Spivey Consulting Q&A with Adcoms from Yale, Harvard, Penn, Chicago etc.

Special forum where professionals are encouraged to help law school applicants, students, and graduates.

Which would you prefer most?

Poll ended at Sat Apr 23, 2016 11:05 am

1. Blog advice
0
No votes
2. Podcast advice
0
No votes
3. Video advice
0
No votes
4. Just keep it all on TLS
0
No votes
5. Tweet it
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 0

User avatar
neprep
Posts: 1066
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby neprep » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:05 pm

Mike:

Sorry this question is a little frivolous, but who in your run-of-the-mill admissions office is responsible for updating status checkers? Does someone sit down at COB or at other points during the day with a list of applications and manually change the statuses? Or is it automatically updated based on when it's downloaded/printed?

User avatar
KarenButtenbaum
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:12 pm

neprep wrote:Mike:

Sorry this question is a little frivolous, but who in your run-of-the-mill admissions office is responsible for updating status checkers? Does someone sit down at COB or at other points during the day with a list of applications and manually change the statuses? Or is it automatically updated based on when it's downloaded/printed?


The LSAC status checker is real-time with the school's applicant database, so there is not a separate process for changing your status. Some schools have their own status checker, so I'm not sure how the process works for those schools, but if you are looking at the LSAC one, you are seeing a real-time status.

FWIW, the database is not always updated as soon as a decision is made :)

Cheers,
Karen

User avatar
KarenButtenbaum
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:21 pm

ZVBXRPL wrote:Spivey Consulting,

Apparently an average of 7% of the Rutgers class were admitted with another type of standardized test score (GRE, GMAT, and MCAT [??]). This method of admissions wasn't reported to the ABA. Rutgers was fined $25K.

To what extent is this practice commonplace? Will this incident result in a marked drop in USNWR ranking?

I understand why Rutgers chose to admit students in this fashion but it seems quite embarrassing if you ask me.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... iving_LSAT


This practice is not unusual in schools who have a joint degree program, but (almost) all of them received a variance from the ABA prior to admitting anyone. I don't know why they didn't ask for a variance - that seems to me the most embarrassing thing about this story.

KB

User avatar
KarenButtenbaum
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:26 pm

bouleversement wrote:Mike & Karen,

How much taint does a previously-successful reapplicant have? I know you have cautioned against submitting the same application the second time but would you go so far as to say an addendum is necessary in order to explain, in so many words, why you hurt their yield last time around and why you won't necessarily do so again?

Thanks.


I think a brief addendum is appropriate here, but I also think how you withdrew makes a difference. As long as you didn't burn a bridge when you withdrew, you should be OK with an explanation. There is a slight chance that you might be WL'd as a precaution to make sure you won't do it again.

KB

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2607
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:20 pm

KarenButtenbaum wrote:
ZVBXRPL wrote:Spivey Consulting,

Apparently an average of 7% of the Rutgers class were admitted with another type of standardized test score (GRE, GMAT, and MCAT [??]). This method of admissions wasn't reported to the ABA. Rutgers was fined $25K.

To what extent is this practice commonplace? Will this incident result in a marked drop in USNWR ranking?

I understand why Rutgers chose to admit students in this fashion but it seems quite embarrassing if you ask me.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... iving_LSAT


This practice is not unusual in schools who have a joint degree program, but (almost) all of them received a variance from the ABA prior to admitting anyone. I don't know why they didn't ask for a variance - that seems to me the most embarrassing thing about this story.

KB


One more thing to add- Rutgers had started to email just about every law school applicant late cycle saying something along the lines of "you don't need an LSAT score to apply to Rutgers" (my words, not theirs exactly) so not only did they fail to get an ABA variance, but they also were pretty much throwing this out in the face of the ABA.

My guess is they simply did not know the policy, i.e. someone who should have looked into it did not and there wasn't great communication within the law school.

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby amc987 » Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:28 pm

Hi Mike and Karen,

I wanted to post this question on behalf of my SO who is a bit leery of posting on TLS.

She took the LSAT previously and got in the 160s two years ago and then in the 170s in June. She thought she could do better and took the test again in December. She's not sure how well it went and is thinking of cancelling her score. She's interested in HYS and is concerned about the potential of having a lower score on her record, especially because she already improved significantly on her previous take.

What is the danger of having a lower retake on your record when you apply? Would it kill one's chances at HYS to have a score in the 170s and then a lower score? What about cancelling? Would that raise some red flags with adcomms?

My SO sees the value of rolling to dice and seeing what she got in December (because if it's higher than the score she has now, it might help her admissions chances), but she isn't sure about taking the risk if the negative result would really mess things up.

Thanks for your advice!
Last edited by amc987 on Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bouleversement
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby bouleversement » Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:31 pm

KarenButtenbaum wrote:
bouleversement wrote:Mike & Karen,

How much taint does a previously-successful reapplicant have? I know you have cautioned against submitting the same application the second time but would you go so far as to say an addendum is necessary in order to explain, in so many words, why you hurt their yield last time around and why you won't necessarily do so again?

Thanks.


I think a brief addendum is appropriate here, but I also think how you withdrew makes a difference. As long as you didn't burn a bridge when you withdrew, you should be OK with an explanation. There is a slight chance that you might be WL'd as a precaution to make sure you won't do it again.

KB


Thank you Karen!

User avatar
KarenButtenbaum
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:36 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:
KarenButtenbaum wrote:
This practice is not unusual in schools who have a joint degree program, but (almost) all of them received a variance from the ABA prior to admitting anyone. I don't know why they didn't ask for a variance - that seems to me the most embarrassing thing about this story.

KB


One more thing to add- Rutgers had started to email just about every law school applicant late cycle saying something along the lines of "you don't need an LSAT score to apply to Rutgers" (my words, not theirs exactly) so not only did they fail to get an ABA variance, but they also were pretty much throwing this out in the face of the ABA.

My guess is they simply did not know the policy, i.e. someone who should have looked into it did not and there wasn't great communication within the law school.


I stand corrected. That is the most embarrassing thing about this story.

User avatar
xylocarp
Posts: 4740
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 2:16 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby xylocarp » Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:49 pm

Mike and Karen,

I apologize if you've commented on this before, but do you think we're seeing the beginnings of a trend with law schools cutting tuition? Penn State recently halved their in-state tuition, and University of Iowa just decreased out-of-state tuition by 16.4%. Any chance other schools will follow suit?

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2607
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:09 pm

xylocarp wrote:Mike and Karen,

I apologize if you've commented on this before, but do you think we're seeing the beginnings of a trend with law schools cutting tuition? Penn State recently halved their in-state tuition, and University of Iowa just decreased out-of-state tuition by 16.4%. Any chance other schools will follow suit?


Here is a bit on this:

http://thecareerist.typepad.com/thecare ... 21613.html

I think the article is near my prediction -- the trend will continue at schools in unfavorable locations or for those who struggle filling a class. Put another way, it will be bimodal.
Last edited by MikeSpivey on Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby lawschool22 » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:12 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:
xylocarp wrote:Mike and Karen,

I apologize if you've commented on this before, but do you think we're seeing the beginnings of a trend with law schools cutting tuition? Penn State recently halved their in-state tuition, and University of Iowa just decreased out-of-state tuition by 16.4%. Any chance other schools will follow suit?


Here is a bit on this:

http://thecareerist.typepad.com/thecare ... 21613.html

I think the article is near my prediction -- the trend will continue at school in unfavorable locations or for those who struggle filling a class. Put another way, it will be bimodal.


If this continues it is a good thing. Right now the economics make no sense, but this could right that ship.

