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
Puffin
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:17 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby Puffin » Wed May 14, 2014 9:36 am

Thank you so much for your response.
Last edited by Puffin on Wed May 14, 2014 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Wed May 14, 2014 9:40 am

drawstring wrote:Thanks for the response!

Another question. Let's say a school offers WL spots over three straight days--is there a most common reason as to why someone gets an offer on one day rather than the others? Just about when files are read?


In this scenario, likely who they can get in touch with first. They are also, likely, going to call all three days and say "are you still interested"...so maybe who calls them back, perhaps they call in alpha order, etc etc. That entire group in just one cohort.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Wed May 14, 2014 9:51 am

Puffin -- we can't give advice of this nature without a signed contract for legal reasons but just know that on a borad level many law school students have a variety of disclosed C&F circumstances.

chizzy
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 5:07 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby chizzy » Wed May 14, 2014 12:03 pm

Hi mike,

When a school says they are waiting till the 3rd seat deposit to expect spaces to become available before they pull off people from the waitlist, what does it really mean? The school says even if not enough people don't put down a deposit, they would still not use their waitlist because their class is oversized. And this schools 2nd deposit isn't until may 30th. I was just worried since at the beginning the school claimed they expected at least 50 seats to open up.

User avatar
nothingtosee
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby nothingtosee » Wed May 14, 2014 1:29 pm

Are the dynamics of may/post-may negotiations different then before deposit deadlines? Are they likely to be more receptive to one than the other?

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby drawstring » Thu May 15, 2014 4:13 pm

Thanks for the response!

A related question, when schools are looking for people to take off the WL will they ever go by date? So, for example, would they browse files by starting with the most recent applicants and only later get to earlier applicants if there are still spots open? Are there any other reasons why virtually all of a school's WL acceptances would come from applicants who applied in the second half of the cycle, even though there are many earlier applicants on the WL?

Thank you

linkx13
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 1:27 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby linkx13 » Thu May 15, 2014 7:07 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:A quick fyi. Within the next day or two we will have what I would consider to be a pretty major blog post up on our website, for those applying next cycle.

Not breaking news -- just major. :) Hopefully major! (hint: it doesn't have to do with majors).


Tomorrow?

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Thu May 15, 2014 9:42 pm

drawstring wrote:Thanks for the response!

A related question, when schools are looking for people to take off the WL will they ever go by date? So, for example, would they browse files by starting with the most recent applicants and only later get to earlier applicants if there are still spots open? Are there any other reasons why virtually all of a school's WL acceptances would come from applicants who applied in the second half of the cycle, even though there are many earlier applicants on the WL?

Thank you


I doubt that they are going by date - just remember that you are only seeing a small sample size of what is actually happening in the office. Often that small sample can be an indication of some larger pattern, but I don't think that is the case here.

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

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby KarenButtenbaum » Thu May 15, 2014 9:47 pm

chizzy wrote:Hi mike,

When a school says they are waiting till the 3rd seat deposit to expect spaces to become available before they pull off people from the waitlist, what does it really mean? The school says even if not enough people don't put down a deposit, they would still not use their waitlist because their class is oversized. And this schools 2nd deposit isn't until may 30th. I was just worried since at the beginning the school claimed they expected at least 50 seats to open up.


They probably will still go to the WL but not until later in the summer. The admissions office knows that some admits will drop out of the class (admitted to other schools), but they don't know who yet, so they have to wait and see what the class looks like and who they need to admit in order to meet their admissions goals. I know that the waiting isn't fun, but I think the movement will happen a little later.

buenolaw
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby buenolaw » Thu May 15, 2014 10:47 pm

How do schools look at past financial crimes such as use of a stolen credit card. I went through a diversion probation program and was considered "adjudication withheld" which I was told was not a conviction but still shows up on background checks. The incident was approximately 7 years ago and I have not had an issue since.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Fri May 16, 2014 8:42 am

linkx13 wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:A quick fyi. Within the next day or two we will have what I would consider to be a pretty major blog post up on our website, for those applying next cycle.

Not breaking news -- just major. :) Hopefully major! (hint: it doesn't have to do with majors).


Tomorrow?


