HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
amc987
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:58 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby amc987 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:41 pm

rotaxkarter wrote: I agree with this, though I want to add that I think URMs and Internationals are probably playing a different 'game' then the rest of the held pool.


What do you mean by this? I've heard that Harvard tends to hold a lot of URMs with borderline numbers so that it can see the whole applicant pool before it makes decisions. How do you think this differs from the non-URM holds? As a URM, I'm not sure that my chances of getting off of this hold list and getting a KB1/2 are any better than anyone else's odds. It seems like Harvard wait lists/ dings plenty of URMs who have been held just like they do non-URMs. I think they're pretty much just deciding what to do with all of the people on the hold list. They don't think any of us are terrible applicants, but none of us have knocked their socks off yet either--otherwise we'd have more definitive news.

planeride
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:22 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby planeride » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:41 pm

naf34 wrote:How many people do you think are being held? 100? 500?.....


There's about 100 on the spreadsheet alone.

Think about what %age of applicants even know about TLS...and the smaller %age who read it...and the even smaller %age who post...and the even smaller %age within that group who read this thread AND were willing to offer their numbers for public consumption on this particular document.

In summary...I think there are a lot of people on hold :(

User avatar
Elendil
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby Elendil » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:48 pm

planeride wrote:
naf34 wrote:How many people do you think are being held? 100? 500?.....


There's about 100 on the spreadsheet alone.

Think about what %age of applicants even know about TLS...and the smaller %age who read it...and the even smaller %age who post...and the even smaller %age within that group who read this thread AND were willing to offer their numbers for public consumption on this particular document.

In summary...I think there are a lot of people on hold :(


+1,000

I fall into the very small percentage that reads and posts on TLS but did not participate in the spreadsheet anxiety... :)

User avatar
rotaxkarter
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 1:24 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby rotaxkarter » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:55 pm

amc987 wrote:
rotaxkarter wrote: I agree with this, though I want to add that I think URMs and Internationals are probably playing a different 'game' then the rest of the held pool.


What do you mean by this? I've heard that Harvard tends to hold a lot of URMs with borderline numbers so that it can see the whole applicant pool before it makes decisions. How do you think this differs from the non-URM holds? As a URM, I'm not sure that my chances of getting off of this hold list and getting a KB1/2 are any better than anyone else's odds. It seems like Harvard wait lists/ dings plenty of URMs who have been held just like they do non-URMs. I think they're pretty much just deciding what to do with all of the people on the hold list. They don't think any of us are terrible applicants, but none of us have knocked their socks off yet either--otherwise we'd have more definitive news.


I am only going by what I 'think' the adcom try to do when filling their class. From how I understand it, they try to get a certain percentage of URMs and a certain percentage of Internationals in the entire class. Let's assume for this argument that they try for 10% URMs, then URMs are only really competing against other URMs for that 10%, and NOT the entire pool. That's a simplified statement of course, there's obviously some relation to the entire applicant pool to some degree.

Maybe someone with better knowledge can add/disagree.

Dani.B
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:34 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby Dani.B » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:08 pm

Question re transcripts and letters of recommendation:

should both be sent through LSAC or should i send the letter of recommendation through the mail?

User avatar
amc987
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:58 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby amc987 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:54 pm

rotaxkarter wrote:
amc987 wrote:
rotaxkarter wrote: I agree with this, though I want to add that I think URMs and Internationals are probably playing a different 'game' then the rest of the held pool.


What do you mean by this? I've heard that Harvard tends to hold a lot of URMs with borderline numbers so that it can see the whole applicant pool before it makes decisions. How do you think this differs from the non-URM holds? As a URM, I'm not sure that my chances of getting off of this hold list and getting a KB1/2 are any better than anyone else's odds. It seems like Harvard wait lists/ dings plenty of URMs who have been held just like they do non-URMs. I think they're pretty much just deciding what to do with all of the people on the hold list. They don't think any of us are terrible applicants, but none of us have knocked their socks off yet either--otherwise we'd have more definitive news.


I am only going by what I 'think' the adcom try to do when filling their class. From how I understand it, they try to get a certain percentage of URMs and a certain percentage of Internationals in the entire class. Let's assume for this argument that they try for 10% URMs, then URMs are only really competing against other URMs for that 10%, and NOT the entire pool. That's a simplified statement of course, there's obviously some relation to the entire applicant pool to some degree.

Maybe someone with better knowledge can add/disagree.


