Harvard c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
Anonymous4444
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:41 pm

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

Postby Anonymous4444 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:26 pm

trojandave wrote:
NoodleyOne wrote:Well it does seem that the largest decrease is in the 170+ bracket, so that's good for those going for H. Hey, it may not show the effect we're hoping, but since this is the only way I'm getting into H, I'm going to keep my fingers crossed.


Right there with you man, I'm in your boat for sure. But I think BroadStreet is right and we'll probably see the benefit in a few months off the waitlist. That'll give them time to realize this drop is serious after December score people start applying, and until then they'll likely hold out hope for a miraculous swoon of overly qualified apps. Meanwhile I hope the December results come back and only like 10 people took the test. Who wants to take a test in December anyway?


Lol I hope nobody got higher than a 140 eh 145

BSC
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:11 pm

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

Postby BSC » Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:27 pm

Lavitz wrote:
BSC wrote:Submitted 11/20 and still not complete.....

Anyone have any idea on when I can expect that?

Soon.



Good call, complete today! Any predictions on if (and if so when) I get a JS1?

Anonymous4444
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:41 pm

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

Postby Anonymous4444 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:31 pm

BSC wrote:
Lavitz wrote:
BSC wrote:Submitted 11/20 and still not complete.....

Anyone have any idea on when I can expect that?

Soon.



Good call, complete today! Any predictions on if (and if so when) I get a JS1?


Soon.

User avatar
Nala7892
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 12:33 pm

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

Postby Nala7892 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:37 pm

Had my JS1 today! I think it actually went really well and she seemed (and claimed) to really like my responses. Here's hoping, for me and for all of you!

User avatar
banjo
Posts: 1345
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:00 pm

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

Postby banjo » Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:21 pm

For people currently accepted on LSN:

Average LSAT: 173.07
Median LSAT: 174

Average GPA: 3.931
Median GPA: 3.92

Oiler
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:20 pm

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

Postby Oiler » Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:06 pm

Why is being a URM so significant? Does HLS have an (unstated) affirmative action policy?

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

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

Postby sinfiery » Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:25 pm

broadstreet11 wrote:I have a funny feeling that this means that the waitlists might be the place for increased acceptances and lower standards rather than during the year. No reason, just a hunch.

Absolutely agree with this.
Because they can't really visualize/rely as much on historical data for how everything is going to play out before/during the early parts of the cycle as they can in normal circumstances, they will most likely have to put significant work in towards the end of the cycle relative to other years where there isn't as much inconsistency on what exactly they can expect.

They don't realize how much risk their currently taking on, and because they are still Harvard, they will wait until they do because it will help them create a better incoming class.

That isn't to say they haven't already noticed some of the risk, but time can only help alleviate their ignorance


The cycle is young, all we can do is wait..

That being said, if I don't get a JS1 in the next big batch, I'm just gonna take the mindset of Lavitz and assume the worst.

User avatar
efresh88
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:19 pm

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

Postby efresh88 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:20 pm

Oiler wrote:Why is being a URM so significant? Does HLS have an (unstated) affirmative action policy?


Pretty much all schools do, but Harvard is especially known for its URM love. The school wants to have the same percentage of these ethnicities in the school as the united states has...it wants to be representative of the country to show that it truly has a diverse student body, which is something that schools now care about (not sure if that has anything to do with its ranking score but I'm betting it does).

In my opinion (speaking as a URM) I think the race card should not be as big of a factor as socio-economic status, since I think that is the real indicator when it comes to not having the same resources to achieve at the same level as more affluent peers. Unfortunately URM's and low socio-economic status too often go hand-in-hand.

User avatar
efresh88
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:19 pm

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

Postby efresh88 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:05 am

Wormfather wrote:stigma > resources

There were and still are plenty of rich females who didnt achieve despite having the resources and talent to do so.


I agree that stigma plays a part, but in a purely academic setting I don't think that is as significant of a factor as not having the money to afford adequate school supplies, tutors, LSAT prep etc.. These students also often do not have support at home because their single parents are working multiple jobs and/or don't have a formal education themselves. If a non-URM came from this kind of background I would want them to get the boost over a URM who had economic advantages.

Anonymous4444
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:41 pm

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

Postby Anonymous4444 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:37 am

Ok people tough love time. Someone mentioned if your complete for two months ur being held I was complete in early October 10/10. Do I still have a shot? Harvard is my dream school.... Ill ride wait list if nec but are we at that point yet?