In the next hour or two:

The Three Essential Features to a Great Personal Statement

(sorry if I hyped it up too much, I was just happy that we were working on it. And it is just one of a three part PS series)

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Fri May 16, 2014 10:33 am

Here it is:

http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/the-3- ... statement/

Two more of similar ilk coming soon!

milkshakeyurd
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby milkshakeyurd » Fri May 16, 2014 12:16 pm

Hi Mike and Karen,

Mike touched upon the drop in 165-169 range LSAT scores in relation to T7 and below. I was curious how this relates to T25 outside of T14 schools (are they expecting to have to reach into their waitlist, or have they compensated with more admits?)

I was WLed at a T25, median LSAT low GPA in early March. LOCI and visit in April. Thinking about sending a brief second LOCI before second deposit deadline in June. Any advice on second LOCI?

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Fri May 16, 2014 7:55 pm

chizzy wrote:Excited for this announcement


Yay, got some insider data! I'm going to start slowly tweeting it and I won't stop until Sunday!

User avatar
Black_Swan
Posts: 238
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:47 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby Black_Swan » Sat May 17, 2014 7:59 am

NotASpecialSnowflake wrote:Hey Mike and Karen thank you so much for doing this!

You mentioned before that reapplying is OK if you have a compelling family or personal reason. What if that reason is simply you cannot take out so much debt and want to retake the LSAT one more time for more money? I am on a waitlist at my dream school and I've told them that they are my top choice. But if I get in at sticker, I don't feel comfortable going. I have tried to communicate this over my LOCIs but I am worried that if they accept me and I withdraw and later reapply, they'll see me as unsure and reject me the next time.

My prelaw adviser also tells me to go if I get in, because he feels like I won't get a second chance. I like my adviser, but all the advice they have given me (don't retake the LSAT, go at sticker, improving numbers doesn't change much, take risks) directly contradicts all the advice on this website. I'm really confused.

Thanks!


Sorry if this has been answered before. I am curious what the answer is. Thanks

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Sat May 17, 2014 8:37 am

Black_Swan wrote:
NotASpecialSnowflake wrote:Hey Mike and Karen thank you so much for doing this!

You mentioned before that reapplying is OK if you have a compelling family or personal reason. What if that reason is simply you cannot take out so much debt and want to retake the LSAT one more time for more money? I am on a waitlist at my dream school and I've told them that they are my top choice. But if I get in at sticker, I don't feel comfortable going. I have tried to communicate this over my LOCIs but I am worried that if they accept me and I withdraw and later reapply, they'll see me as unsure and reject me the next time.

My prelaw adviser also tells me to go if I get in, because he feels like I won't get a second chance. I like my adviser, but all the advice they have given me (don't retake the LSAT, go at sticker, improving numbers doesn't change much, take risks) directly contradicts all the advice on this website. I'm really confused.

Thanks!


Sorry if this has been answered before. I am curious what the answer is. Thanks


It generally won't be held against you if you reapply.

If you are not taken off the WL and you retake and reapply, it will likely give you a small upward bump.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Sat May 17, 2014 11:54 am

I want to give people some peace of mind. For as long as I have been doing this (which dates back to 2000), now is the time people start saying: "this is going to be a really bad year for WL movement because of x, y, and/or z." Z, Y, and Z often change, but this statement is always repeated. Every single year.

Some years the statement is correct. This year, it won't be but for a small number of schools.

Just looking at the data, everything is loaded in favor of you, the applicant.

Applications are down at private school by 8.5%, at public by 9.8%.
Applications are down in every single race category with the exception of "not indicated."
Female applicants are down 7.5%, male down 9.1%
LSAT scores are down in 7 of 9 bandwidths. (I will post the data on my blog this weekend)
163 of 200 schools are reporting a drop in applications.

Few law schools are going to publicly say en masse, "we are suffering let it be known"...but that is exactly the landscape we are looking at.

This will be a wonderful year for WL movement. One of the stronger I have seen in 14 years of tracking this. If you had applied 5 years ago, it would have been much tougher. A few years from now, when there may be fewer law schools and more applicants, it will be slimmer pickings. But for now, it is May. The summer is long and full of Melting. hang in there!

Mike

(also, I don't have the ability to post this on every individual school thread but please feel free to share!)

in the process
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 4:43 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby in the process » Sun May 18, 2014 5:35 pm

Hi Mike/Karen,

Thanks for all that you do here!!

I have a question;
I know that you guys have said in the past that concise and well written addenda can be very useful in giving Adcomms a clearer picture of things, especially when there is something in need of clarity. But what's the limit on this?
If one has 3 or 4 different issues that he feels need to be addressed in an addendum (a very low grade in a law related class, a big gap on the resume, a very low first LSAT score etc.....) is it appropriate to write that many addenda, should one err on the side of clarity......or will it be viewed as annoying by Adcomms because they have more than enough to read without you throwing 3 more pieces of paper at them?

Thanks so much!

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Mon May 19, 2014 8:17 pm

here is your 5/9/14 LSAT Bandwidth data:

http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/lsat-b ... s-of-5914/

chizzy
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 5:07 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby chizzy » Mon May 19, 2014 8:24 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:I want to give people some peace of mind. For as long as I have been doing this (which dates back to 2000), now is the time people start saying: "this is going to be a really bad year for WL movement because of x, y, and/or z." Z, Y, and Z often change, but this statement is always repeated. Every single year.

Some years the statement is correct. This year, it won't be but for a small number of schools.

Just looking at the data, everything is loaded in favor of you, the applicant.

Applications are down at private school by 8.5%, at public by 9.8%.
Applications are down in every single race category with the exception of "not indicated."
Female applicants are down 7.5%, male down 9.1%
LSAT scores are down in 7 of 9 bandwidths. (I will post the data on my blog this weekend)
163 of 200 schools are reporting a drop in applications.

Few law schools are going to publicly say en masse, "we are suffering let it be known"...but that is exactly the landscape we are looking at.

This will be a wonderful year for WL movement. One of the stronger I have seen in 14 years of tracking this. If you had applied 5 years ago, it would have been much tougher. A few years from now, when there may be fewer law schools and more applicants, it will be slimmer pickings. But for now, it is May. The summer is long and full of Melting. hang in there!

Mike

(also, I don't have the ability to post this on every individual school thread but please feel free to share!)


Thanks for this Mike! It can be really a bummer when I see different schools say their class is full and they may not use their waitlist. Really hoping for this summer melting to happen soon!

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Wed May 21, 2014 9:10 am

in the process wrote:Hi Mike/Karen,

Thanks for all that you do here!!

I have a question;
I know that you guys have said in the past that concise and well written addenda can be very useful in giving Adcomms a clearer picture of things, especially when there is something in need of clarity. But what's the limit on this?
If one has 3 or 4 different issues that he feels need to be addressed in an addendum (a very low grade in a law related class, a big gap on the resume, a very low first LSAT score etc.....) is it appropriate to write that many addenda, should one err on the side of clarity......or will it be viewed as annoying by Adcomms because they have more than enough to read without you throwing 3 more pieces of paper at them?

Thanks so much!



That strikes me as too much. If nothings else, you probably should just ignore the first LSAT score explanation unless there really was some crazy something that occurred that day. Trust me, the schools will ignore the score.
Last edited by MikeSpivey on Wed May 21, 2014 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
nothingtosee
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby nothingtosee » Wed May 21, 2014 9:15 am

Mike and Karen -

Any thoughts on the recent accommodations decision by LSAC?

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Wed May 21, 2014 11:12 am

nothingtosee wrote:Mike and Karen -

Any thoughts on the recent accommodations decision by LSAC?


I have long thought that LSAC was too stringent and (paradoxically) inexact in granting accomdations -- although to be fair it's a rather tough vetting job to have.

This change in policy towards not annotating people who took under accommodations will likely hurt the admissions prospectives of many more people with disabilities than it will help.

in the process
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 4:43 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby in the process » Wed May 21, 2014 11:30 am

MikeSpivey wrote:
nothingtosee wrote:Mike and Karen -

Any thoughts on the recent accommodations decision by LSAC?


I have long thought that LSAC was too stringent and (paradoxically) inexact in granting accomdations -- although to be fair it's a rather tough vetting job to have.

This change in policy towards not annotating people who took under accommodations will likely hurt the admissions prospectives of many more people with disabilities than it will help.


Interesting. Why do you think it will hurt them?

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2608
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Q&A with former Admissions Officers

Postby MikeSpivey » Wed May 21, 2014 12:55 pm

I think it potentially encourages law schools to take a less holistic view of the application, which I think is not good. I firmly believe that when applications are read broadly everyone (law school and applicant) benefits. As an aside, when we consult for law schools we often talk about this in terms of video interviewing, etc.

Every law school in the nation will have people they want to take a closer look at --some of whom they will want to admit after said look. Anything that gets away from that diminishes the application process, IMO.


Return to “Free Help and Advice from Professionals”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest