Top Law Schools

splbagel wrote:Two things to keep in mind:

--LSN isn't necessarily a representative sample of applicants.

--Of the 8 <3.8 admits on LSN last year, 5 were URM.

Yea, LSN is skewed in favor of strong applicants, that's why you see a higher % of accepts than the actual acceptance rate.

Point taken about URMs. Even so, I think Stanford isn't so much a GPA whore as a softs-whore. Seems like they actually DO want to hear your story and take interesting candidates.

Curious1 wrote:I think Stanford isn't so much a GPA whore as a softs-whore. Seems like they actually DO want to hear your story and take interesting candidates.

That's what I'm counting on!

splbagel wrote:Two things to keep in mind:

--LSN isn't necessarily a representative sample of applicants.

Right, totally. However it does seem to be directional, and I would imagine that it's far more representative the more super elite a school is (i.e., people assume that the gunner folks with higher numbers distort the overall numbers on LSN and TLS, but I don't see those people's numbers being too much higher than the non-participants' numbers for HYS and CCN).

splbagel wrote:Of the 8 <3.8 admits on LSN last year, 5 were URM.

I have it as 5 non-URM and 8 URMs: http://stanford.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... ,6&type=jd

Numbers for the previous year is the same (2009-2010 is 3 non-URM, 7 URM) but 2008-2009 is much better (10 non-URM and 5 URM)

Curious1 wrote:Even so, I think Stanford isn't so much a GPA whore as a softs-whore. Seems like they actually DO want to hear your story and take interesting candidates.

I hope so! I have seen Dean Deal say time and again that a well-written PS and consistent, cogent theme is very important to her. I worked really hard to develop this theme and I really hope that in my case it works for her.

Hmm... not sure if my application had a strong theme. Won't bother checking, though--it'll just stress me out.

addy11 wrote:

splbagel wrote:Two things to keep in mind:

--LSN isn't necessarily a representative sample of applicants.

Right, totally. However it does seem to be directional, and I would imagine that it's far more representative the more super elite a school is (i.e., people assume that the gunner folks with higher numbers distort the overall numbers on LSN and TLS, but I don't see those people's numbers being too much higher than the non-participants' numbers for HYS and CCN).

splbagel wrote:Of the 8 <3.8 admits on LSN last year, 5 were URM.

I have it as 5 non-URM and 8 URMs: http://stanford.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... ,6&type=jd

Numbers for the previous year is the same (2009-2010 is 3 non-URM, 7 URM) but 2008-2009 is much better (10 non-URM and 5 URM)

Good points in both regards. I was looking at the graph trying to pick out the green triangles, glad to see I missed a few. Hoping you're right that LSN is more representative the higher you go up the rankings.

Question: Does a Berkeley acceptance bode well for Stanford ?

oregon000 wrote:Question: Does a Berkeley acceptance bode well for Stanford ?

Not necessarily.

oregon000 wrote:Question: Does a Berkeley acceptance bode well for Stanford ?

Yeah, I mean: yes and no. I think the whole idea of Berkeley being huge on GPA is sort of overblown (especially this cycle, seemingly). I guess an acceptance to pretty much any good school will bode well (you didn't totally screw up your PS! We can overlook your murder charge! your recommenders seemed to know who you were!) but really each school should be assessed on its own (putative) criteria. Even with these, numbers only go so far as predictability goes, and we all talk a big game but none of us knows just what the ad comms are looking for otherwise.

oregon000 wrote:Question: Does a Berkeley acceptance bode well for Stanford ?

In that they're both quirky about acceptances, sure, but they may be quirky in different ways. Either way, Stanford is way harder to get into than Berkeley.

I'm just hoping for the best but not expecting anything. But my unconscious is screaming PLEASE CALL ME THIS WEEK STANFORD!!

Curious1 wrote:I'm just hoping for the best but not expecting anything. But my unconscious is screaming PLEASE CALL ME THIS WEEK STANFORD!!

+1

AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! So nervous.

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admissions/

calitodc wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! So nervous.

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admissions/

OMG PLEASE BE TODAY AND PLEASE CALL ME. Phone is attached to my hand.

calitodc wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! So nervous.

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admissions/

Today or tomorrow? Why the tease Stanford, whhyyyyy!!

(please love me...I promise I will drop my lunch and answer the call!)

calitodc wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! So nervous.

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admissions/

It's clear from that first paragraph she's just toying with our my emotions.

calitodc wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! So nervous.

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admissions/

Wow, guys. Super exciting. An admit to Stanford is truly an amazing thing. Congrats in advance to the lucky ones today and tomorrow.

I think it's pretty clear from a 7:15 pst blog post about congratulatory calls that she'll be making some today. And probably some more tomorrow. All my productivity is officially out the window.

annyong wrote:

calitodc wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! So nervous.

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admissions/

Today or tomorrow? Why the tease Stanford, whhyyyyy!!

(please love me...I promise I will drop my lunch and answer the call!)

Haha! I will answer while I’m eating, while I’m in the shower, while I’m taking a nap, when I’m out to dinner, when I’m at the mall, when I’m at the bars, ANY. TIME.

Reallyyy hope my dean's cert gets out there soon. I'm resigned to not hearing back for a while but i'd at least like to know they have everything. but good luck everyone, hope we hear of some admits soon

I am glad that she was cool with people screaming and being exasperated. That was sort of my reaction to getting into another school I didn't expect over the phone.

It seems like they want you to be professional and courteous, but also allow for excitement and the physical reaction to such a tremendous honor. I think that's totally reasonable.

Also, why do people even answer the phone if they know they can't take it? Just let it go to voicemail. She clearly says that she recognizes that people have better things to do than sit around waiting for a phone call... if you're doing something important I'm sure she understands and will call you back or you can call her back.

I had a really vivid dream I got into Stanford last night. At least now I know how it feels even if I strike out in real life.

addy11 wrote:I am glad that she was cool with people screaming and being exasperated. That was sort of my reaction to getting into another school I didn't expect over the phone.

It seems like they want you to be professional and courteous, but also allow for excitement and the physical reaction to such a tremendous honor. I think that's totally reasonable.

Also, why do people even answer the phone if they know they can't take it? Just let it go to voicemail. She clearly says that she recognizes that people have better things to do than sit around waiting for a phone call... if you're doing something important I'm sure she understands and will call you back or you can call her back.

Agreed. After taking one call from somewhere else earlier in the cycle, I've come to realize I should probably let them go to voicemail. Also, super nervous for Stanford!!

I am banking on strong softs as well...

What constitutes stong softs...its so hard to judge.

Anyone know what constitutes strong softs??? I hate that Stanford is such a black box, but I guess it gives me hope as well....good luck to everyone! I hope we are all in Palo Alto next year!

I think of strong softs as Rhodes/Cambridge/Truman/Marshall/Fulbright or other prestigious scholarships, D1 athlete, and stuff like writing a novel or founding a nonprofit.

I definitely have not written a novel but not too far off on the athlete, hopefully that matters.