Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle) Forum

[snehpets]

I also got a 4th update today. I'm hoping you guys are wrong about this being bad news. I thought my chances were pretty good...

Maybe it just means they're still considering us. We're all either reach people, "okay" people, or madvillain, who has awesome numbers but is canadian i think.

On the bright side, none are "auto-dings."

[hyakku]

I'd really just like my first UR...

This damnit.

[Campagnolo]

I also got a 4th update today. I'm hoping you guys are wrong about this being bad news. I thought my chances were pretty good...

You do have an excellent chance, given your numbers. There's really only one person saying it's bad news. I think it's just the normal course of business of reviewing apps. The truth is, there is no sort of uniformity whatsoever to status checkers. UVA never updates once you go complete, Michigan updates every damn day of the week (therefore rendering it completely useless), and the other schools fall somewhere in between.

Who could know?

[snehpets]

I also got a 4th update today. I'm hoping you guys are wrong about this being bad news. I thought my chances were pretty good...

You do have an excellent chance, given your numbers. There's really only one person saying it's bad news. I think it's just the normal course of business of reviewing apps. The truth is, there is no sort of uniformity whatsoever to status checkers. UVA never updates once you go complete, Michigan updates every damn day of the week (therefore rendering it completely useless), and the other schools fall somewhere in between.

Who could know?

I'm not saying it's bad news at all! Or I didn't intend to. I was just throwing out a hypothesis for group analysis. Sorry

[lawschool899]

I think today is not the day sadly.

[Nelson]

I also got a 4th update today. I'm hoping you guys are wrong about this being bad news. I thought my chances were pretty good...

You do have an excellent chance, given your numbers. There's really only one person saying it's bad news. I think it's just the normal course of business of reviewing apps. The truth is, there is no sort of uniformity whatsoever to status checkers. UVA never updates once you go complete, Michigan updates every damn day of the week (therefore rendering it completely useless), and the other schools fall somewhere in between.

Who could know?

People are comparing to the pattern last year, which was a huge update of status checkers to third UR the day before decisions were released. So this week has defied that pattern, causing more speculation.

[lawhopeful2012]

new tweet just to make us crazy. completely unrelated to apps haha

[Campagnolo]

I also got a 4th update today. I'm hoping you guys are wrong about this being bad news. I thought my chances were pretty good...

You do have an excellent chance, given your numbers. There's really only one person saying it's bad news. I think it's just the normal course of business of reviewing apps. The truth is, there is no sort of uniformity whatsoever to status checkers. UVA never updates once you go complete, Michigan updates every damn day of the week (therefore rendering it completely useless), and the other schools fall somewhere in between.

Who could know?

People are comparing to the pattern last year, which was a huge update of status checkers to third UR the day before decisions were released. So this week has defied that pattern, causing more speculation.

The Rubensteins, coupled with the cut to the class size, means that previous years can't be relied upon. At least that's what I think.

I just want to know so I can plan my life. Am I going to be rural and cold (Mich and Cornell), or urban and cold (C/N/P)?

[thestillpoint]

No fourth update here.

No fourth update for me either. Still on 1/9 (complete 11/2).
Hopefully tomorrow will bring decisions rather than more speculation!

[Nelson]

The Rubensteins, coupled with the cut to the class size, means that previous years can't be relied upon. At least that's what I think.

The Rubys were around last year. What makes you think UChi is going to cut class size this year? They're already the smallest T14 by some. I doubt they're going to go smaller than 170 this year.

[crosby813]

The Rubensteins, coupled with the cut to the class size, means that previous years can't be relied upon. At least that's what I think.

I just want to know so I can plan my life. Am I going to be rural and cold (Mich and Cornell), or urban and cold (C/N/P)?[/quote]


What exactly do you mean?

[dakure]

ITS SNOWING IN CHICAGO, GUYS.

[crosby813]

The Rubensteins, coupled with the cut to the class size, means that previous years can't be relied upon. At least that's what I think.

The Rubys were around last year. What makes you think UChi is going to cut class size this year? They're already the smallest T14 by some. I doubt they're going to go smaller than 170 this year.

My question exactly

[danielhay11]

The Rubensteins, coupled with the cut to the class size, means that previous years can't be relied upon. At least that's what I think.

The Rubys were around last year. What makes you think UChi is going to cut class size this year? They're already the smallest T14 by some. I doubt they're going to go smaller than 170 this year.

My question exactly

Do you mean the reduction in the applicant pool? Also, IIRC, Rubys go out later.

[Campagnolo]

Here's what I meant: Last year they changed things up because of the Rubys and the class size cut. They made enormous gains in medians with that change. Enormous. Tremendous.

This year they face a drastic reduction in the number of applicants. 16-17% is huge. I would guess the reduction in test takers has no overall effect on the distribution of top LSAT scores (a very smart assumption). In order to maintain the shiny new medians, Chicago must alter the process somehow, or else last year's spike in numbers will be just that: a spike.

All the schools seem to be playing a cagey game this year.

