Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Rahviveh » Wed Nov 28, 2012 2:39 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote:IF YOUVE BEEN ASKED TO INTERVIEW PLEASE FILL THIS OUT!

Google Doc:

Form: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/vie ... SmEwdWc6MQ

Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... wdWc#gid=0

Please fill out, its anonymous


bump

one_by_one
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 2:10 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby one_by_one » Wed Nov 28, 2012 2:46 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:IF YOUVE BEEN ASKED TO INTERVIEW PLEASE FILL THIS OUT!

Google Doc:

Form: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/vie ... SmEwdWc6MQ

Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... wdWc#gid=0

Please fill out, its anonymous


bump


can we sort this by LSAT or something? thanks!

User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Rahviveh » Wed Nov 28, 2012 2:47 pm

The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.

User avatar
02889
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 12:21 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby 02889 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 2:58 pm

Man, that 170/3.64 gives me (and I'm sure many others) a ton of hope. Good luck to everyone on their interviews!

shntn
Posts: 5319
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby shntn » Wed Nov 28, 2012 2:59 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.

No pressure, though. :lol:

User avatar
WhiteyCakes
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:38 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby WhiteyCakes » Wed Nov 28, 2012 3:02 pm

shntn wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.

No pressure, though. :lol:


Yeah that made me a little nervous

User avatar
pacifica
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 5:34 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby pacifica » Wed Nov 28, 2012 3:39 pm

WhiteyCakes wrote:
shntn wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.

No pressure, though. :lol:


Yeah that made me a little nervous


Naw, don't be nervous. If anything, I think this kinda shows there's no bias in the interviews right now. I don't proclaim to be an expert in this area (especially since I don't know adcom of Chicago's past history), but right now, spread sheet shows 7/21 (33%) above both medians. I mean, statistically speaking, being above both medians should be 1/2*1/2, or 25%, of the admitted pool right? So it's right around there. Most of the applicants got their things in early, but that's about the only trend. Hope that calmed nerves, if not, feel free to continue to freak out, that's always cool too.

User avatar
WhiteyCakes
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:38 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby WhiteyCakes » Wed Nov 28, 2012 3:41 pm

Scheduled for next monday afternoon...lets do this

shntn
Posts: 5319
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby shntn » Wed Nov 28, 2012 3:42 pm

WhiteyCakes wrote:Scheduled for next monday afternoon...lets do this

Nice! I was gonna take that slot, but I decided to do it over my lunch break next Thursday. You'll have to let us know how it goes.

User avatar
WhiteyCakes
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:38 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby WhiteyCakes » Wed Nov 28, 2012 3:44 pm

shntn wrote:
WhiteyCakes wrote:Scheduled for next monday afternoon...lets do this

Nice! I was gonna take that slot, but I decided to do it over my lunch break next Thursday. You'll have to let us know how it goes.


Thanks...no idea what to expect. I'm going to review my app and hope they don't ask anything too out of the box

shntn
Posts: 5319
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby shntn » Wed Nov 28, 2012 3:47 pm

WhiteyCakes wrote:
shntn wrote:
WhiteyCakes wrote:Scheduled for next monday afternoon...lets do this

Nice! I was gonna take that slot, but I decided to do it over my lunch break next Thursday. You'll have to let us know how it goes.


Thanks...no idea what to expect. I'm going to review my app and hope they don't ask anything too out of the box

I can't imagine it'll deviate much from the other interviews I've had so far. Just be ready to elaborate on any portion of your app or resume and have some interesting tidbits about yourself on hand to make you stick out in their minds.

User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Rahviveh » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:00 pm

shntn wrote:
WhiteyCakes wrote:
shntn wrote:
WhiteyCakes wrote:Scheduled for next monday afternoon...lets do this

Nice! I was gonna take that slot, but I decided to do it over my lunch break next Thursday. You'll have to let us know how it goes.


Thanks...no idea what to expect. I'm going to review my app and hope they don't ask anything too out of the box

I can't imagine it'll deviate much from the other interviews I've had so far. Just be ready to elaborate on any portion of your app or resume and have some interesting tidbits about yourself on hand to make you stick out in their minds.


Your priority should be showing why you're interested in attending, and something beyond standard stuff about some particular program. Show that you REALLY want to go to Chicago for good reasons, over any other school.

yankihote
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby yankihote » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:01 pm

pacifica wrote:
WhiteyCakes wrote:
shntn wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.

No pressure, though. :lol:


Yeah that made me a little nervous


Naw, don't be nervous. If anything, I think this kinda shows there's no bias in the interviews right now. I don't proclaim to be an expert in this area (especially since I don't know adcom of Chicago's past history), but right now, spread sheet shows 7/21 (33%) above both medians. I mean, statistically speaking, being above both medians should be 1/2*1/2, or 25%, of the admitted pool right? So it's right around there. Most of the applicants got their things in early, but that's about the only trend. Hope that calmed nerves, if not, feel free to continue to freak out, that's always cool too.



There is no guarantee that 25% of applicants would be above both medians. If it works out that way for any given cycle, it is likely the the result of adcomms wanting it that way. Statistically it is only one possibility among many others that would result in any given set of median gpa and lsat scores.

Just to clarify: 1/2 of applicants are above one of the medians. By multiplying this 1/2 by 1/2 again, you are saying that 1/2 of all applicants that are above one median, say the LSAT median, must also be above the GPA median. This is the faulty assumption. The 1/2 of students above LSAT median could all have GPAs below median. This can work in the opposite as well. My point is that there is no guarantee that 25% are above both.

