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.
User avatar
ManOfTheMinute
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:54 am

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

Postby ManOfTheMinute » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:44 am

elterrible78 wrote:
ManOfTheMinute wrote:And I thought the 860% increase over at YLS for URM was a lot.


Told you it wasn't that much. Although, to be honest, beyond a certain point, I think it's kind of meaningless. What it really says is "There is a numbers-level below which non-URMs aren't getting in, but URMs can." What it definitely doesn't say is "the average URM is 8.6 or 48.6 or 480.6 times more likely to get in than the average non-URM.


Yeah thats what's happening. No real way for numbers to express that. To quantify the URM boost we should be looking at people whose non-URM numbers history yield a 25-75% acceptance rate... or something along those lines. Although, the relative magnitude between schools indicates that harvard cares more than yale (which I think I have seen in other analyses)

User avatar
John_rizzy_rawls
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:44 pm

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

Postby John_rizzy_rawls » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:50 am

elterrible78 wrote:Not a typo, but if you check out my last post, I think that pretty much explains my interpretation of it. Parsing it by URM type would be nearly impossible for a couple reasons. The first is that you'd have to depend on the person indicating in the "other" section of their LSN profile what type of URM (s)he happens to be, and I think we'd end up with so few observations that any analysis would be meaningless. The other, more immediate problem is...I don't want to dig through all those profiles! :D


Makes sense, thanks!

User avatar
elterrible78
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:09 am

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

Postby elterrible78 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:52 am

ManOfTheMinute wrote:
elterrible78 wrote:
ManOfTheMinute wrote:And I thought the 860% increase over at YLS for URM was a lot.


Told you it wasn't that much. Although, to be honest, beyond a certain point, I think it's kind of meaningless. What it really says is "There is a numbers-level below which non-URMs aren't getting in, but URMs can." What it definitely doesn't say is "the average URM is 8.6 or 48.6 or 480.6 times more likely to get in than the average non-URM.


Yeah thats what's happening. No real way for numbers to express that. To quantify the URM boost we should be looking at people whose non-URM numbers history yield a 25-75% acceptance rate... or something along those lines. Although, the relative magnitude between schools indicates that harvard cares more than yale (which I think I have seen in other analyses)


From everything I've looked at, Harvard cares about more than anyone in the T14 by a pretty wide margin, actually.

User avatar
Mr. Elshal
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:30 pm

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

Postby Mr. Elshal » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:18 am

Wormfather wrote:
Also, Yale only really needs a few URMs to match the population percentage. So for example, only about 12 AAs break 170 each year, Yale can take 10 of them and be within their 25%-75% for LSAT, thus it only seems like a smaller boost.

Case and point: One would imagine that an AA with a 170/3.7 would at least be at least WL at YLS given the information above...not so much.


I've been trying to understand...based on this information, are there not many AAs at top law schools? Like, taking your hypothetical above, is it feasible to go to H or Y and see only 10 or fewer AAs? That seems pretty weird. Also, I imagine this would be more pronounced at H where the student body is huge.

User avatar
clouded.memory
Posts: 323
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 7:26 pm

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

Postby clouded.memory » Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:27 am

Mr. Elshal wrote:
Wormfather wrote:
Also, Yale only really needs a few URMs to match the population percentage. So for example, only about 12 AAs break 170 each year, Yale can take 10 of them and be within their 25%-75% for LSAT, thus it only seems like a smaller boost.

Case and point: One would imagine that an AA with a 170/3.7 would at least be at least WL at YLS given the information above...not so much.


I've been trying to understand...based on this information, are there not many AAs at top law schools? Like, taking your hypothetical above, is it feasible to go to H or Y and see only 10 or fewer AAs? That seems pretty weird. Also, I imagine this would be more pronounced at H where the student body is huge.


I think this link answers your question pretty nicely: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=195443

According to this, all-in-all, there's only about 331 (give or take) AAs in the T-14.

User avatar
Mr. Elshal
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:30 pm

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

Postby Mr. Elshal » Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:29 pm

clouded.memory wrote:
Mr. Elshal wrote:
Wormfather wrote:
Also, Yale only really needs a few URMs to match the population percentage. So for example, only about 12 AAs break 170 each year, Yale can take 10 of them and be within their 25%-75% for LSAT, thus it only seems like a smaller boost.

Case and point: One would imagine that an AA with a 170/3.7 would at least be at least WL at YLS given the information above...not so much.


I've been trying to understand...based on this information, are there not many AAs at top law schools? Like, taking your hypothetical above, is it feasible to go to H or Y and see only 10 or fewer AAs? That seems pretty weird. Also, I imagine this would be more pronounced at H where the student body is huge.


I think this link answers your question pretty nicely: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=195443

According to this, all-in-all, there's only about 331 (give or take) AAs in the T-14.


