UVA c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013 cycle)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
ironbmike
Posts: 379
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 12:31 pm

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

Postby ironbmike » Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:00 pm

WL today.

User avatar
SteelPenguin
Posts: 1090
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:37 pm

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

Postby SteelPenguin » Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:18 pm

Rejected today. Completely expected, below median in both LSAT and GPA.

User avatar
Cicero76
Posts: 1276
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:41 pm

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

Postby Cicero76 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:25 pm

WL email. Applied early December.

User avatar
ph5354a
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:40 pm

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

Postby ph5354a » Tue Mar 12, 2013 3:08 pm

Interesting analysis of UVA's inflated yield rate due to their new phone call practices. I agree that every school has the right to YP, or reject a student based on a complete and utter lack of demonstrated interest in the school, but this does seem a little aggressive.

http://abovethelaw.com/2013/03/does-any ... ield-rate/

kakistocracy
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:14 am

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

Postby kakistocracy » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:22 pm

Waitlisted, and withdrawing.

Wrote a Why Virginia and everything, eh.

KingFish
Posts: 334
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:34 pm

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

Postby KingFish » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:51 pm

ph5354a wrote:Interesting analysis of UVA's inflated yield rate due to their new phone call practices. I agree that every school has the right to YP, or reject a student based on a complete and utter lack of demonstrated interest in the school, but this does seem a little aggressive.

http://abovethelaw.com/2013/03/does-any ... ield-rate/

Good read. Makes UVA look bad, maybe more public discussion of yp will discourage schools from doing it.

jym_dawg
Posts: 294
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 10:09 pm

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

Postby jym_dawg » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:55 pm

KingFish wrote:
ph5354a wrote:Interesting analysis of UVA's inflated yield rate due to their new phone call practices. I agree that every school has the right to YP, or reject a student based on a complete and utter lack of demonstrated interest in the school, but this does seem a little aggressive.

http://abovethelaw.com/2013/03/does-any ... ield-rate/

Good read. Makes UVA look bad, maybe more public discussion of yp will discourage schools from doing it.


Spot the necessary assumption: There is something wrong about YP. It might suck for the individual applicants who get YPed, but it's good for the school's yield rate and for applicants who say UVA is their top choice.

ETA: Also, if an admissions officer who has the ability to offer you an acceptance requests that you call (and the call itself is widely known to be YP), why would you ever say anything other than UVA is (or is among) your top choices? If I told UVA I was most likely going to YHS, of course it'd make sense they would YP me. That should not come as a surprise to anyone.

KingFish
Posts: 334
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:34 pm

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

Postby KingFish » Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:13 pm

jym_dawg wrote:it's good for the school's yield rate

Only reason to inflate the yield rate is to game the rankings, that's why it's bs.
jym_dawg wrote:and for applicants who say UVA is their top choice.

That's what ED is for.

I agree that it's stupid to admit over the phone that you don't want to attend. That person probably should have withdrawn anyway.

User avatar
ph5354a
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:40 pm

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

Postby ph5354a » Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:18 pm

The shadier thing IMO is that she received an email a few minutes later that her app had been withdrawn --not rejected or WL, even though she never requested that her app be withdrawn. I agree that she shouldn't have admitted she was going to HYS though.

User avatar
digifly
Posts: 652
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:28 am

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

Postby digifly » Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:22 pm

If UVA didn't like the way the phone call went, they could also just flat out reject you. That is essentially exactly what they're doing. In addition, I don't see how this is substantively that much different from a JS1.

During my call I was basically asked if I had any updates and a little "Why UVA?" Which makes sense because I'm from CA and didn't send them a Why UVA in writing. Had I said something to the tune of, "Well I applied to UVA as a safety, but I'm in at Stanford," why is it wrong of them to withdraw me? If Harvard called and I said that to JS, I'm sure I'd never see a JS2. It's like sending a LOCI and expecting to get in by saying, "I need a backup."

EDIT: Seems people think being withdrawn is shady. But wouldn't it HELP UVA's numbers to reject more people? That makes them look more selective, right? I'd be willing to bet that'd lead to "gaming" claims as much as this does.

Big Dog
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

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

Postby Big Dog » Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:05 pm

just good business practice, IMO. Why should they waste any more time on someone who had already decided to attend elsewhere?

It would be one thing if she said, 'while I've been accepted to HYS, I really like Charlottesville/UVA and I'm haven't yet decided on a LS....', and then they withdrew her app.

Instead, she flat out said that she "would be attending HYS". In other words, she HAD decided on a LS, and UVa had no shot.

User avatar
Yardbird
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:45 pm

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

Postby Yardbird » Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:07 am

Big Dog wrote:just good business practice, IMO. Why should they waste any more time on someone who had already decided to attend elsewhere?