I get your drift, but I'm not sure that scenario would make a real difference for URMs. Even if URMs were only competing against URMs for 10% of the spots, wouldn't Harvard just hold a proportionally smaller number of URM applicants and sift through those applications to fill URM-designated seats? Unless you're saying that there is a much smaller percentage of URM applicants held as compared to the percentage of non-URM applicants held. In that case could URMs have a better shot for the class seats that Harvard hopes to have URMs fill? I would like to know more about this as well.

Could I get some feedback from GAIAthecheerleader, BlakcMajikc or someone else who is more familiar with URM admissions cycles/ prospects at HLS??

User avatar
boosk
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 6:31 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby boosk » Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:22 pm

amc987 wrote:could URMs have a better shot for the class seats that Harvard hopes to have URMs fill?


God, I hope so...

planeride
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:22 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby planeride » Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:53 am

OK, I'm sending in an LOR. (It might be the best one I have...) What would be the best way to send?

Have recommender send it directly to Harvard, have recommender give me a sealed envelope which I send to Harvard, assign it through LSAC, or something different?

EMZE
Posts: 715
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:53 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby EMZE » Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:05 pm

planeride wrote:OK, I'm sending in an LOR. (It might be the best one I have...) What would be the best way to send?

Have recommender send it directly to Harvard, have recommender give me a sealed envelope which I send to Harvard, assign it through LSAC, or something different?


They say everything you said needs to be signed by you. So I think your options are to either submit it through LSAC and release it to them (since that requires your signature on that release thing). Or, get a copy and attach a signed memo stating that you wish to update your file with the LOR. I would probably go with the second.

chucklesmcgee
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby chucklesmcgee » Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:53 pm

amc987 wrote:I get your drift, but I'm not sure that scenario would make a real difference for URMs. Even if URMs were only competing against URMs for 10% of the spots, wouldn't Harvard just hold a proportionally smaller number of URM applicants and sift through those applications to fill URM-designated seats?


The proportion of URMs with LSAT and GPAs between Harvard's 25th-75th is much smaller relative to the total applicant pool's proportion. It means that URMs at any given LSAT/GPA have a much better chance of acceptance compared to non-URMs with the same LSAT/GPA. So rotaxkarter's assertion that URMs are an exception to Nelson's claim that most of the people who get in will come from the top quartiles in terms of GPA/LSAT is probably valid.

This is an interesting paper on the subject and probably more information than anyone cares to read: --LinkRemoved-- The figure on page 65 does a good job of illustrating the scarcity.

User avatar
boosk
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 6:31 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby boosk » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:37 pm

how does everyone in here weigh the importance of including the postcard with the materials you've sent in to ensure receipt? I'm debating over sending in my LOCI/Updated Resume without one today or with tomorrow... I've been on hold for 2 weeks already and I want to make sure the adcom gets ahold of these materials before I get a decision.

thanks
Last edited by boosk on Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
amc987
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:58 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby amc987 » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:52 pm

chucklesmcgee wrote:
amc987 wrote:I get your drift, but I'm not sure that scenario would make a real difference for URMs. Even if URMs were only competing against URMs for 10% of the spots, wouldn't Harvard just hold a proportionally smaller number of URM applicants and sift through those applications to fill URM-designated seats?


The proportion of URMs with LSAT and GPAs between Harvard's 25th-75th is much smaller relative to the total applicant pool's proportion. It means that URMs at any given LSAT/GPA have a much better chance of acceptance compared to non-URMs with the same LSAT/GPA. So rotaxkarter's assertion that URMs are an exception to Nelson's claim that most of the people who get in will come from the top quartiles in terms of GPA/LSAT is probably valid.

This is an interesting paper on the subject and probably more information than anyone cares to read: --LinkRemoved-- The figure on page 65 does a good job of illustrating the scarcity.


I understand this. Rotaxkarter is probably right that the URMs who are accepted off the hold list will have lower numbers than the non-URMs who are on the same list and that the URMs who are within one of Harvard's 25th/75th ranges will stand a much better chance than those who are not. However, that point doesn't really answer my question about percentages of URMs put on the hold list relative to percentages of other groups who are also being held. For the sake of argument, if we assume that the URMs are really competing against each other for URM-designated spots in the class, how does the proportion of URMs held relative to the number of available spots compare with the proportion of non-URMs held relative to the number of available spots? Basically, I'm trying to determine whether we have a better chance, worse chance, or an equal chance of getting off of this list and in at HLS. My whole question relates back to an assertion that has been made many times on these boards that Harvard likes to hold a lot of URMs with borderline numbers so that it can compare the strength of their applications against the strength of all the URM applicants in a given cycle. Therefore, it may be that being held means that you're probably just going to get WL'd/dinged because Harvard has deemed that it doesn't like you that much in comparison to other, more compelling applicants, or it could just be a reflection of Harvard's tendency to wait to accept most of its minority applicants until later in the cycle.

