Columbia 2011!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
4102011
Posts: 1724
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby 4102011 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:48 pm

Forgot username field, post if you want me to add it for you

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby ahduth » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:48 pm

logistikon wrote:So.... is no news bad news? I am wondering if my joint degree application is keeping me out of the fray, or if I am already in the "reserve" pile.


Wait lets do a count of how many remaining not held who are complete pre-xmas

+1

I'm going to make this a list. Next person quote it:

r6
dulcatis
justhoping
RJ127
absolutazn87
forward
Philip_J_Fry
Kent M
TrustMeI'mAnActress
glitched
ahduth

+1

edit: total quote fail.
Last edited by ahduth on Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Knock » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:49 pm

r6_philly wrote:
Knock wrote:
dulcatis wrote:
r6_philly wrote:
Wait lets do a count of how many remaining not held who are complete pre-xmas

+1


+1

I'm going to make this a list. Next person quote it:

r6
dulcatis
justhoping


Probably already have VCE's in the mail. OR are heading for a rejection later on :?.


I refuse to think of a rejection because I was reserved last year. And I am miles better this year.


There is another option I mentioned ;)

User avatar
starrydreamz3
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 11:42 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby starrydreamz3 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:49 pm

I feel a "The Forgotten - Columbia 2011" thread coming up.

User avatar
arism87
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:46 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby arism87 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:50 pm

somewhere wrote:
arism87 wrote:pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)


My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.


Sorry but 99.5% of the time (making this number up) that is enough to know which is more compelling to an adcomm.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:51 pm

starrydreamz3 wrote:I feel a "The Forgotten - Columbia 2011" thread coming up.


I will start it when I get home and still sans email!

4102011
Posts: 1724
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby 4102011 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:51 pm

dulcatis wrote:Yeah who am I kidding? For us confuzzled applicants:

Form:

--LinkRemoved--

Spreadsheet:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=COCx7rcG

lastMinuteGuy
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:23 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby lastMinuteGuy » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:51 pm

CM612 wrote:
lastMinuteGuy wrote:Just got my hold. 174/3.94, December complete.


It's not over?


Just double checked the timestamp and it was sent at 5:45 but didn't show up in my inbox until a little while ago, so just a Gmail hiccup and not another wave or anything.

melamine
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 11:06 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby melamine » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:51 pm

somewhere wrote:
arism87 wrote:pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)


My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.



So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Knock » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:52 pm

melamine wrote:
somewhere wrote:
arism87 wrote:pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)


My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.



So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.


I see you are new to TLS.

User avatar
Muenchen
Posts: 1197
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:42 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Muenchen » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:53 pm

ahduth wrote:
logistikon wrote:So.... is no news bad news? I am wondering if my joint degree application is keeping me out of the fray, or if I am already in the "reserve" pile.


Wait lets do a count of how many remaining not held who are complete pre-xmas

+1

I'm going to make this a list. Next person quote it:

r6
dulcatis
justhoping
RJ127
absolutazn87
forward
Philip_J_Fry
Kent M
TrustMeI'mAnActress
glitched
ahduth

+1

edit: total quote fail.


I can be added to this list.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:53 pm

melamine wrote:
somewhere wrote:
arism87 wrote:pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)


My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.



So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.


You guys are presume people like you refer to are not still waiting for decisions.

User avatar
Muenchen
Posts: 1197
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:42 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Muenchen » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:53 pm

Knock wrote:
I see you are new to TLS.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So much win.

somewhere
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 12:38 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby somewhere » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:54 pm

arism87 wrote:
Sorry but 99.5% of the time (making this number up) that is enough to know which is more compelling to an adcomm.


And the reason you're sure of this is LSN & TLS, nothing else, right? Both of which have an obvious self-selection bias and contradict the stated claims of the adcomms themselves.

Obviously super high numbers usually get accepted and super low ones usually get rejected. Anybody would be a fool to deny either of those things. But there are enough exceptions to both to temper the LSN/TLS numbers obsession.

Or not. The other option is to just keep being shocked every other day.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:54 pm

Muenchen wrote:
Knock wrote:
I see you are new to TLS.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So much win.


Hey I said it first (in a Columbia-esque, gunner voice).

User avatar
forward
Posts: 413
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby forward » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:54 pm

Okay, this is NOT the place for a debate on what does or should matter to AdComms. It's pretty clear that with the avalanche of holds that something is up at CLS. We're trying to figure that out. CLS is historically quite numbers-based, but holds today went up and down the pool. Something deeper must be afoot. There are countless other threads to debate the merits of softs vs. numbers.

ETA: remove me from the 'not held' list - I'm there erroneously. Held just after 5 pm CST.
Last edited by forward on Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

c_dubya_s
Posts: 557
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 11:58 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby c_dubya_s » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:54 pm

lastMinuteGuy wrote:
CM612 wrote:
lastMinuteGuy wrote:Just got my hold. 174/3.94, December complete.


It's not over?


Just double checked the timestamp and it was sent at 5:45 but didn't show up in my inbox until a little while ago, so just a Gmail hiccup and not another wave or anything.


5:55pm on mine...

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:54 pm

Knock wrote:
There is another option I mentioned ;)


Yes, I hope so.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby ahduth » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:54 pm

Dulcatis should probably just go work in i banking instead with her spreadsheet ninjitsu.

dabbadon8
Posts: 767
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 2:17 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby dabbadon8 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:54 pm

Can anyone make anything of the no-hold spread sheet? My best guess is that we are part of the early feb mixed decision wave.

User avatar
hotthaichick
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:59 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby hotthaichick » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:55 pm

Officially starting to feel dizzy from all the Columbia thread activity. I'm going to go stare at my hold letter for awhile...

logistikon
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby logistikon » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:55 pm

r6_philly wrote:
melamine wrote:
somewhere wrote:
arism87 wrote:pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)


My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.



So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.


You guys are presume people like you refer to are not still waiting for decisions.


i didnt understand that sentence

justhoping
Posts: 147
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:38 am

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby justhoping » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:55 pm

i'm the 2nd person on the spreadsheet...
in @ CLS would take a miracle, just look @ my track record... :cry:

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:55 pm

somewhere wrote:
arism87 wrote:
Sorry but 99.5% of the time (making this number up) that is enough to know which is more compelling to an adcomm.


And the reason you're sure of this is LSN & TLS, nothing else, right? Both of which have an obvious self-selection bias and contradict the stated claims of the adcomms themselves.

Obviously super high numbers usually get accepted and super low ones usually get rejected. Anybody would be a fool to deny either of those things. But there are enough exceptions to both to temper the LSN/TLS numbers obsession.

Or not. The other option is to just keep being shocked every other day.


I have yet to be shocked.

User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby acrossthelake » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:56 pm

dulcatis wrote:CLS admissions:

Image




This.


In general, I'd agree that admissions is a bit more holistic than we give them credit for. However, there's not much you can say about a single case, and right now I'm willing to bet a substantial portion of those held will get in, particularly the high index people.




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ewan0707, MSNbot Media, smashbash and 7 guests