It would be one thing if she said, 'while I've been accepted to HYS, I really like Charlottesville/UVA and I'm haven't yet decided on a LS....', and then they withdrew her app.

Instead, she flat out said that she "would be attending HYS". In other words, she HAD decided on a LS, and UVa had no shot.
You are also supposed to withdraw all applications after accepting/deciding to attend a school. UVA withdrew that application because the girl said she was attending HYS and hadn't told UVA like she was supposed to. This isn't YP, its just the LSAC requirement and the requirement all law schools have once you commit to a school.

It would be a different story if she wasn't in somewhere and they withdrew her application or, as the above person stated, if she was shaky on HYS.

User avatar
Rlabo
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:18 am

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

Postby Rlabo » Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:21 am

shadowofjazz wrote:
Big Dog wrote:just good business practice, IMO. Why should they waste any more time on someone who had already decided to attend elsewhere?

It would be one thing if she said, 'while I've been accepted to HYS, I really like Charlottesville/UVA and I'm haven't yet decided on a LS....', and then they withdrew her app.

Instead, she flat out said that she "would be attending HYS". In other words, she HAD decided on a LS, and UVa had no shot.
You are also supposed to withdraw all applications after accepting/deciding to attend a school. UVA withdrew that application because the girl said she was attending HYS and hadn't told UVA like she was supposed to. This isn't YP, its just the LSAC requirement and the requirement all law schools have once you commit to a school.

It would be a different story if she wasn't in somewhere and they withdrew her application or, as the above person stated, if she was shaky on HYS.


It seemed weird to me only because she had not specifically requested to be withdrawn. It shouldn't be in the schools power to withdraw an application unless the applicant asked. If they want to get rid of an application for someone who has no interest in matriculating before an offer was ever even made, well that's what rejection is for. They should have rejected the applicant not withdrawn her application IMO.

User avatar
Yardbird
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:45 pm

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

Postby Yardbird » Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:32 am

Rlabo wrote:
shadowofjazz wrote:
Big Dog wrote:just good business practice, IMO. Why should they waste any more time on someone who had already decided to attend elsewhere?

It would be one thing if she said, 'while I've been accepted to HYS, I really like Charlottesville/UVA and I'm haven't yet decided on a LS....', and then they withdrew her app.

Instead, she flat out said that she "would be attending HYS". In other words, she HAD decided on a LS, and UVa had no shot.
You are also supposed to withdraw all applications after accepting/deciding to attend a school. UVA withdrew that application because the girl said she was attending HYS and hadn't told UVA like she was supposed to. This isn't YP, its just the LSAC requirement and the requirement all law schools have once you commit to a school.

It would be a different story if she wasn't in somewhere and they withdrew her application or, as the above person stated, if she was shaky on HYS.


It seemed weird to me only because she had not specifically requested to be withdrawn. It shouldn't be in the schools power to withdraw an application unless the applicant asked. If they want to get rid of an application for someone who has no interest in matriculating before an offer was ever even made, well that's what rejection is for. They should have rejected the applicant not withdrawn her application IMO.
If an ED applicant has applied to other schools and gets into the ED, the other schools will withdraw that applicants applications upon notification that he/she has committed to another school. If an applicant tells a school this directly, I fail to see what the problem is if they take the same action.

User avatar
Rlabo
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:18 am

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

Postby Rlabo » Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:04 am

shadowofjazz wrote:
Rlabo wrote:
shadowofjazz wrote:
Big Dog wrote:just good business practice, IMO. Why should they waste any more time on someone who had already decided to attend elsewhere?

It would be one thing if she said, 'while I've been accepted to HYS, I really like Charlottesville/UVA and I'm haven't yet decided on a LS....', and then they withdrew her app.

Instead, she flat out said that she "would be attending HYS". In other words, she HAD decided on a LS, and UVa had no shot.
You are also supposed to withdraw all applications after accepting/deciding to attend a school. UVA withdrew that application because the girl said she was attending HYS and hadn't told UVA like she was supposed to. This isn't YP, its just the LSAC requirement and the requirement all law schools have once you commit to a school.

It would be a different story if she wasn't in somewhere and they withdrew her application or, as the above person stated, if she was shaky on HYS.


It seemed weird to me only because she had not specifically requested to be withdrawn. It shouldn't be in the schools power to withdraw an application unless the applicant asked. If they want to get rid of an application for someone who has no interest in matriculating before an offer was ever even made, well that's what rejection is for. They should have rejected the applicant not withdrawn her application IMO.
If an ED applicant has applied to other schools and gets into the ED, the other schools will withdraw that applicants applications upon notification that he/she has committed to another school. If an applicant tells a school this directly, I fail to see what the problem is if they take the same action.


See but ED is (generally speaking) binding and so that's not a fair comparison because by the student letting the school now shes been accepted on ED, by law she must withdraw other outstanding applications. On the other hand, the student here said she was going to go to hys, but lets say for some crazy reason she wakes up the next day and decides she really wants to go to Virginia cuz she fell in love with the school/area or wtvr insane but still possible reason one can think of. She know no longer has that option as UVA has taken away her choice to decide. ED forces one to make that decision, but telling an admissions officer "im planning on attending hys" does and should not. Plans change, plain and simple. Until she has stated that she will not be attending (in writing IMO), a school should not be able to just withdraw an application.

User avatar
Yardbird
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:45 pm

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

Postby Yardbird » Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:14 am

Rlabo wrote:
shadowofjazz wrote:
Rlabo wrote:It seemed weird to me only because she had not specifically requested to be withdrawn. It shouldn't be in the schools power to withdraw an application unless the applicant asked. If they want to get rid of an application for someone who has no interest in matriculating before an offer was ever even made, well that's what rejection is for. They should have rejected the applicant not withdrawn her application IMO.
If an ED applicant has applied to other schools and gets into the ED, the other schools will withdraw that applicants applications upon notification that he/she has committed to another school. If an applicant tells a school this directly, I fail to see what the problem is if they take the same action.
See but ED is (generally speaking) binding and so that's not a fair comparison because by the student letting the school now shes been accepted on ED, by law she must withdraw other outstanding applications. On the other hand, the student here said she was going to go to hys, but lets say for some crazy reason she wakes up the next day and decides she really wants to go to Virginia cuz she fell in love with the school/area or wtvr insane but still possible reason one can think of. She know no longer has that option as UVA has taken away her choice to decide. ED forces one to make that decision, but telling an admissions officer "im planning on attending hys" does and should not. Plans change, plain and simple. Until she has stated that she will not be attending (in writing IMO), a school should not be able to just withdraw an application.
But what school/employer would ever accept someone who said in an interview they were going somewhere else/wanted to be somewhere else? Especially for law school when there are hundreds of applicants for each spot, the school can afford to withdraw the application for that indecisive individual for someone who is 100% for UVA from the start. No one likes/wants sloppy seconds. If they're indecisive, reject them. If they're 100% for another school, withdraw their app. If they're 100% for UVA, accept them. There isn't anything wrong with this strategy (and as some have said, the Harvard JS interviews function in a similar manner).

User avatar
Rlabo
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:18 am

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

Postby Rlabo » Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:24 am

shadowofjazz wrote:
Rlabo wrote:
shadowofjazz wrote:
Rlabo wrote:It seemed weird to me only because she had not specifically requested to be withdrawn. It shouldn't be in the schools power to withdraw an application unless the applicant asked. If they want to get rid of an application for someone who has no interest in matriculating before an offer was ever even made, well that's what rejection is for. They should have rejected the applicant not withdrawn her application IMO.
If an ED applicant has applied to other schools and gets into the ED, the other schools will withdraw that applicants applications upon notification that he/she has committed to another school. If an applicant tells a school this directly, I fail to see what the problem is if they take the same action.
See but ED is (generally speaking) binding and so that's not a fair comparison because by the student letting the school now shes been accepted on ED, by law she must withdraw other outstanding applications. On the other hand, the student here said she was going to go to hys, but lets say for some crazy reason she wakes up the next day and decides she really wants to go to Virginia cuz she fell in love with the school/area or wtvr insane but still possible reason one can think of. She know no longer has that option as UVA has taken away her choice to decide. ED forces one to make that decision, but telling an admissions officer "im planning on attending hys" does and should not. Plans change, plain and simple. Until she has stated that she will not be attending (in writing IMO), a school should not be able to just withdraw an application.
But what school/employer would ever accept someone who said in an interview they were going somewhere else/wanted to be somewhere else? Especially for law school when there are hundreds of applicants for each spot, the school can afford to withdraw the application for that indecisive individual for someone who is 100% for UVA from the start. No one likes/wants sloppy seconds. If they're indecisive, reject them. If they're 100% for another school, withdraw their app. If they're 100% for UVA, accept them. There isn't anything wrong with this strategy (and as some have said, the Harvard JS interviews function in a similar manner).


You're missing my point a little bit. I'm not saying the school should have extended her an offer by any means. I'm saying specifically that "withdrawal" should be under the applicants discretion, not the law school. If the law school finds something off-colored about an applicant and believe they are not interested or committed to their school before rendering any decision, then they should reject the applicant (or waitlist if they're still somewhat interested for wtvr reason), not withdraw the application. The end result is the same, but the way its nuanced is different. This should've been easy in this case as the school had never even extended the applicant any form of acceptance.

Big Dog
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

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

Postby Big Dog » Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:44 am

The end result is the same, but the way its nuanced is different.


But why play "nuance' games if the end result is the same? The applicant clearly said that she had made a decision to attend HYS. Case closed.

But think about it differently. If UVa would have rejected her, ATL would have written about that (and folks other than you would have complained). If UVa would have WL'ed her, ATL would have written about that. UVa will be trashed by ATL regardless (since, other than outright acceptance, it is all YP), so the simplest solution is the best, IMO. And that is to close the file, so adcoms don't have to pick it up again (which is what would happen with a WL). IMO it's much better to have a clean break and move on to candidates who are on hold and who would love to attend UVA Law.

LRGhost
Posts: 1869
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 6:49 pm

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

Postby LRGhost » Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:46 am

Big Dog wrote:
The end result is the same, but the way its nuanced is different.


But why play "nuance' games if the end result is the same? The applicant clearly said that she had made a decision to attend HYS. Case closed.

But think about it differently. If UVa would have rejected her, ATL would have written about that (and folks other than you would have complained). If UVa would have WL'ed her, ATL would have written about that. UVa will be trashed by ATL regardless (since, other than outright acceptance, it is all YP), so the simplest solution is the best, IMO. And that is to close the file, so adcoms don't have to pick it up again (which is what would happen with a WL). IMO it's much better to have a clean break and move on to candidates who are on hold and who would love to attend UVA Law.


If she said she was in at HYS but would consider V with $$$$, what do you think the result would have been?

Big Dog
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

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

Postby Big Dog » Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:49 am

^^yes, I addressed that in my earlier post. But that is a hypothetical.

User avatar
Yardbird
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:45 pm

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

Postby Yardbird » Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:52 am

LRGhost wrote:
Big Dog wrote:
The end result is the same, but the way its nuanced is different.


But why play "nuance' games if the end result is the same? The applicant clearly said that she had made a decision to attend HYS. Case closed.

But think about it differently. If UVa would have rejected her, ATL would have written about that (and folks other than you would have complained). If UVa would have WL'ed her, ATL would have written about that. UVa will be trashed by ATL regardless (since, other than outright acceptance, it is all YP), so the simplest solution is the best, IMO. And that is to close the file, so adcoms don't have to pick it up again (which is what would happen with a WL). IMO it's much better to have a clean break and move on to candidates who are on hold and who would love to attend UVA Law.


If she said she was in at HYS but would consider V with $$$$, what do you think the result would have been?
I'm sure they asked her if they could close the file too. Doesn't sound like ATL got the full story.

Big Dog
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

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

Postby Big Dog » Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:57 am

^^Like with most blogs, even even newspapers, critical reading skills are in order since every author, by definition, has a personal pov in writing the article in the first place.

ATL can be a fun read, but (IMO) they often stretch their credibility in some of their articles.

User avatar
ph5354a
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:40 pm

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

Postby ph5354a » Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:11 am

Sorry to derail the thread guys :P ^^that's definitely true about ATL's credibility, everything should be taken with a grain of salt.

User avatar
Rlabo
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:18 am

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

Postby Rlabo » Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:33 am

Big Dog wrote:
The end result is the same, but the way its nuanced is different.


But why play "nuance' games if the end result is the same? The applicant clearly said that she had made a decision to attend HYS. Case closed.

But think about it differently. If UVa would have rejected her, ATL would have written about that (and folks other than you would have complained). If UVa would have WL'ed her, ATL would have written about that. UVa will be trashed by ATL regardless (since, other than outright acceptance, it is all YP), so the simplest solution is the best, IMO. And that is to close the file, so adcoms don't have to pick it up again (which is what would happen with a WL). IMO it's much better to have a clean break and move on to candidates who are on hold and who would love to attend UVA Law.


The reason to play the "nuance" game is because it forces schools to make a decision on an applicant and places the ball back in the applicants hands. And would people really complain if a candidate like this had been rejected? They clearly showed 0 interest! Rejection is a clean break in this instance.

I do agree though that we probably don't have the full story as others have said, and therefore its hard to really pass any judgment on UVA.

talesofyore
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:21 pm

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

Postby talesofyore » Wed Mar 13, 2013 2:20 pm

Do people tend to have any updates before a decision is made? My initial complete and under review date has remained pristine and untouched since mid-November.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 20171lhopeful, Cfitz, lawschool55, Long shot hero, mav1993, trueblue92 and 14 guests