I'm sure it depends on the person involved. I don't think I have a very good shot at making it in, mostly because I am below both 25ths. Nonetheless, I do think that some of the URMs who were held with higher numbers than mine (chuckles, MickeyD, FryBreadPower, etc.) might just have been held because of when you applied and Harvard's wait-and-see policy re: URMs.

naf34
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:59 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby naf34 » Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:17 pm

1000 people on hold?? no way!

User avatar
sharktankdean
Posts: 663
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:57 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby sharktankdean » Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:22 pm

amc987 wrote:
chucklesmcgee wrote:
amc987 wrote:I get your drift, but I'm not sure that scenario would make a real difference for URMs. Even if URMs were only competing against URMs for 10% of the spots, wouldn't Harvard just hold a proportionally smaller number of URM applicants and sift through those applications to fill URM-designated seats?


The proportion of URMs with LSAT and GPAs between Harvard's 25th-75th is much smaller relative to the total applicant pool's proportion. It means that URMs at any given LSAT/GPA have a much better chance of acceptance compared to non-URMs with the same LSAT/GPA. So rotaxkarter's assertion that URMs are an exception to Nelson's claim that most of the people who get in will come from the top quartiles in terms of GPA/LSAT is probably valid.

This is an interesting paper on the subject and probably more information than anyone cares to read: --LinkRemoved-- The figure on page 65 does a good job of illustrating the scarcity.


I understand this. Rotaxkarter is probably right that the URMs who are accepted off the hold list will have lower numbers than the non-URMs who are on the same list and that the URMs who are within one of Harvard's 25th/75th ranges will stand a much better chance than those who are not. However, that point doesn't really answer my question about percentages of URMs put on the hold list relative to percentages of other groups who are also being held. For the sake of argument, if we assume that the URMs are really competing against each other for URM-designated spots in the class, how does the proportion of URMs held relative to the number of available spots compare with the proportion of non-URMs held relative to the number of available spots? Basically, I'm trying to determine whether we have a better chance, worse chance, or an equal chance of getting off of this list and in at HLS. My whole question relates back to an assertion that has been made many times on these boards that Harvard likes to hold a lot of URMs with borderline numbers so that it can compare the strength of their applications against the strength of all the URM applicants in a given cycle. Therefore, it may be that being held means that you're probably just going to get WL'd/dinged because Harvard has deemed that it doesn't like you that much in comparison to other, more compelling applicants, or it could just be a reflection of Harvard's tendency to wait to accept most of its minority applicants until later in the cycle.

I'm sure it depends on the person involved. I don't think I have a very good shot at making it in, mostly because I am below both 25ths. Nonetheless, I do think that some of the URMs who were held with higher numbers than mine (chuckles, MickeyD, FryBreadPower, etc.) might just have been held because of when you applied and Harvard's wait-and-see policy re: URMs.




I kind of disagree with the last part of your statement. I feel like Harvard is really looking at GPAs more thoroughly this year before they give out KB1s. The Urms you listed are reverse splitters. So at this point we cannot determine that they havent gotten kb1s because of the time they applied. In my opinion, I would think Dani B and lawschoolproject may be the next Urms to hear back. But since we don't know how Harvard compares Urms my prior guess may be very inaccurate.
In order to find out how Harvard treats Urms you will need to know how for example they view a 3.9/163 and a 3.4/173. If the boost (it's been hypothesized +10 for AAs) is giving to LSATs only then for example the prior candidate could be perceived as a 3.9/173 and the later 3.4/180. I think in this case Harvard will still pick the former candidate. It seems like reverse splitter Urms within a certain range will always be better off than regular splitter Urms. Again this is NOT fact. I'm just showing how another opinion could change your conclusion.

On another note I think some people will see some kb1s by wednesday.

User avatar
nids333
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby nids333 » Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:52 pm

Can you just send it via certified mail?

boosk wrote:how does everyone in here weigh the importance of including the postcard with the materials you've sent in to ensure receipt? I'm debating over sending in my LOCI/Updated Resume without one today or with tomorrow... I've been on hold for 2 weeks already and I want to make sure the adcom gets ahold of these materials before I get a decision.

thanks

quaker10
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:24 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby quaker10 » Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:19 pm

nids333 wrote:Can you just send it via certified mail?

boosk wrote:how does everyone in here weigh the importance of including the postcard with the materials you've sent in to ensure receipt? I'm debating over sending in my LOCI/Updated Resume without one today or with tomorrow... I've been on hold for 2 weeks already and I want to make sure the adcom gets ahold of these materials before I get a decision.

