Top Law Schools

boosk wrote:

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...

What are they doing sending holds to a 3.94/178, a 3.9/175, and a 3.97/173? This is the weirdest cycle ever (of all 1 that I've observed).

mickeyD wrote:

boosk wrote:

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...

What are they doing sending holds to a 3.94/178, a 3.9/175, and a 3.97/173? This is the weirdest cycle ever (of all 1 that I've observed).

New dean = weird cycle. I'm sure it'll all work out in the end.

mickeyD wrote:
What are they doing sending holds to a 3.94/178, a 3.9/175, and a 3.97/173? This is the weirdest cycle ever (of all 1 that I've observed).

If I were them and wanted to keep our yield high and acceptance rate low because we didn't have that many applications to begin with, we'd hold the kids we thought were going to go into Yale and wait for them to withdraw.

chucklesmcgee wrote:

mickeyD wrote:
What are they doing sending holds to a 3.94/178, a 3.9/175, and a 3.97/173? This is the weirdest cycle ever (of all 1 that I've observed).

If I were them and wanted to keep our yield high and acceptance rate low because we didn't have that many applications to begin with, we'd hold the kids we thought were going to go into Yale and wait for them to withdraw.

This makes sense... at least for those crazy high numbers.

chucklesmcgee wrote:

mickeyD wrote:
What are they doing sending holds to a 3.94/178, a 3.9/175, and a 3.97/173? This is the weirdest cycle ever (of all 1 that I've observed).

If I were them and wanted to keep our yield high and acceptance rate low because we didn't have that many applications to begin with, we'd hold the kids we thought were going to go into Yale and wait for them to withdraw.

Haha. Harvard is not worried about people choosing Yale over them. I would guess that those are K-JDs or internationals. Both of those groups have been having tough cycles at Harvard.

chucklesmcgee wrote:

mickeyD wrote:
What are they doing sending holds to a 3.94/178, a 3.9/175, and a 3.97/173? This is the weirdest cycle ever (of all 1 that I've observed).

If I were them and wanted to keep our yield high and acceptance rate low because we didn't have that many applications to begin with, we'd hold the kids we thought were going to go into Yale and wait for them to withdraw.

I think that's a pretty risky strategy for them to be playing, especially since Yale makes a habit of NOT accepting all of the kids with crazy high numbers, or at least putting them on the WL. Also, I doubt most people accepted to Yale would immediately withdraw from a hold at Harvard, as I would guess many students making the HY decision would want to attend the ASW of both schools. Maybe this strategy could be used for holds, but extending it out past February/March might bring some risks, especially as that student accumulates significant scholarship offers and starts to visit the ASW of other schools. Harvard isn't immune from the #3-5 (aka Stanford, Chicago +Ruby, Columbia +Hamilton, etc).

Nelson wrote:Haha. Harvard is not worried about people choosing Yale over them. I would guess that those are K-JDs or internationals. Both of those groups have been having tough cycles at Harvard.

Yeah, I don't know about the others that were mentioned, but I have a strong sense that the 173/3.98 is an international.

mickeyD wrote:

boosk wrote:

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...

What are they doing sending holds to a 3.94/178, a 3.9/175, and a 3.97/173? This is the weirdest cycle ever (of all 1 that I've observed).

I just want you to know that the inclusion of my stats in your list made me smile. If only I weren't K-JD.

What does K-JD stand for?

brown822015 wrote:What does K-JD stand for?

It refers to candidates going straight from undergrad to law school, rather than taking a year or two to gain work experience.

new LOR going out today and sending an updated resume and letter tomorrow. don't think i really have a shot but giving it it's due diligence...

PrincetonLaw wrote:new LOR going out today and sending an updated resume and letter tomorrow. don't think i really have a shot but giving it it's due diligence...

you decided to do a LOR? I ultimately decided not to due to their blog post.

alevin wrote:

PrincetonLaw wrote:new LOR going out today and sending an updated resume and letter tomorrow. don't think i really have a shot but giving it it's due diligence...

you decided to do a LOR? I ultimately decided not to due to their blog post.

blog post? haha care to share the link?

I received a promotion at work since applying and my boss was very enthusiastic about writing one so i didn't think it'd hurt.

PrincetonLaw wrote:

alevin wrote:

PrincetonLaw wrote:new LOR going out today and sending an updated resume and letter tomorrow. don't think i really have a shot but giving it it's due diligence...

you decided to do a LOR? I ultimately decided not to due to their blog post.

blog post? haha care to share the link?

I received a promotion at work since applying and my boss was very enthusiastic about writing one so i didn't think it'd hurt.

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/admissions ... %E2%80%9D/

Please note that your application was complete with the letters of recommendation that you already submitted. Additional letters of recommendation, therefore, are unnecessary at this time.

They are currently trying to decide on the names to ding. By sending in a LoR right now, you make them see a document with your name on it, therefore when they are asked about their opinion on who to ding, there is an increased chance that they will remember your name!

Nulli Secundus wrote:They are currently trying to decide on the names to ding. By sending in a LoR right now, you make them see a document with your name on it, therefore when they are asked about their opinion on who to ding, there is an increased chance that they will remember your name!

haha very possible.

alevin wrote:

PrincetonLaw wrote:

alevin wrote:

PrincetonLaw wrote:new LOR going out today and sending an updated resume and letter tomorrow. don't think i really have a shot but giving it it's due diligence...

you decided to do a LOR? I ultimately decided not to due to their blog post.

blog post? haha care to share the link?

I received a promotion at work since applying and my boss was very enthusiastic about writing one so i didn't think it'd hurt.

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/admissions ... %E2%80%9D/

Please note that your application was complete with the letters of recommendation that you already submitted. Additional letters of recommendation, therefore, are unnecessary at this time.

I'll agree they aren't necessary but I still feel OK about it since she can provide insight to an update reflected on my new resume or that's my justification/rationalization

sent in my updated resume and BOMB loci yesterday, two weeks ago (BEFORE I saw the blog post) I sent in a LOR that I already had on file with LSAC but wasn't sure of its strength, last week I sent in updated transcripts but my registrar messed up so i sent in a "corrected copy" last friday.

all done for now... idk if i could send in anything else, even if a WL comes my way...

Anyone who sent a LOCI with self-addressed post card gotten the post card back yet? And, if so, how long did it take from when you mailed it? It's been a full week since I sent mine, and I've been on the look-out for my post card since. I assumed they'd pop the cards back in the mail and file the LOCIs later, but perhaps they're taking longer? I live in CT, by the way.

Killingly wrote:Anyone who sent a LOCI with self-addressed post card gotten the post card back yet? And, if so, how long did it take from when you mailed it? It's been a full week since I sent mine, and I've been on the look-out for my post card since. I assumed they'd pop the cards back in the mail and file the LOCIs later, but perhaps they're taking longer? I live in CT, by the way.

I think four or five mailing days. I live in PA, sent it Priority the day held decisions came out so maybe Harvard's sorting through the hundreds of LOCIs they've received.

chucklesmcgee wrote:

Killingly wrote:Anyone who sent a LOCI with self-addressed post card gotten the post card back yet? And, if so, how long did it take from when you mailed it? It's been a full week since I sent mine, and I've been on the look-out for my post card since. I assumed they'd pop the cards back in the mail and file the LOCIs later, but perhaps they're taking longer? I live in CT, by the way.

I think four or five mailing days. I live in PA, sent it Priority the day held decisions came out so maybe Harvard's sorting through the hundreds of LOCIs they've received.

Thanks. My postcard was a blank pre-paid one I bought from the post office. I hope whoever handles the mail didn't just assume that it couldn't be mailed because there was no physical stamp (just a thing that looks like a stamp scanned onto the card itself). I don't want to worry, but I am, haha.

Killingly wrote:

chucklesmcgee wrote:

Killingly wrote:Anyone who sent a LOCI with self-addressed post card gotten the post card back yet? And, if so, how long did it take from when you mailed it? It's been a full week since I sent mine, and I've been on the look-out for my post card since. I assumed they'd pop the cards back in the mail and file the LOCIs later, but perhaps they're taking longer? I live in CT, by the way.

I think four or five mailing days. I live in PA, sent it Priority the day held decisions came out so maybe Harvard's sorting through the hundreds of LOCIs they've received.

Thanks. My postcard was a blank pre-paid one I bought from the post office. I hope whoever handles the mail didn't just assume that it couldn't be mailed because there was no physical stamp (just a thing that looks like a stamp scanned onto the card itself). I don't want to worry, but I am, haha.

I sent the exact same blank printed-stamp postcard from the Post Office on 1/11 and just got it back yesterday

46nyc wrote:

Killingly wrote:

chucklesmcgee wrote:

Killingly wrote:Anyone who sent a LOCI with self-addressed post card gotten the post card back yet? And, if so, how long did it take from when you mailed it? It's been a full week since I sent mine, and I've been on the look-out for my post card since. I assumed they'd pop the cards back in the mail and file the LOCIs later, but perhaps they're taking longer? I live in CT, by the way.

I think four or five mailing days. I live in PA, sent it Priority the day held decisions came out so maybe Harvard's sorting through the hundreds of LOCIs they've received.

Thanks. My postcard was a blank pre-paid one I bought from the post office. I hope whoever handles the mail didn't just assume that it couldn't be mailed because there was no physical stamp (just a thing that looks like a stamp scanned onto the card itself). I don't want to worry, but I am, haha.

I sent the exact same blank printed-stamp postcard from the Post Office on 1/11 and just got it back yesterday

Thank you, 46! That helps so much.

Killingly wrote:
Thank you, 46! That helps so much.

No problem! I had actually forgotten about it until I saw the postcard in my mailbox, it was such a long time.

Hey, did you guys just sign your names on the bottom of the LOCI, or do it on a separate cover page or something?