially since - imho at least - the best softs are not things that you do in the hopes of improving your application, but things you do because they truly matter to you). So in your case the point isn't to get better softs, it's to make the most of the ones you have. While softs, LOR, and PS matter, the goal should be to create a coherent, consistent, interesting narrative throughout those things based on what you have done, not to add more stuff to a list.

[earthabides]

.

[Nebby]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

You said it yourself, you're not really going to be able to change your softs. If you're applying next cycle you're not going to magically improve your softs in any way that makes a measurable difference (especially since - imho at least - the best softs are not things that you do in the hopes of improving your application, but things you do because they truly matter to you). So in your case the point isn't to get better softs, it's to make the most of the ones you have. While softs, LOR, and PS matter, the goal should be to create a coherent, consistent, interesting narrative throughout those things based on what you have done, not to add more stuff to a list.

I could feel the collective gasp of upper and upper middle class communities across the country

[LikelyThrowaway]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

Yes. You are very special. Here is a cookie

Thanks so much for making sure I'm not a snowflake. Really thoughtful advice.

Either they're picking borderline candidates out of a hat or the small stuff starts to matter. But obviously wondering whether the latter is true makes me a self-centered moron. Got it.

Small stuff matters at the margins. Congratulations! That's common sense. Do you need to ask tls to confirm common sense? What are you hoping to get out of this? No one here cares about your mission trips to Africa or your tutoring children above 110th street

So your point is that you agree with me that it isn't actually true that softs will "make ZERO difference," as the guy I was responding to said, but you're offended that I had the audacity to ask for clarity on the point? Whatever man, I've read your posts before and they've been useful to me so I'm gonna drop this rather than get pissed, but I do think you're being crazy hostile to someone just trying to understand nuances of the application process. If you think I'm being an idiot, okay, but for the record people on here routinely say precisely the opposite of what you're saying is common sense.

As to A. Nony Mouse, thank you, that's about how I was understanding it. I just wanted to know whether softs are gonna play a role at all.

[Nebby]

I'm in that post-bar, pre-work period of 4L and have way too much time on my hand right now. My bad on the aggro. You will get into your school of choice with your numbers, so long as you follow Nony's advice. Your personal statement will be your biggest asset after accounting for LSAT/GPA--make sure it shows who you are

[LikelyThrowaway]

I'm in that post-bar, pre-work period of 4L and have way too much time on my hand right now. My bad on the aggro. You will get into your school of choice with your numbers, so long as you follow Nony's advice. Your personal statement will be your biggest asset after accounting for LSAT/GPA--make sure it shows who you are

Thank you, s'all gravy.

[Pikapika]

The way I've understood the General TLS opinion on softs, is that nobody is saying you must have amazing softs to get SLS and YLS. Where the confusion comes, is that 0Ls will come in and ask if their softs give them a boost, meaning their softs will allow them to out perform their numbers. And in that case, yes, I do believe (and the General TLS opinion I think would agree) that your softs need to be at least above average for any surprise in your outcome. (Anecdotal exceptions may apply) The normal people (aka non Rhodes/Olympians/Nobel laureates) walking around YLS for the most part probably have stats that are on par for Yale (3.85+, 174+). As much as Yale can throw curveballs, if you look on mylsn, even Yale has to play the numbers game.

This exactly. There are plenty of people at YLS that are not Rhodes scholars or Olympians (while there are some for sure). The point being if your softs are not at this absurd level, then they will make no difference in your application. Plenty of people with meh softs go to YHS. But they certainly had the grades/URM status when applicable. So back to my advice and to OP- your softs will make ZERO difference in your application so you need to have the number qualifications.

But don't you think they make a difference for borderline cases, like I think I am? When someone is right on the edge, I've gotta thinks softs, PS, and LoRs make a big difference as to what side of the fence you'll fall on.

You said it yourself, you're not really going to be able to change your softs. If you're applying next cycle you're not going to magically improve your softs in any way that makes a measurable difference (especially since - imho at least - the best softs are not things that you do in the hopes of improving your application, but things you do because they truly matter to you). So in your case the point isn't to get better softs, it's to make the most of the ones you have. While softs, LOR, and PS matter, the goal should be to create a coherent, consistent, interesting narrative throughout those things based on what you have done, not to add more stuff to a list.

Could not agree with this more and I believe this advice really helped me with my cycle/outcomes. Definitely let this guide you while writing your PS.

[theconsigliere]

As it pertains to Yale, what's missing here is the fact that Yale's faculty review is so (potentially) arbitrary that no one has any idea what will get you in. Maybe you get reviewed by a couple of faculty members who don't give a shit and just rank people by LSAT. Or maybe you get a weirdo who puts a ton of stock into the written part of the LSAT. Or maybe you get a guy who just goes 4, 3, 2, 2, 4, 3, 2, 2....


I guess the point is that you can't control any of this so just put your best foot forward in all parts of your app.