thanks


I sent in a LOCI with a postcard and they sent it back to me with a stamped date on it...Can't imagine how it could be a bad thing. In fact, I would think they deem it a responsible move since that is what they suggested you do in the email.

chucklesmcgee
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby chucklesmcgee » Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:37 pm

quaker10 wrote:
nids333 wrote:Can you just send it via certified mail?

boosk wrote:how does everyone in here weigh the importance of including the postcard with the materials you've sent in to ensure receipt? I'm debating over sending in my LOCI/Updated Resume without one today or with tomorrow... I've been on hold for 2 weeks already and I want to make sure the adcom gets ahold of these materials before I get a decision.

thanks


I sent in a LOCI with a postcard and they sent it back to me with a stamped date on it...Can't imagine how it could be a bad thing. In fact, I would think they deem it a responsible move since that is what they suggested you do in the email.


I didn't have a postcard handy and just included a self addressed stamped envelope which was promptly returned to me with a date. I'm sure the admissions office is pretty responsible, but it couldn't hurt to confirm receipt. Plus getting the receipt will put your mind at rest if anything.

chucklesmcgee
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby chucklesmcgee » Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:03 pm

naf34 wrote:1000 people on hold?? no way!


I don't know, having ~15% of your applications held until you know what the rest of the applications for the cycle doesn't seem implausible considering how wonky this cycle is.

A leaked internal LSAC document says that applicants for this cycle are down ~17% from last year- last year having had the fewest number of applicants on record since at least 2001. That could be causing some serious panic issues in schools trying to keep their admission rates, yield, class size and 25th-75th percentiles in check. Holding a ton of quite possibly qualified applicants is pretty reasonable.

errmsg
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby errmsg » Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:30 am

chucklesmcgee wrote:
naf34 wrote:1000 people on hold?? no way!


I don't know, having ~15% of your applications held until you know what the rest of the applications for the cycle doesn't seem implausible considering how wonky this cycle is.

A leaked internal LSAC document says that applicants for this cycle are down ~17% from last year- last year having had the fewest number of applicants on record since at least 2001. That could be causing some serious panic issues in schools trying to keep their admission rates, yield, class size and 25th-75th percentiles in check. Holding a ton of quite possibly qualified applicants is pretty reasonable.



where is this from?

anyhow, what's a good rule of thumb for these - within in a page? two pages?

having a really hard time trouble coming up with why harvard considering i already incorporated that into my PS....

User avatar
sach1282
Posts: 330
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:50 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby sach1282 » Tue Jan 24, 2012 9:07 am

Do you get an email before the KB1 phone call or is it just a call out of the blue? My phone number has changed since I submitted my application and I am not sure what to do.

seanPtheB
Posts: 276
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:06 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby seanPtheB » Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:00 am

sach1282 wrote:Do you get an email before the KB1 phone call or is it just a call out of the blue? My phone number has changed since I submitted my application and I am not sure what to do.


You get an email. I would write to Harvard asap telling them your new number. It has to be sent snail mail and be signed by you.

User avatar
mickeyD
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby mickeyD » Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:59 am

sharktankdean wrote:In order to find out how Harvard treats Urms you will need to know how for example they view a 3.9/163 and a 3.4/173. If the boost (it's been hypothesized +10 for AAs) is giving to LSATs only then for example the prior candidate could be perceived as a 3.9/173 and the later 3.4/180. I think in this case Harvard will still pick the former candidate. It seems like reverse splitter Urms within a certain range will always be better off than regular splitter Urms.


:(

chucklesmcgee
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby chucklesmcgee » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:40 pm

errmsg wrote:
chucklesmcgee wrote:A leaked internal LSAC document says that applicants for this cycle are down ~17% from last year.

where is this from?


http://abovethelaw.com/2012/01/the-earl ... lications/

User avatar
fingerscrossedxx
Posts: 733
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:56 am

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby fingerscrossedxx » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:51 pm

seanPtheB wrote:
sach1282 wrote:Do you get an email before the KB1 phone call or is it just a call out of the blue? My phone number has changed since I submitted my application and I am not sure what to do.


You get an email. I would write to Harvard asap telling them your new number. It has to be sent snail mail and be signed by you.


I dunno, last year I updated my address with them via email. Its just that they don't open attachments but if you embed it in the email they usually accept that.

User avatar
boosk
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 6:31 pm

Re: HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style

Postby boosk » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:52 pm

rotaxkarter wrote:
MobyDick wrote:I thought it might be nice to gather some data about held applicants, so I made a a Google Doc:

Form: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/vie ... NU5meEE6MQ

Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... kRqNU5meEE


For the newly held...




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