I guess that's not as bad as I imagined it, although still low enough to be interesting.
Now I'm curious about whether URMs who get a boost are generally able to keep up with their fellow students who may have needed a higher GPA/LSAT to get in without any boost. I'll save that for another time though, because I don't want people to see too many new posts and think JS1s are out :P

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

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

Postby Yukos » Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:36 pm

Mr. Elshal wrote:
clouded.memory wrote:
Mr. Elshal wrote:
Wormfather wrote:
Also, Yale only really needs a few URMs to match the population percentage. So for example, only about 12 AAs break 170 each year, Yale can take 10 of them and be within their 25%-75% for LSAT, thus it only seems like a smaller boost.

Case and point: One would imagine that an AA with a 170/3.7 would at least be at least WL at YLS given the information above...not so much.


I've been trying to understand...based on this information, are there not many AAs at top law schools? Like, taking your hypothetical above, is it feasible to go to H or Y and see only 10 or fewer AAs? That seems pretty weird. Also, I imagine this would be more pronounced at H where the student body is huge.


I think this link answers your question pretty nicely: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=195443

According to this, all-in-all, there's only about 331 (give or take) AAs in the T-14.


I guess that's not as bad as I imagined it, although still low enough to be interesting.
Now I'm curious about whether URMs who get a boost are generally able to keep up with their fellow students who may have needed a higher GPA/LSAT to get in without any boost. I'll save that for another time though, because I don't want people to see too many new posts and think JS1s are out :P


Yeah and this thread might not be the right place for that, considering that's one of the most controversial aspects of AA...

User avatar
elterrible78
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:09 am

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

Postby elterrible78 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:50 pm

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:Is that URM% a typo? It looks more like a DBZ power level than a URM bump. Not complaining but just... wow. If you don't mind explaining, how did you come to that % exactly?

ETA: is there anyway to further parse that % by URM type?


You know, this was starting to bother me. It's not that the number is inaccurate, it's just that at first glance it seems insane. Maybe a better way to look at a URM bump is like this:

In terms of your chances at getting in at Harvard, being a URM is worth 8.8 points on your LSAT and 0.42 on your GPA. I think that's a little easier to digest, probably.
Last edited by elterrible78 on Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
clouded.memory
Posts: 323
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 7:26 pm

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

Postby clouded.memory » Tue Jan 29, 2013 12:50 pm

Yukos wrote:Yeah and this thread might not be the right place for that, considering that's one of the most controversial aspects of AA...

+1

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

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

Postby Yukos » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:23 pm

I decided to make a chart since that's what all the cool kids are doing. This graph represents the relative importance of the GPA increase, LSAT increase and URM boosts.

Image

az21833
Posts: 1403
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:57 pm

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

Postby az21833 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:25 pm

Yukos wrote:I decided to make a chart since that's what all the cool kids are doing. This graph represents the relative importance of the GPA increase, LSAT increase and URM boosts.

Image


LOL

User avatar
sabanist
Posts: 573
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:48 pm

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

Postby sabanist » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:26 pm

elterrible78 wrote:In terms of your chances at getting in at Harvard, being a URM is worth 8.8 points on your LSAT and 0.42 on your GPA. I think that's a little easier to digest, probably.

As a person who can't math, this makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the info!

housebro13
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:12 am

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

Postby housebro13 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:31 pm

JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

spyke123
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:41 am

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

Postby spyke123 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:33 pm

housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


congrats!!!!!

when was your JS1?

User avatar
elterrible78
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:09 am

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

Postby elterrible78 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:33 pm

housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Congrats!!

housebro13
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:12 am

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

Postby housebro13 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:34 pm

spyke123 wrote:
housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


congrats!!!!!

when was your JS1?


Invite 1/3 and interview date 1/8.

GeneralMuffin
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:07 pm

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

Postby GeneralMuffin » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:36 pm

housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Congrats!

I can't decide whether I should anxiously hover over my phone or whether I should try and stay away so I don't get my hopes up every time the stupid thing buzzes.

User avatar
Mr. Elshal
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:30 pm

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

Postby Mr. Elshal » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:36 pm

housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Congratulations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

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

Postby wtrc » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:37 pm

housebro13 wrote:
spyke123 wrote:
housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


congrats!!!!!

when was your JS1?


Invite 1/3 and interview date 1/8.


Congrats! Mind sharing what your LSAT score was?

User avatar
chickpea
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm

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

Postby chickpea » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:44 pm

Congrats Housebro!!!!

User avatar
clouded.memory
Posts: 323
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 7:26 pm

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

Postby clouded.memory » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:46 pm

housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Congratulations!!!

User avatar
sitwaitwish
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:31 pm

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

Postby sitwaitwish » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:48 pm

housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



This is awesome! Congrats 'bro!!

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

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

Postby twinkletoes16 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:52 pm

If JS2s....no JS1s today?


congrats housebro!!!

mommalee
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:05 pm

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

Postby mommalee » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:57 pm

housebro13 wrote:JS2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Congratulations! !!!!!

mm3456
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 5:58 pm

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

Postby mm3456 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:08 pm

JS2!!!!




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 20171lhopeful, Assasindowntheavenue, Bing [Bot], GoGreen17, KissMyAxe, lawnerd87, proteinshake, Rich Uncle Skeleton and 28 guests