[Nelson]

Here's what I meant: Last year they changed things up because of the Rubys and the class size cut. They made enormous gains in medians with that change. Enormous. Tremendous.

This year they face a drastic reduction in the number of applicants. 16-17% is huge. I would guess the reduction in test takers has no overall effect on the distribution of top LSAT scores (a very smart assumption). In order to maintain the shiny new medians, Chicago must alter the process somehow, or else last year's spike in numbers will be just that: a spike.

All the schools seem to be playing a cagey game this year.

While the cycle seems to be a little weird (though no weirder than any other cycle seems when taking a random snapshot), the bolded is not correct. Schools have confirmed that the drop in apps hits all of the LSAT percentiles equally. Smart people with high LSATs usually have better options outside of law school so they've dropped off just as much as low scorers.

[Campagnolo]

Here's what I meant: Last year they changed things up because of the Rubys and the class size cut. They made enormous gains in medians with that change. Enormous. Tremendous.

This year they face a drastic reduction in the number of applicants. 16-17% is huge. I would guess the reduction in test takers has no overall effect on the distribution of top LSAT scores (a very smart assumption). In order to maintain the shiny new medians, Chicago must alter the process somehow, or else last year's spike in numbers will be just that: a spike.

All the schools seem to be playing a cagey game this year.

While the cycle seems to be a little weird (though no weirder than any other cycle seems when taking a random snapshot), the bolded is not correct. Schools have confirmed that the drop in apps hits all of the LSAT percentiles equally. Smart people with high LSATs usually have better options outside of law school so they've dropped off just as much as low scorers.

That's exactly what I was saying. I just said it in a confusing way. The curve of the LSAT remains. Because the number of people taking the test is so large, it would be very difficult to pull the bell one way or the other.

[yankees42789]

Just had a third update (12/22, 1/9, 1/12). I'm thinking decisions are going to start coming either tomorrow or Monday.

[KevinP]

Here's what I meant: Last year they changed things up because of the Rubys and the class size cut. They made enormous gains in medians with that change. Enormous. Tremendous.

This year they face a drastic reduction in the number of applicants. 16-17% is huge. I would guess the reduction in test takers has no overall effect on the distribution of top LSAT scores (a very smart assumption). In order to maintain the shiny new medians, Chicago must alter the process somehow, or else last year's spike in numbers will be just that: a spike.

All the schools seem to be playing a cagey game this year.

While the cycle seems to be a little weird (though no weirder than any other cycle seems when taking a random snapshot), the bolded is not correct. Schools have confirmed that the drop in apps hits all of the LSAT percentiles equally. Smart people with high LSATs usually have better options outside of law school so they've dropped off just as much as low scorers.

I think both of you are saying the same thing. Based on limited data released by LSAC, which may not necessarily be representative, the group with the greatest decrease is the 175+ group (-23.28%--2010 vs 2011 as of Dec. 3rd). However, taken as an aggregate, the distributions tend to be fairly stable.

[snehpets]

Just had a third update (12/22, 1/9, 1/12). I'm thinking decisions are going to start coming either tomorrow or Monday.

cool, this should be a relief to all the people i inadvertently freaked out if I remember your amazing cycle/stats correctly.

[Nelson]

Just had a third update (12/22, 1/9, 1/12). I'm thinking decisions are going to start coming either tomorrow or Monday.

cool, this should be a relief to all the people i inadvertently freaked out if I remember your amazing cycle/stats correctly.

Yeah, he's HS secure so we can assume that a 1/12 update is no badge of shame.

Looks like decisions not happening to day. They better make some calls tomorrow or that tweet on Monday will have been a huge tease.

[Nelson]

That's exactly what I was saying. I just said it in a confusing way. The curve of the LSAT remains. Because the number of people taking the test is so large, it would be very difficult to pull the bell one way or the other.

Sorry, I must have totally read that wrong the first time.

[KevinP]

Well, I only had 2 UR dates. I'm guessing a waitlist or rejection for me.

[Campagnolo]

Oh, and I'm hoping last year was a spike, because I went to being at or above medians, to below the 25% GPA mark in one year.

Edit: 3.59-3.87 168-172 /// 3.71-3.94 167-173

[JamMasterJ]

I also got a 4th update today. I'm hoping you guys are wrong about this being bad news. I thought my chances were pretty good...

You do have an excellent chance, given your numbers. There's really only one person saying it's bad news. I think it's just the normal course of business of reviewing apps. The truth is, there is no sort of uniformity whatsoever to status checkers. UVA never updates once you go complete, Michigan updates every damn day of the week (therefore rendering it completely useless), and the other schools fall somewhere in between.

Who could know?

People are comparing to the pattern last year, which was a huge update of status checkers to third UR the day before decisions were released. So this week has defied that pattern, causing more speculation.

The Rubensteins, coupled with the cut to the class size, means that previous years can't be relied upon. At least that's what I think.

I just want to know so I can plan my life. Am I going to be rural and cold (Mich and Cornell), or urban and cold (C/N/P)?

yeah, the only life decision I know so far is that I need to buy some nice boots