User avatar
tyler.durden
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:12 pm

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

Postby tyler.durden » Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:48 am

Anonymous4444 wrote:Ok people tough love time. Someone mentioned if your complete for two months ur being held I was complete in early October 10/10. Do I still have a shot? Harvard is my dream school.... Ill ride wait list if nec but are we at that point yet?


same boat :(

JSY
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:48 am

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

Postby JSY » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:16 am

teiswei wrote:
NoodleyOne wrote:
helix23 wrote:
NoodleyOne wrote:So I hate to do this... but there is another HUGE drop in applicants (22% down from last year, which was itself a down year)...


source?

http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/ ... volume.asp

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=197380&start=150


You are proposing this as good thing, correct? Schools aren't likely to reduce class sizes and their yields will remain about the same. All of this meaning higher acceptance percentages to most schools.

Edit: to clarify, I mean that there will be the same number of offers with less applicants. Lets just hope it means schools are more flexible with their numbers.


http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/la ... job-market

according to some schools (ie NYU), acceptance rates won't be dropping :/ there will just be fewer graduates

User avatar
twinkletoes16
Posts: 1317
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 11:14 pm

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

Postby twinkletoes16 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:26 am

I don't see how an article from Kaplan could be considered a source, and what he's referring to is last year's cycle, which DID have slightly easier admissions criteria AND cuts in class sizes. If this cycle has even FEWER applicants, there's no way of knowing what will happen.

JSY
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:48 am

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

Postby JSY » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:38 am

twinkletoes16 wrote:I don't see how an article from Kaplan could be considered a source, and what he's referring to is last year's cycle, which DID have slightly easier admissions criteria AND cuts in class sizes. If this cycle has even FEWER applicants, there's no way of knowing what will happen.


Fair enough. Have to admit, I was a bit thrown off by some schools ie Duke and their PT acceptances/waitlist. Hope this cycle will be good for everyone.

taf889
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:51 pm

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

Postby taf889 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:40 am

A friend of mine who is a current student at harvard law said an e-mail (no further specification) stated that they had admitted "100+" students so far. good news for those waiting.

UMich11
Posts: 409
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 8:34 pm

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

Postby UMich11 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:41 am

I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.

User avatar
teiswei
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 3:50 pm

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

Postby teiswei » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:47 am

UMich11 wrote:I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.


Yes! I need this! With a 3.3, this is my only hope and I still give myself a 0.0000000000001% shot. We shall see... At least my $100 will help someone at HLS.

User avatar
twinkletoes16
Posts: 1317
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 11:14 pm

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

Postby twinkletoes16 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:49 am

UMich11 wrote:I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.



LSAT is a great indicator and pretty fair across the board. Much better than SAT. I don't think it will go the way of MBA admissions at all since the JD and MBA degrees are entirely different. You can work in a business setting and then go and get an MBA and advance. While you could work as a paralegal/legal assistant and then go to law school, you cannot be a lawyer without the JD. More comparable to the MD, which is pretty numbers-heavy with the MCAT as well. It's like comparing apples and oranges.

UMich11
Posts: 409
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 8:34 pm

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

Postby UMich11 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:52 am

with that said, i posted the yesterday i saw my status check change to complete. I submitted between 12/1 and 12/3 (email date is 12/3) but i just received the complete email today (market complete yesterday). Either applications have slowed down and they have a slower turnaround time, or they are trying to process as much as possible before Christmas. 10 day turnaround isn't too bad compared to you guys early on waiting for 30 days+, now it's just a wonder until it goes under review.

User avatar
NoodleyOne
Posts: 2358
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 7:32 pm

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

Postby NoodleyOne » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:57 am

UMich11 wrote:I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.

I fucking hope not. "Holistic" is a huge flame in % 95 of cases. The way it is now, where if you've done something truly significant (military, TFA, etc.) You get a boost is fine, while Bullshit like frat president and weekend volunteer at the SPCA is not a determining factor.

Law school admissions are close to perfect.

User avatar
teiswei
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 3:50 pm

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

Postby teiswei » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:03 am

NoodleyOne wrote:
UMich11 wrote:I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.

I fucking hope not. "Holistic" is a huge flame in % 95 of cases. The way it is now, where if you've done something truly significant (military, TFA, etc.) You get a boost is fine, while Bullshit like frat president and weekend volunteer at the SPCA is not a determining factor.

Law school admissions are close to perfect.


Schools have pretty openly mocked "frat presidents" in my interviews. I think they see through it and really only acknowledge the truly experienced. If they were to adopt a "holistic" methodology, I think it would benefit most schools. Hard numbers will always have to matter, but giving leeway to those that have accomplished more than their fellow applicants should be OK with most of us.