User avatar
xylocarp
Posts: 4740
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 2:16 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby xylocarp » Tue Dec 10, 2013 1:53 am

MikeSpivey wrote:
xylocarp wrote:Mike and Karen,

I apologize if you've commented on this before, but do you think we're seeing the beginnings of a trend with law schools cutting tuition? Penn State recently halved their in-state tuition, and University of Iowa just decreased out-of-state tuition by 16.4%. Any chance other schools will follow suit?


Here is a bit on this:

http://thecareerist.typepad.com/thecare ... 21613.html

I think the article is near my prediction -- the trend will continue at schools in unfavorable locations or for those who struggle filling a class. Put another way, it will be bimodal.

That makes sense. Thanks for the insight!

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby amc987 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 1:46 pm

amc987 wrote:Hi Mike and Karen,

I wanted to post this question on behalf of my SO who is a bit leery of posting on TLS.

She took the LSAT previously and got in the 160s two years ago and then in the 170s in June. She thought she could do better and took the test again in December. She's not sure how well it went and is thinking of cancelling her score. She's interested in HYS and is concerned about the potential of having a lower score on her record, especially because she already improved significantly on her previous take.

What is the danger of having a lower retake on your record when you apply? Would it kill one's chances at HYS to have a score in the 170s and then a lower score? What about cancelling? Would that raise some red flags with adcomms?

My SO sees the value of rolling to dice and seeing what she got in December (because if it's higher than the score she has now, it might help her admissions chances), but she isn't sure about taking the risk if the negative result would really mess things up.

Thanks for your advice!


Mike and Karen,

Sorry to re-post this, but I never got a response. My SO could really use the advice and the matter is a bit time-sensitive since she's debating whether to cancel her December score.

Thanks so much!

User avatar
KarenButtenbaum
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Tue Dec 10, 2013 2:36 pm

amc987 wrote:
amc987 wrote:Hi Mike and Karen,

I wanted to post this question on behalf of my SO who is a bit leery of posting on TLS.

She took the LSAT previously and got in the 160s two years ago and then in the 170s in June. She thought she could do better and took the test again in December. She's not sure how well it went and is thinking of cancelling her score. She's interested in HYS and is concerned about the potential of having a lower score on her record, especially because she already improved significantly on her previous take.

What is the danger of having a lower retake on your record when you apply? Would it kill one's chances at HYS to have a score in the 170s and then a lower score? What about cancelling? Would that raise some red flags with adcomms?

My SO sees the value of rolling to dice and seeing what she got in December (because if it's higher than the score she has now, it might help her admissions chances), but she isn't sure about taking the risk if the negative result would really mess things up.

Thanks for your advice!


Mike and Karen,

Sorry to re-post this, but I never got a response. My SO could really use the advice and the matter is a bit time-sensitive since she's debating whether to cancel her December score.

Thanks so much!


Her high score is the one that the school will report, so that's the one that counts. She knows better than anyone how she feels after taking the test, but I don't think this rises to the level of cancelling the score. Even a point or two upward will make a difference in here, so I'd be hesitant to cancel if she thinks that she might have done well. If for some reason she didn't do well, she could write an addendum.
Hope that helps!
Cheers,
KB

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby luckystar84 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:08 pm

deleted
Last edited by luckystar84 on Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby amc987 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:16 pm

KarenButtenbaum wrote:
amc987 wrote:
amc987 wrote:Hi Mike and Karen,

I wanted to post this question on behalf of my SO who is a bit leery of posting on TLS.

She took the LSAT previously and got in the 160s two years ago and then in the 170s in June. She thought she could do better and took the test again in December. She's not sure how well it went and is thinking of cancelling her score. She's interested in HYS and is concerned about the potential of having a lower score on her record, especially because she already improved significantly on her previous take.

What is the danger of having a lower retake on your record when you apply? Would it kill one's chances at HYS to have a score in the 170s and then a lower score? What about cancelling? Would that raise some red flags with adcomms?

My SO sees the value of rolling to dice and seeing what she got in December (because if it's higher than the score she has now, it might help her admissions chances), but she isn't sure about taking the risk if the negative result would really mess things up.