User avatar
UtilityMonster
Posts: 315
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 3:16 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby UtilityMonster » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:05 pm

I quote from my complete email:

Your application at the University of Chicago Law School is now complete. This means that we have received all required application materials necessary for the Admissions Committee to evaluate your file. No further action is required on your part.


LIARS!!!

:lol:

User avatar
Lavitz
Posts: 3098
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:39 am

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Lavitz » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:28 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote:IF YOUVE BEEN ASKED TO INTERVIEW PLEASE FILL THIS OUT!

Google Doc:

Form: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/vie ... SmEwdWc6MQ

Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... wdWc#gid=0

Please fill out, its anonymous

Yeah, mine accidentally went through twice (I'm on my phone). Don't know how to delete it.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby 2014 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:55 pm

The spreadsheet has the median GPA botched I think. Isn't it 3.9 for this year?

I ask because the guy with a 3.84 is listed as above both medians

User avatar
pacifica
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 5:34 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby pacifica » Wed Nov 28, 2012 7:56 pm

yankihote wrote:
pacifica wrote:
WhiteyCakes wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.



Yeah that made me a little nervous


Naw, don't be nervous. If anything, I think this kinda shows there's no bias in the interviews right now. I don't proclaim to be an expert in this area (especially since I don't know adcom of Chicago's past history), but right now, spread sheet shows 7/21 (33%) above both medians. I mean, statistically speaking, being above both medians should be 1/2*1/2, or 25%, of the admitted pool right? So it's right around there. Most of the applicants got their things in early, but that's about the only trend. Hope that calmed nerves, if not, feel free to continue to freak out, that's always cool too.



There is no guarantee that 25% of applicants would be above both medians. If it works out that way for any given cycle, it is likely the the result of adcomms wanting it that way. Statistically it is only one possibility among many others that would result in any given set of median gpa and lsat scores.

Just to clarify: 1/2 of applicants are above one of the medians. By multiplying this 1/2 by 1/2 again, you are saying that 1/2 of all applicants that are above one median, say the LSAT median, must also be above the GPA median. This is the faulty assumption. The 1/2 of students above LSAT median could all have GPAs below median. This can work in the opposite as well. My point is that there is no guarantee that 25% are above both.


I agree with your clarification. I don't want to get into a detailed statistical argument here (mostly cus I'm very rusty), but what you pointed out is the other extreme of what I was saying. If we assumed LSAT and GPA are completely independent variables (i.e. everyone is a splitter and reverse-splitter), then it's 0.5*0.5 for probability of people being above both medians, or 25% for candidates are above both medians. If we assumed LSAT and GPA are completely dependent (i.e. there are no such thing as splitters), then its basically 50% for candidates above both medians because you're saying if you're above one, you're automatically above the other.

It's probably somewhere in between those two extremes, which means candidates above both medians will make up between 25-50% of the population, and the spread sheet seems to show that, since approximately 1/3 of the interviewees thus far are above both medians.

Which gets back to my original argument, that nobody needs to freak out that somehow this interview is selected for "borderline candidates", splitters, whatever you named, since it seems like the scores so far shows a random sampling.

[Edit: well, not anymore I guess, it's now 8/32? It was closer to 1/3 earlier during the day.]

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby 20141023 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:09 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Mon Feb 16, 2015 5:13 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Yukos » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:38 pm

Got an interview invite today too, first good thing I've heard from a law school so far so I'm happy :)

shntn
Posts: 5319
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby shntn » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:39 pm

Yukos wrote:Got an interview invite today too, first good thing I've heard from a law school so far so I'm happy :)

Woot! Good luck!

User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Rahviveh » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:55 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:IF YOUVE BEEN ASKED TO INTERVIEW PLEASE FILL THIS OUT!

Google Doc:

Form: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/vie ... SmEwdWc6MQ

Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... wdWc#gid=0

Please fill out, its anonymous

Just as a quick reference, would you be able to add the median for both LSAT and GPA to the bottom of this spreadsheet?

Thanks for this, by the way.... this is some really great information!! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

(It is also kind of depressing to see what my numbers are versus everyone else, though. :cry: )

Good luck on your interviews everyone!!!

Edit: Also, having whether the applicant was ED or RD might shed some light on things.


I was going to put that, but since these interviews went out before the ED Deadline, I didn't think that was a material factor

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby 20141023 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:07 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Mon Feb 16, 2015 5:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bernaldiaz
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 12:51 am

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby bernaldiaz » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:59 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.


They may also be interviewing different people for different reasons. Some applicants may be interviewed because they are borderline acceptances, others may be interviewed for scholarship purposes. For example, I highly doubt, now that they have this mechanism in place, that they will give a Ruby to anyone who doesn't interview.

User avatar
Lavitz
Posts: 3098
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:39 am

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Lavitz » Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:15 pm

Just scheduled for the 18th.

bernaldiaz wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.


They may also be interviewing different people for different reasons. Some applicants may be interviewed because they are borderline acceptances, others may be interviewed for scholarship purposes. For example, I highly doubt, now that they have this mechanism in place, that they will give a Ruby to anyone who doesn't interview.

My thoughts exactly.

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Yukos » Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:27 pm

Lavitz wrote:Just scheduled for the 18th.

bernaldiaz wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:The more people who fill it out, the more it looks like its for borderline applicants. I highlighted in green everyone who is at or above both medians. Everyone else is a URM, splitter, or reverse splitter.


They may also be interviewing different people for different reasons. Some applicants may be interviewed because they are borderline acceptances, others may be interviewed for scholarship purposes. For example, I highly doubt, now that they have this mechanism in place, that they will give a Ruby to anyone who doesn't interview.

My thoughts exactly.


There's definitely some numbers on there that are either being interviewed a) as a form of YP (ie to gauge likelihood of actually attending) or b) for scholarship purposes.




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