UMich11
Posts: 409
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 8:34 pm

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

Postby UMich11 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:12 am

twinkletoes16 wrote:
UMich11 wrote:I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.



LSAT is a great indicator and pretty fair across the board. Much better than SAT. I don't think it will go the way of MBA admissions at all since the JD and MBA degrees are entirely different. You can work in a business setting and then go and get an MBA and advance. While you could work as a paralegal/legal assistant and then go to law school, you cannot be a lawyer without the JD. More comparable to the MD, which is pretty numbers-heavy with the MCAT as well. It's like comparing apples and oranges.


i'm not saying they'll replace it, especially at the T14 schools. But the T14 may start taking some harder looks at people who are taking career shifts and have a proven record for success. They may have not performed 170+ on LSAT and have 3.7+ GPAs yet in government, business, or humanitarian areas they have done impressive things. just a thought. with the employment market the way it is, and schools being criticized for misrepresenting employment factors they may start focusing less on what they bring in, and more on what they put out. ie. what type of person is able to perform very well in the real world beyond the ivory tower and iron fences of Harvard/Yale/etc. some very smart people go to these schools yet flame out in the work force because they simply aren't built for it, don't have the motivation, or are simply book smart and that's it.

For example myself, i don't have the typical Harvard numbers but i was a varsity athlete in college, started and sold 3 startups of my own while in school (final one was doing 5 figures/month at the time i sold out), and now work in finance - at an international investment bank (never studied finance in school, no econ, only one fin class, i was a social science major). i have alumni from HLS and HBS in my family as well but that won't give me a boost at all, i would assume

User avatar
banjo
Posts: 1345
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:00 pm

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

Postby banjo » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:23 am

UMich11 wrote:I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.


HLS might indeed be "going soft" like YSB, but that's not necessarily a good thing. At least with LSAT/GPA we have years of data on predictive validity. What do we know about the correlation between being frat president and law school performance or professional success? Absolutely nothing. It doesn't even acheive any of the diversity goals law schools purport to care about.

User avatar
teiswei
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 3:50 pm

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

Postby teiswei » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:29 am

banjo wrote:HLS might indeed be "going soft" like YSB, but that's not necessarily a good thing. At least with LSAT/GPA we have years of data on predictive validity. What do we know about the correlation between being frat president and law school performance or professional success? Absolutely nothing. It doesn't even acheive any of the diversity goals law schools purport to care about.


I don't think UMich11 is really referencing frat presidents and as I said, in my on-campus interviews with NU and Vandy, they don't take those things seriously. They don't take most of the work experience people have seriously. I believe schools, particularly the elites, have the ability to sift through the BS and understand when someone is truly successful. I, much like UMich11, have pretty solid softs and have accomplished things professionally during highschool and undergrad that many people 10 years out of school have not. These are the things that should be noted, not the soft-softs.

User avatar
NoodleyOne
Posts: 2358
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 7:32 pm

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

Postby NoodleyOne » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:31 am

teiswei wrote:
NoodleyOne wrote:
UMich11 wrote:I could be completely wrong, but they might start going the way of MBA admissions and giving more weight to what an applicant has done vs. the scores, since they really aren't indicative of true performance and aren't exactly standardized. if this gains traction across the board i think Numbers will still be a factor, but not as big of one as it is today.

I fucking hope not. "Holistic" is a huge flame in % 95 of cases. The way it is now, where if you've done something truly significant (military, TFA, etc.) You get a boost is fine, while Bullshit like frat president and weekend volunteer at the SPCA is not a determining factor.

Law school admissions are close to perfect.


Schools have pretty openly mocked "frat presidents" in my interviews. I think they see through it and really only acknowledge the truly experienced. If they were to adopt a "holistic" methodology, I think it would benefit most schools. Hard numbers will always have to matter, but giving leeway to those that have accomplished more than their fellow applicants should be OK with most of us.

Define accomplish? I had to work two minimum wage jobs to pay bills and go to school. Do you think that's as impressive of the guy that could afford to take a month off to do missionary work in Haiti?

I think a lot of "softs" are hidden socioeconomic biases. Some people like myself simply can't afford to take months off to do a lot of volunteer work or school activities. My rent isnt going to go away, I don't have the family network to get a good job with no experience, and I can't take the risk of striking out on my own. Yet despite that, due to the numbers based process, I still have an opportunity to go to an elite school. Admissions are fine, and I think the cry for the holistic approach reeks of classism.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Zoe107 and 5 guests