Thanks for your advice!


Mike and Karen,

Sorry to re-post this, but I never got a response. My SO could really use the advice and the matter is a bit time-sensitive since she's debating whether to cancel her December score.

Thanks so much!


Her high score is the one that the school will report, so that's the one that counts. She knows better than anyone how she feels after taking the test, but I don't think this rises to the level of cancelling the score. Even a point or two upward will make a difference in here, so I'd be hesitant to cancel if she thinks that she might have done well. If for some reason she didn't do well, she could write an addendum.
Hope that helps!
Cheers,
KB


Thanks so much, Karen! Just to clarify, though, if she did cancel, would 172-cancel look worse than 172-lower score? How is cancelling after you have a good score viewed? I only press this point because I know you have a lot of experience reviewing files and there doesn't seem to be any reliable information about the impact of cancelling in this circumstance. I appreciate your insights!

User avatar
KarenButtenbaum
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:58 pm

amc987 wrote:Thanks so much, Karen! Just to clarify, though, if she did cancel, would 172-cancel look worse than 172-lower score? How is cancelling after you have a good score viewed? I only press this point because I know you have a lot of experience reviewing files and there doesn't seem to be any reliable information about the impact of cancelling in this circumstance. I appreciate your insights!


One cancelled score is usually a non-issue, so it won't be looked at negatively. Even one point up in this case would make a difference, though, and schools get that.

User avatar
KarenButtenbaum
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:02 pm

luckystar84 wrote:hey KB, a few pages ago you said you think the change @ hls will be very minimal if any. i don't know how that comment relates chronologically (before or after) to mike's recent proclamation of a "mad dash," but do you see hls significantly changing its approach from last year or the year before?


I think that may have been a response to the 'mad dash' comment. There will be no free-for-all at HLS, but there certainly will be high demand for higher scores at all schools if test takers at the top are more scarce than last year.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2607
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:56 am

WOW, only 14,171 applicants as of 12/06 and applications are down 15.7 from this point last cycle.

http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/ ... ear-volume

I am super, super cereal (anyone?), mad-dash this cycle!

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:57 am

MikeSpivey wrote:WOW, only 14,171 applicants as of 12/06 and applications are down 15.7 from this point last cycle.

http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/ ... ear-volume

I am super, super cereal (anyone?), mad-dash this cycle!


:shock: 8) :D Great news

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:58 am

MikeSpivey wrote:WOW, only 14,171 applicants as of 12/06 and applications are down 15.7 from this point last cycle.

http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/ ... ear-volume

I am super, super cereal (anyone?), mad-dash this cycle!


If you project it out using their 28% number we are looking at about 50,600 applicants for c/o 2017.

Edit: meant class of 2017
Last edited by lawschool22 on Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:00 pm

Now we just need that bandwidth data and we can make some real sense of the trends...

User avatar
jk148706
Posts: 2499
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 11:14 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby jk148706 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:01 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:WOW, only 14,171 applicants as of 12/06 and applications are down 15.7 from this point last cycle.

http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/ ... ear-volume

I am super, super cereal (anyone?), mad-dash this cycle!


Gives me SOME hope :D

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby cotiger » Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:02 pm

lawschool22 wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:WOW, only 14,171 applicants as of 12/06 and applications are down 15.7 from this point last cycle.

http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/ ... ear-volume

I am super, super cereal (anyone?), mad-dash this cycle!


If you project it out using their 28% number we are looking at about 50,600 applicants for c/o 2014.


Wow. That's half of ten years ago. The class that was applying to enter in Fall 2004 had 100,600.

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby cotiger » Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:14 pm

Four cycles ago, the total number ENROLLED was 52,500, more than the number projected to even apply this year (not to mention get in, or enroll, which about 13% of acceptances typically don't).
Last edited by cotiger on Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Free Help and Advice from Professionals”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest