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

[poe]

I was UR on 12/09 (submitted late Oct) and then I just checked my status checker and it says UR 12/25, so has anyone else in this thread had 2 UR dates? I am an RD candidate, strong application but I do not have auto-admit numbers.

That is a dedicated staff over there to update my app on 12/25.

Yeah. My first UR date was 11/11, and it updated again on 12/14. I think this was the case for a lot of RD people. Not sure if it really means anything.

[American_in_China]

Looking at the LSN graph, quite a few "splitters" got in already, so I would be hopeful if you got waitlisted. They already seem like they are more lenient GPA-wise than I thought they would be (four people with sub-3.5 GPA's have been admitted.)

Yeah, but I wasn't one of them, even with a 179. I think it's just so hard to convince schools to take a chance on a 3.25, despite the fact that I went to a school with no grade inflation in my primary major. It's hard to explain that I only took heavy econ classes, not finance classes, which have no inflation. But it is what it is. I'm sure I'll go to a good school and make it where I want regardless. Time to start drafting my LOCI.

3.25 might be tough for Chi to swallow but NYU should give you a look?

And did you explain that grade inflation stuff in an addendum? If not, maybe mention it in your LOCI (I don't know much about LOCI so don't take my word for it)

Yeah, but it's still an excuse. I definitely didn't work nearly as hard in undergrad as I should have. I'm just gonna have to work hard wherever I get in.

[boosk]

.

[MumofCad]

Looking at the LSN graph, quite a few "splitters" got in already, so I would be hopeful if you got waitlisted. They already seem like they are more lenient GPA-wise than I thought they would be (four people with sub-3.5 GPA's have been admitted.)

Yeah, but I wasn't one of them, even with a 179. I think it's just so hard to convince schools to take a chance on a 3.25, despite the fact that I went to a school with no grade inflation in my primary major. It's hard to explain that I only took heavy econ classes, not finance classes, which have no inflation. But it is what it is. I'm sure I'll go to a good school and make it where I want regardless. Time to start drafting my LOCI.

3.25 might be tough for Chi to swallow but NYU should give you a look?

And did you explain that grade inflation stuff in an addendum? If not, maybe mention it in your LOCI (I don't know much about LOCI so don't take my word for it)

Yeah, but it's still an excuse. I definitely didn't work nearly as hard in undergrad as I should have. I'm just gonna have to work hard wherever I get in.

I find this refreshing - I'm not positive, but I have the feeling that at least some adcomms might as well.

[addy11]

Looking at the LSN graph, quite a few "splitters" got in already, so I would be hopeful if you got waitlisted. They already seem like they are more lenient GPA-wise than I thought they would be (four people with sub-3.5 GPA's have been admitted.)

Yeah, but I wasn't one of them, even with a 179. I think it's just so hard to convince schools to take a chance on a 3.25, despite the fact that I went to a school with no grade inflation in my primary major. It's hard to explain that I only took heavy econ classes, not finance classes, which have no inflation. But it is what it is. I'm sure I'll go to a good school and make it where I want regardless. Time to start drafting my LOCI.

3.25 might be tough for Chi to swallow but NYU should give you a look?

And did you explain that grade inflation stuff in an addendum? If not, maybe mention it in your LOCI (I don't know much about LOCI so don't take my word for it)

Yeah, but it's still an excuse. I definitely didn't work nearly as hard in undergrad as I should have. I'm just gonna have to work hard wherever I get in.

It's hard to put your uninflated GPA in context, because almost all American schools in almost all majors have some grade inflation, and the degree to which this is the case varies wildly.

You say you could have worked harder, but I suppose that is the case for everyone. Might it be worth it to get a LoR from a prof in your major (better yet, the head of the department) to acknowledge just how difficult your major was? If 3.25 uninflated is the equivalent of a 3.6 inflated, maybe it wouldn't be, but if your GPA is better than 95% of people in your major, that could be a compelling piece of context.

[American_in_China]

3.25 might be tough for Chi to swallow but NYU should give you a look?

And did you explain that grade inflation stuff in an addendum? If not, maybe mention it in your LOCI (I don't know much about LOCI so don't take my word for it)

Yeah, but it's still an excuse. I definitely didn't work nearly as hard in undergrad as I should have. I'm just gonna have to work hard wherever I get in.

I find this refreshing - I'm not positive, but I have the feeling that at least some adcomms might as well.

Haha yeah, I wish, but they can't know whether I'm sincere or just grasping for straws. I hoped the fact I started a company and did research or tutoring every semester since sophomore year would overcome it, and show I've got work ethic, but I guess not. But it's not the end of the world. Chicago was my #1 choice, but I'd be happy at any of the schools I applied to.

Time to get crackin on my LOCI.

[American_in_China]

To Addy- I think it's time to give up on explaining it. I didn't work enough, plain and simple. Whatever I write my LOCI about, it's going to be about what I bring to Chicago, not why I don't have auto-accept numbers.

[anewaphorist]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

[addy11]

To Addy- I think it's time to give up on explaining it. I didn't work enough, plain and simple. Whatever I write my LOCI about, it's going to be about what I bring to Chicago, not why I don't have auto-accept numbers.

Fair enough, but if you feel that you deserve a spot at UChi, don't fall on your sword. You know yourself and you're right about the direction you want to take your LOCI, I just wouldn't rule out any supplemental chances to put your GPA in context. You may not think you've worked hard enough, but I would bet you worked a lot harder than some people who have been admitted or who will be in the future. My GPA was among the highest of my friends', but I certainly didn't work as hard as most of them.

Anyway, best of luck to you regardless.

[MumofCad]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I think there is every reason to believe this plays an important role in the case of a low UGPA. The adcoms are going to be more sceptical than for someone with a strong UG institution and GPA, who got an oddly low first LSAT based on all other indicators.

Eta: not that they will strictly avg in either case, but just that it will come more into play with a weakwer Gpa as a balancing factor

[foxylaxy]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I think there is every reason to believe this plays an important role in the case of a low UGPA. The adcoms are going to be more sceptical than for someone with a strong UG institution and GPA, who got an oddly low first LSAT based on all other indicators.

Eta: not that they will strictly avg in either case, but just that it will come more into play with a weakwer Gpa as a balancing factor

Quoted from their site:

"We will review all LSAT scores that you have received. In accordance with the American Bar Association and LSAC policies, we will focus on the highest LSAT score and report the highest score.

Any large differences (a seven or eight point jump) between LSAT scores should be explained in an addendum attached to your application and be honest about the discrepancy in your scores. We simply want to know why one score is a better predictor of your ability than another.

We read the writing sample and you should take it seriously. Remember that you are applying for a professional program and it reflects very poorly on an applicant's judgment when we see a writing sample with a silly or unprofessional comment in it (this really happens)."

I do think it'll have some bearing on your application though (and mine as I took 2) since if they have someone with a similar case but who only took the LSAT once and got your high score, wouldn't you take the single score test taker? But I don't think they straight out average the score.

[American_in_China]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

No it applies to me as well. I had a 172 in June, and a 179 in October. That's a good point though. Jam was a retaker too, was he not? He probably has the best GPA/LSAT combo of any ED applicant, but if you average his or my stats, we definitely fall below some of the acceptances.

[daydreamer]

Hi checking in here. Just updated today, Application Under Review 12/30, previous review date on 12/14 and complete 11/2.

[nine-and-fifty]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I only took once (178/3.55) and was still waitlisted. Then again, my application could very well have had a different problem, and you might be onto something.

[snehpets]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I only took once (178/3.55) and was still waitlisted. Then again, my application could very well have had a different problem, and you might be onto something.

wtf, you got waitlisted with a 178, first time? even with a 3.55 it seems insane to waitlist you ED.

[anewaphorist]

Agreed. My puny 170-ass got in...? Well, there's no way Columbia's not taking you.

[nine-and-fifty]

Agreed. My puny 170-ass got in...? Well, there's no way Columbia's not taking you.

There's no reason to sell yourself short. A 4.0 is impressive, and you probably have good softs to go with it. Given how my cycle has gone so far, I would say my app has a red flag, or at least a major weakness, somewhere beyond the numbers.

[catmo]

RD. Under review again 12/29. Has everyone been finding out via email?

[180asBreath]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I only took once (178/3.55) and was still waitlisted. Then again, my application could very well have had a different problem, and you might be onto something.

wtf, you got waitlisted with a 178, first time? even with a 3.55 it seems insane to waitlist you ED.

They do have a pretty well-established GPA floor.

[hyakku]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I think there is every reason to believe this plays an important role in the case of a low UGPA. The adcoms are going to be more sceptical than for someone with a strong UG institution and GPA, who got an oddly low first LSAT based on all other indicators.

Eta: not that they will strictly avg in either case, but just that it will come more into play with a weakwer Gpa as a balancing factor

Quoted from their site:

"We will review all LSAT scores that you have received. In accordance with the American Bar Association and LSAC policies, we will focus on the highest LSAT score and report the highest score.

Any large differences (a seven or eight point jump) between LSAT scores should be explained in an addendum attached to your application and be honest about the discrepancy in your scores. We simply want to know why one score is a better predictor of your ability than another.

We read the writing sample and you should take it seriously. Remember that you are applying for a professional program and it reflects very poorly on an applicant's judgment when we see a writing sample with a silly or unprofessional comment in it (this really happens)."

I do think it'll have some bearing on your application though (and mine as I took 2) since if they have someone with a similar case but who only took the LSAT once and got your high score, wouldn't you take the single score test taker? But I don't think they straight out average the score.

ROFL at the bolded. While I wrote a full essay, I definitely had a semi-sarcastic parenthetical in there. I can't believe they are that serious about that. Maybe Chi isn't the place for me at all (says the guy that isn't even UR yet) if things are taken this seriously.


At least I've got an excuse for my ding. "They just didn't get me!"

[snehpets]

wtf, you got waitlisted with a 178, first time? even with a 3.55 it seems insane to waitlist you ED.

They do have a pretty well-established GPA floor.

ah. i'm not particularly knowledgeable about chicago i was just surprised they didn't want to lock in such a median boosting LSAT, even at the cost of a lower gpa.

also yeah, i may be looking at an auto-rejection if they really take the tone of your personal statement that seriously.

[luxxe]

They do have a pretty well-established GPA floor.

Which they went below multiple times for ED applicants so far. Multiple 3.2/3.3s were admitted.

I only took the LSAT once, fwiw, but I also did poorly, so I am guessing that has more to do with my WL. Though someone in another thread said they got in yesterday with a 3.9x/167 .

Between Columbia's and Chicago's ED decisions this year, I don't understand what the fuck is going on.

[addy11]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I think there is every reason to believe this plays an important role in the case of a low UGPA. The adcoms are going to be more sceptical than for someone with a strong UG institution and GPA, who got an oddly low first LSAT based on all other indicators.

Eta: not that they will strictly avg in either case, but just that it will come more into play with a weakwer Gpa as a balancing factor

Quoted from their site:

"We will review all LSAT scores that you have received. In accordance with the American Bar Association and LSAC policies, we will focus on the highest LSAT score and report the highest score.

Any large differences (a seven or eight point jump) between LSAT scores should be explained in an addendum attached to your application and be honest about the discrepancy in your scores. We simply want to know why one score is a better predictor of your ability than another.

We read the writing sample and you should take it seriously. Remember that you are applying for a professional program and it reflects very poorly on an applicant's judgment when we see a writing sample with a silly or unprofessional comment in it (this really happens)."

I do think it'll have some bearing on your application though (and mine as I took 2) since if they have someone with a similar case but who only took the LSAT once and got your high score, wouldn't you take the single score test taker? But I don't think they straight out average the score.

ROFL at the bolded. While I wrote a full essay, I definitely had a semi-sarcastic parenthetical in there. I can't believe they are that serious about that. Maybe Chi isn't the place for me at all (says the guy that isn't even UR yet) if things are taken this seriously.


At least I've got an excuse for my ding. "They just didn't get me!"

I would hope that silly = something like Legally Blonde application vid, and unprofessional = some racy joke or needless inclusion of a curse word, denigration of another school, etc.

If it's tasteful and funny I can't imagine the school holding it against you. I (would like to) think LS ad comms get their fill of grave, serious, civic minded apps, and a good joke would give you crazy bonus points.

[Tiago Splitter]

Anyone think UChi is being particularly unkind to people who have taken the LSAT more than once? Unkind in this case could simply be the practice of strictly averaging an applicant's LSAT scores. Most of the T14 just look at the best score, but I wonder if certain people aren't getting love from Chicago because the adcom is actually averaging their scores...

AiC, this doesn't seem to be your problem, but it might go a way towards explaining some of the more inexplicable WLs.

I only took once (178/3.55) and was still waitlisted. Then again, my application could very well have had a different problem, and you might be onto something.

wtf, you got waitlisted with a 178, first time? even with a 3.55 it seems insane to waitlist you ED.

They do have a pretty well-established GPA floor.

But a 3.3x got in ED. Very surprised an ED app at 178/3.5 got WLed. Crud.

[hyakku]

I would hope that silly = something like Legally Blonde application vid, and unprofessional = some racy joke or needless inclusion of a curse word, denigration of another school, etc.

If it's tasteful and funny I can't imagine the school holding it against you. I (would like to) think LS ad comms get their fill of grave, serious, civic minded apps, and a good joke would give you crazy bonus points.

It wasn't either of those lol, but something tells me that if they went far enough to include that in a FAQ, they are probably pretty strict. I'm not stressing it either way; all I can do is wait. Besides, after visiting Columbia and NYU today while I've been at home, I'm more excited about those two (especially NYU) than ever before. Thankfully stressing over them will absorb more of my time than worrying about how balanced my snark was lol. Good luck all, sorry to hear about the dings before NYE (that's kind of a dick move that reinforces my questioning of whether I'm down for Chi. Columbia did the same. Really messed up).