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
Audeamus
Posts: 430
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:28 pm

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

Postby Audeamus » Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:18 pm

given looming deadlines, anyone else think this will be the week for movement?

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

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

Postby jvincent11 » Mon Apr 22, 2013 2:04 pm

When is the deposit deadline? They could be waiting for that to pass to get a better sense of yield before they send out decisions for those waiting.

fallingup
Posts: 481
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2010 4:34 pm

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

Postby fallingup » Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:01 pm

Not till 4/30 :(

account1
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:39 pm

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

Postby account1 » Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:28 pm

Any movement fellow UR2 4/18s?

User avatar
JXander
Posts: 960
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:23 am

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

Postby JXander » Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:29 pm

account1 wrote:Any movement fellow UR2 4/18s?

Nope.

lawsch16
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:54 pm

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

Postby lawsch16 » Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:31 pm

JXander wrote:
account1 wrote:Any movement fellow UR2 4/18s?

Nope.

User avatar
gbelle
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:50 pm

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

Postby gbelle » Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:32 pm

account1 wrote:Any movement fellow UR2 4/18s?


Nothing here..

ht2988
Posts: 482
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:07 pm

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

Postby ht2988 » Mon Apr 22, 2013 6:49 pm

When does Chicago begin pulling from the waitlist?

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

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

Postby 2014 » Mon Apr 22, 2013 8:34 pm

ht2988 wrote:When does Chicago begin pulling from the waitlist?

I had similar numbers to you and got in last June. I don't think there was a ton of movement before that, but keep an eye on the deposit deadlines. They have to let some people in very shortly after April 30 if they are under deposited.

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

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

Postby Lavitz » Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:38 pm

ht2988 wrote:When does Chicago begin pulling from the waitlist?

Last year, they sent out an e-mail to certain waitlisted applicants on April 16th asking if they were still interested, and started accepting some of those people on April 20th. The deposit deadline last year was April 15th, so it looks like they get to work immediately afterwards.

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

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

Postby Crowing » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:44 am

Last year Chicago took a ton of people off the WL. This year at ASW they mentioned that this ASW was the highest turnout ever (230+ admits I think) and their target class seems to be very slightly smaller than previous years (185). All that probably doesn't mean anything, but I'm just putting it out there.

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

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

Postby Lavitz » Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:04 am

Yeah, just from reading the posts on TLS, I feel like Chicago is a very popular option this cycle.

User avatar
cwid1391
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:41 pm

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

Postby cwid1391 » Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:45 am

Lavitz wrote:Yeah, just from reading the posts on TLS, I feel like Chicago is a very popular option this cycle.


I'm actually pretty nervous about the class being significantly larger than usual - that's one of the big advantages of UChi for me. Several people I talked to at ASW made it seem like they really had too many admits right now. I don't think it bodes well for people hoping to get in off the WL or for scholarship negotiations. Just my .02.

orbotop
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:28 pm

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

Postby orbotop » Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:49 am

i asked about class sizes this year and in the next few, specifically whether chicago anticipated any departure from the norm. admissions folk uniformly said no. i dont think you have reason to be nervous about a significantly larger class. enlarging the class only means making it harder to keep medians.

now whether too many early offers of admission bodes poorly for WL or scholarship negotiations...possibly, if that's true.

User avatar
cwid1391
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:41 pm

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

Postby cwid1391 » Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:58 am

orbotop wrote:i asked about class sizes this year and in the next few, specifically whether chicago anticipated any departure from the norm. admissions folk uniformly said no. i dont think you have reason to be nervous about a significantly larger class. enlarging the class only means making it harder to keep medians.

now whether too many early offers of admission bodes poorly for WL or scholarship negotiations...possibly, if that's true.


I still think, while they may have targeted 185, they may have done so poorly. The ASW was the largest in history (by a significant margin, I think he said). So regardless of what they tried to target, it may wind up being dramatically different.

We won't know for sure until after the deposit deadline, but I still think it's not great news for WLers and for at/below medians hoping to negotiate a scholarship.

mambar
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:11 pm

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

Postby mambar » Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:16 pm

cwid1391 wrote:
orbotop wrote:i asked about class sizes this year and in the next few, specifically whether chicago anticipated any departure from the norm. admissions folk uniformly said no. i dont think you have reason to be nervous about a significantly larger class. enlarging the class only means making it harder to keep medians.

now whether too many early offers of admission bodes poorly for WL or scholarship negotiations...possibly, if that's true.


I still think, while they may have targeted 185, they may have done so poorly. The ASW was the largest in history (by a significant margin, I think he said). So regardless of what they tried to target, it may wind up being dramatically different.

We won't know for sure until after the deposit deadline, but I still think it's not great news for WLers and for at/below medians hoping to negotiate a scholarship.

Just my anecdotal .02: a lot of people at ASW seemed to be way more interested in Columbia or in hearing from some other school. I did meet a lot of people committed to Chicago, but there were plenty of, frankly, obnoxious ones around too. I think we just have to trust the admissions people know what they are doing.

