Harvard Waitlist 2012 Forum

[Doorkeeper]

Two fear-inducing thoughts I'd appreciate getting debunked:
(1) Harvard decided this year was the year to reduce their class size, especially with their drop to 3 in the rankings probably having to do with their class size being 3x that of Y and S;
(2) Since applications were lower, and thus Harvard probably regular accepted applicants with profiles they normally don't, those people would be less likely to deny Harvard (since there's less likelihood they got into S and/or Y), and so the number of spots for WLs will be less.

These thoughts make me sad

(1) Not happening. Friends of mine who attended the ASWs said that Harvard was arguing that its size is an advantage over Y and S all the fucking time. Plus, tuition dollars are the most stable form of income for a law school. Harvard would have to reduce their faculty size in order to balance the reduction in tuition. I can think of 3 new faculty hires in the past 2 years.
(2a) Nowhere on LSN does it indicate that Harvard dipped below their LSAT/GPA averages in amounts larger than in previous years.
(2b) This effect would've also hit Stanford. I don't think it has from the LSN numbers.

[hypothalamus]

Two fear-inducing thoughts I'd appreciate getting debunked:
(1) Harvard decided this year was the year to reduce their class size, especially with their drop to 3 in the rankings probably having to do with their class size being 3x that of Y and S;
(2) Since applications were lower, and thus Harvard probably regular accepted applicants with profiles they normally don't, those people would be less likely to deny Harvard (since there's less likelihood they got into S and/or Y), and so the number of spots for WLs will be less.

These thoughts make me sad

(1) Not happening. Friends of mine who attended the ASWs said that Harvard was arguing that its size is an advantage over Y and S all the fucking time. Plus, tuition dollars are the most stable form of income for a law school. Harvard would have to reduce their faculty size in order to balance the reduction in tuition. I can think of 3 new faculty hires in the past 2 years.
(2a) Nowhere on LSN does it indicate that Harvard dipped below their LSAT/GPA averages in amounts larger than in previous years.
(2b) This effect would've also hit Stanford. I don't think it has from the LSN numbers.

One edit I always feel obliged to make: tuition dollars couldn't even cover the annual salaries of the cleaning staff at HLS or any other top educational institution... Money comes from the endowment and alumni donations.

[yepyepyep]

Two fear-inducing thoughts I'd appreciate getting debunked:
(1) Harvard decided this year was the year to reduce their class size, especially with their drop to 3 in the rankings probably having to do with their class size being 3x that of Y and S;
(2) Since applications were lower, and thus Harvard probably regular accepted applicants with profiles they normally don't, those people would be less likely to deny Harvard (since there's less likelihood they got into S and/or Y), and so the number of spots for WLs will be less.

These thoughts make me sad

(1) Not happening. Friends of mine who attended the ASWs said that Harvard was arguing that its size is an advantage over Y and S all the fucking time. Plus, tuition dollars are the most stable form of income for a law school. Harvard would have to reduce their faculty size in order to balance the reduction in tuition. I can think of 3 new faculty hires in the past 2 years.
(2a) Nowhere on LSN does it indicate that Harvard dipped below their LSAT/GPA averages in amounts larger than in previous years.
(2b) This effect would've also hit Stanford. I don't think it has from the LSN numbers.

Thanks! that is comforting

[Elendil]

Two fear-inducing thoughts I'd appreciate getting debunked:
(1) Harvard decided this year was the year to reduce their class size, especially with their drop to 3 in the rankings probably having to do with their class size being 3x that of Y and S;
(2) Since applications were lower, and thus Harvard probably regular accepted applicants with profiles they normally don't, those people would be less likely to deny Harvard (since there's less likelihood they got into S and/or Y), and so the number of spots for WLs will be less.

These thoughts make me sad

(1) Do you really think that Harvard is going to reduce its class size in the middle of one of the largest capital projects of recent years? Although Harvard dropped to #3 in the rankings, this isn't the first time that this has happened and they value the size of their alumni network and the cash flow of such a large student body. If this is true, I would be shocked. If they reduce their class size THAT much it would require a rebranding away from the "big city" of law schools image.

(2) This one scares me a bit, but I don't think that there's any reason to believe they accepted applicants that would not have gotten in last year or the year before. We actually saw a number of applicants with very high numbers being rejected flat out, and even more being waitlisted. Just check out the WL spreadsheet.

[Elendil]

I'm convinced that the most logical explanation is through the drop in applicants at the high end of the LSAT pool. Perhaps most importantly, there was a ~21% drop in applicants scoring "on the fence" for the top 3 (170-174)... which could explain why so many were waitlisted this cycle. With such skewed numbers, I bet the yield calculations at each school were more skewed also.

Source: http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... igger_drop_/

[yepyepyep]

I'm convinced that the most logical explanation is through the drop in applicants at the high end of the LSAT pool. Perhaps most importantly, there was a ~21% drop in applicants scoring "on the fence" for the top 3 (170-174)... which could explain why so many were waitlisted this cycle. With such skewed numbers, I bet the yield calculations at each school were more skewed also.

Source: http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... igger_drop_/

Thanks for posting that. Seems like good news, especially for heavy splitters of the +75%LSAT variety.

[azgirl514]

I'm a little stressed out because Berkeley's second response form is very clear that I am required to withdraw from every other waitlist if I accept a spot at Boalt. So, if I don't hear from Harvard by June 1, I technically have to withdraw. I think it's a little unfair on Berkeley's part -- it seems like a clear violation of LSAC's policy, doesn't it? Then again, I don't want to risk losing my spot at both schools because I reneged on my commitment.

I wouldn't care that much about losing a deposit, but Berkeley actually doesn't require one -- it's the wording of the acceptance form that worries me. Any advice? I mean, it's unlikely that I'll get a KB1, but still.

Edit: Never mind. Apparently someone in the Berkeley threat called LSAC, and they said Cal is perfectly entitled to do this. So I'll have to withdraw if I don't hear back June 1st. Blerg.

[thederangedwang]

I'm a little stressed out because Berkeley's second response form is very clear that I am required to withdraw from every other waitlist if I accept a spot at Boalt. So, if I don't hear from Harvard by June 1, I technically have to withdraw. I think it's a little unfair on Berkeley's part -- it seems like a clear violation of LSAC's policy, doesn't it? Then again, I don't want to risk losing my spot at both schools because I reneged on my commitment.

I wouldn't care that much about losing a deposit, but Berkeley actually doesn't require one -- it's the wording of the acceptance form that worries me. Any advice? I mean, it's unlikely that I'll get a KB1, but still.

Edit: Never mind. Apparently someone in the Berkeley threat called LSAC, and they said Cal is perfectly entitled to do this. So I'll have to withdraw if I don't hear back June 1st. Blerg.

why and how?

[azgirl514]

I'm a little stressed out because Berkeley's second response form is very clear that I am required to withdraw from every other waitlist if I accept a spot at Boalt. So, if I don't hear from Harvard by June 1, I technically have to withdraw. I think it's a little unfair on Berkeley's part -- it seems like a clear violation of LSAC's policy, doesn't it? Then again, I don't want to risk losing my spot at both schools because I reneged on my commitment.

I wouldn't care that much about losing a deposit, but Berkeley actually doesn't require one -- it's the wording of the acceptance form that worries me. Any advice? I mean, it's unlikely that I'll get a KB1, but still.

Edit: Never mind. Apparently someone in the Berkeley threat called LSAC, and they said Cal is perfectly entitled to do this. So I'll have to withdraw if I don't hear back June 1st. Blerg.

why and how?

Not sure. I'm going to call LSAC in a few hours to hear what the policy is.

[sharktankdean]

I'm convinced that the most logical explanation is through the drop in applicants at the high end of the LSAT pool. Perhaps most importantly, there was a ~21% drop in applicants scoring "on the fence" for the top 3 (170-174)... which could explain why so many were waitlisted this cycle. With such skewed numbers, I bet the yield calculations at each school were more skewed also.

Source: http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... igger_drop_/

Since we are not going to hear from them today we might as well talk about this...

I have some about questions
--How does this affect yield? The only way it would affect yield would be if they just admitted the people with the same numbers that they have admitted in the past..therefore leading the a decrease in the # of people admitted. But there is no indication that Harvard admitted less people this year.
--If there were more people with 170-174's wait listed are you saying that they cut down of some numbers they usually wait-list in order to make room for the 170-174's because it does not look like the WL got bigger this year. It seems about the same or less.



Also I was wondering do law schools wait list people they know they would never take? Like they wait list for formality not because they think they will actually admit you if there is space in the class.

[Doorkeeper]

Also I was wondering do law school wait list people they know they would never take? Like they wait list you are a formality not because they think they will actually admit you if there is space in the class.

Yes. These are people with very poor numbers, no softs or other relevant experience/hooks, and/or have famous/important people who wrote letters of rec and they want the applicant to be let down easily.

Also they apparently waitlist a ton of kids from HYP.

[adam1]

I think another week just passed... What the hell is happening?

[Doorkeeper]

I think another week just passed... What the hell is happening?

Wondering the same.

I have no idea. I guess we will have to wait until next week, unless they want to throw some surprise Friday KB1s out.

[sharktankdean]

I think another week just passed... What the hell is happening?

lol don't we technically have Friday left. Someone mentioned Harvard had commencement ceremonies yesterday and today so we knew that there would be silence again today.

[fingerscrossedxx]

Honestly Harvard. Just throw us a bone

[yepyepyep]

I'm convinced that the most logical explanation is through the drop in applicants at the high end of the LSAT pool. Perhaps most importantly, there was a ~21% drop in applicants scoring "on the fence" for the top 3 (170-174)... which could explain why so many were waitlisted this cycle. With such skewed numbers, I bet the yield calculations at each school were more skewed also.

Source: http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... igger_drop_/

Since we are not going to hear from them today we might as well talk about this...

I have some about questions
--How does this affect yield? The only way it would affect yield would be if they just admitted the people with the same numbers that they have admitted in the past..therefore leading the a decrease in the # of people admitted. But there is no indication that Harvard admitted less people this year.
--If there were more people with 170-174's wait listed are you saying that they cut down of some numbers they usually wait-list in order to make room for the 170-174's because it does not look like the WL got bigger this year. It seems about the same or less.



Also I was wondering do law schools wait list people they know they would never take? Like they wait list for formality not because they think they will actually admit you if there is space in the class.

Not sure if this helps, but I had posted the stats of this year and comparisons to last year a bit ago on this thread. There isn't significantly more presence of 170-174s or 175-180s. The lsat averages and 75%iles were just a bit higher, but the 25% were the same. Including the URMs, I think the numbers were exactly the same.

[Elendil]

Today marks three weeks to the day since the last decision was posted on LSN...

[hypothalamus]

Today marks three weeks to the day since the last decision was posted on LSN...

But there were a few withdrawals in the last couple of days! God bless Berkeley!

[Doorkeeper]

Today marks three weeks to the day since the last decision was posted on LSN...

But there were a few withdrawals in the last couple of days! God bless Berkeley!

Hahahahha.

You're stone cold!

[hypothalamus]

Today marks three weeks to the day since the last decision was posted on LSN...

But there were a few withdrawals in the last couple of days! God bless Berkeley!

Hahahahha.

You're stone cold!

I hear Harvard hasn't filled its ice queen quota, so I'm playing it up

[Doorkeeper]

Today marks three weeks to the day since the last decision was posted on LSN...

But there were a few withdrawals in the last couple of days! God bless Berkeley!

Hahahahha.

You're stone cold!

I hear Harvard hasn't filled its ice queen quota, so I'm playing it up

I'm sure they already have an overabundance on that front...as do most of the top law schools.


On an unrelated note, how about a nice Friday surprise?

[avd90]

for anyone concerned, I'm living in Cambridge now and there were commencement ceremonies at HLS both yesterday and today. That might have caused a distraction in the admissions office. Here's hoping for decisions come tomorrow!

[sharktankdean]

for anyone concerned, I'm living in Cambridge now and there were commencement ceremonies at HLS both yesterday and today. That might have caused a distraction in the admissions office. Here's hoping for decisions come tomorrow!

Thanks. But believe me the admissions office has been distracted for way longer than 2 days.

Also u moved to Cambridge already...u don't play. Lol

[MichelFoucault]

for anyone concerned, I'm living in Cambridge now and there were commencement ceremonies at HLS both yesterday and today. That might have caused a distraction in the admissions office. Here's hoping for decisions come tomorrow!

Thanks. But believe me the admissions office has been distracted for way longer than 2 days.

Also u moved to Cambridge already...u don't play. Lol

Yeah thats pretty intense.

[avd90]

for anyone concerned, I'm living in Cambridge now and there were commencement ceremonies at HLS both yesterday and today. That might have caused a distraction in the admissions office. Here's hoping for decisions come tomorrow!

Thanks. But believe me the admissions office has been distracted for way longer than 2 days.

Also u moved to Cambridge already...u don't play. Lol

Yeah thats pretty intense.

ha I'm moving my furniture from brighton to cambridge (like 10 minutes away) because my other lease ended, and rather than move in with my parents for the summer I'm (hopefully) waitressing around here. I found a really great place that allows big dogs, but the lease started this week so I had to compromise. My roommie is living here this summer, so it worked out perfectly. Assuming I can get a job here, I'll be in Cambridge rather than living in my parents' basement. I promise I'm not super crazy intense