ETA: acknowledgment of the irony of trusting them after noting they admitted several people barely interested in Chicago :)

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

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

Postby Rahviveh » Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:36 pm

Crowing wrote:Last year Chicago took a ton of people off the WL. This year at ASW they mentioned that this ASW was the highest turnout ever (230+ admits I think) and their target class seems to be very slightly smaller than previous years (185). All that probably doesn't mean anything, but I'm just putting it out there.


Ducktales. No way there were 230 people there. Maybe they counted the parents and SO's.

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

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

Postby Rahviveh » Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:37 pm

cwid1391 wrote:
orbotop wrote:i asked about class sizes this year and in the next few, specifically whether chicago anticipated any departure from the norm. admissions folk uniformly said no. i dont think you have reason to be nervous about a significantly larger class. enlarging the class only means making it harder to keep medians.

now whether too many early offers of admission bodes poorly for WL or scholarship negotiations...possibly, if that's true.


I still think, while they may have targeted 185, they may have done so poorly. The ASW was the largest in history (by a significant margin, I think he said). So regardless of what they tried to target, it may wind up being dramatically different.

We won't know for sure until after the deposit deadline, but I still think it's not great news for WLers and for at/below medians hoping to negotiate a scholarship.


Think about how many people you talked to that had HYS as an option. Just about all of those are probably not joining us. That's historically what has happened.

User avatar
scoutmaster
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 3:43 pm

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

Postby scoutmaster » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:05 pm

anyone else looking to live in south loop during 1L year

StarJammer
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:05 am

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

Postby StarJammer » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:37 pm

mambar wrote:
cwid1391 wrote:
orbotop wrote:i asked about class sizes this year and in the next few, specifically whether chicago anticipated any departure from the norm. admissions folk uniformly said no. i dont think you have reason to be nervous about a significantly larger class. enlarging the class only means making it harder to keep medians.

now whether too many early offers of admission bodes poorly for WL or scholarship negotiations...possibly, if that's true.


I still think, while they may have targeted 185, they may have done so poorly. The ASW was the largest in history (by a significant margin, I think he said). So regardless of what they tried to target, it may wind up being dramatically different.

We won't know for sure until after the deposit deadline, but I still think it's not great news for WLers and for at/below medians hoping to negotiate a scholarship.

Just my anecdotal .02: a lot of people at ASW seemed to be way more interested in Columbia or in hearing from some other school. I did meet a lot of people committed to Chicago, but there were plenty of, frankly, obnoxious ones around too.


I feel like way too many people asked me what other schools I was considering so that they could tell me that they're considering Harvard but thought it would be worth it to swing by Chicago's ASW. :D

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

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

Postby Crowing » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:41 pm

I must've hung out with a totally different crowd than you guys. Almost everybody I met was deciding Chi vs CLS/NYU and other than maybe like 2 people they were all leaning or already committed to Chicago. I only talked extensively with one person who was in at H and he was prepared to turn it down for Chi.

Although I also tried not to talk about LS with anybody I met lol and never brought it up so that might have had something to do with it too.

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

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

Postby Rahviveh » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:49 pm

StarJammer wrote:
mambar wrote:
cwid1391 wrote:
orbotop wrote:i asked about class sizes this year and in the next few, specifically whether chicago anticipated any departure from the norm. admissions folk uniformly said no. i dont think you have reason to be nervous about a significantly larger class. enlarging the class only means making it harder to keep medians.

now whether too many early offers of admission bodes poorly for WL or scholarship negotiations...possibly, if that's true.


I still think, while they may have targeted 185, they may have done so poorly. The ASW was the largest in history (by a significant margin, I think he said). So regardless of what they tried to target, it may wind up being dramatically different.

We won't know for sure until after the deposit deadline, but I still think it's not great news for WLers and for at/below medians hoping to negotiate a scholarship.

Just my anecdotal .02: a lot of people at ASW seemed to be way more interested in Columbia or in hearing from some other school. I did meet a lot of people committed to Chicago, but there were plenty of, frankly, obnoxious ones around too.


I feel like way too many people asked me what other schools I was considering so that they could tell me that they're considering Harvard but thought it would be worth it to swing by Chicago's ASW. :D


LOL.

I have more to add but I will keep it to myself :lol:

mambar
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:11 pm

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

Postby mambar » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:56 pm

CP: Don't be greedy! Share it!

Crowing: That sounds like a much more enjoyable approach to ASW :D

StarJammer
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:05 am

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

Postby StarJammer » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:58 pm

mambar wrote:CP: Don't be greedy! Share it!

Crowing: That sounds like a much more enjoyable approach to ASW :D


+1 to both statements.

Share CP!

yaymarissa
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 4:41 pm

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

Postby yaymarissa » Tue Apr 23, 2013 2:16 pm

vvvvvvv
Last edited by yaymarissa on Sun Sep 08, 2013 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.




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