I feel the same way. While my LSAT score is 75 percentile for Stanford, I feel like there's probably a large pool of applicants with LSAT scores at least that high and probably GPAs higher than mine as well. It's what makes waiting for Stanford so puzzling and frustrating. If it weren't my top choice, I would've given up hope by now...jbagelboy wrote:While I know I'm only one member of a perennial group of nearly half-year waiters, I am curious why my application hasn't been DLS'd yet. At most schools people held till April have a number potentially useful to satisfy a median (Harvard digged for held high GPAs it had saved till last week, for example), and if there was something particularly interesting about the app to make up for lower numbers they are admitted on time for that reason. I don't have numbers worth holding onto for median-driven purposes, but clearly nothing about my app was truly worth grabbing or I'd have gotten the call.
Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread Forum
-
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:39 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
ya I have the same LSAT as you. I highly doubt they "need" our lsats. theres gotta be another explanationarrggg wrote:I feel the same way. While my LSAT score is 75 percentile for Stanford, I feel like there's probably a large pool of applicants with LSAT scores at least that high and probably GPAs higher than mine as well. It's what makes waiting for Stanford so puzzling and frustrating. If it weren't my top choice, I would've given up hope by now...jbagelboy wrote:While I know I'm only one member of a perennial group of nearly half-year waiters, I am curious why my application hasn't been DLS'd yet. At most schools people held till April have a number potentially useful to satisfy a median (Harvard digged for held high GPAs it had saved till last week, for example), and if there was something particularly interesting about the app to make up for lower numbers they are admitted on time for that reason. I don't have numbers worth holding onto for median-driven purposes, but clearly nothing about my app was truly worth grabbing or I'd have gotten the call.
- uconjak
- Posts: 357
- Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:20 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I can't figure it out, I have not heard a thing, good or bad. my numbers are not that great. NonURM 168/3.9. It is my first choice, got some great LOR's but still? I am waiting and hoping.jbagelboy wrote:ya I have the same LSAT as you. I highly doubt they "need" our lsats. theres gotta be another explanationarrggg wrote:I feel the same way. While my LSAT score is 75 percentile for Stanford, I feel like there's probably a large pool of applicants with LSAT scores at least that high and probably GPAs higher than mine as well. It's what makes waiting for Stanford so puzzling and frustrating. If it weren't my top choice, I would've given up hope by now...jbagelboy wrote:While I know I'm only one member of a perennial group of nearly half-year waiters, I am curious why my application hasn't been DLS'd yet. At most schools people held till April have a number potentially useful to satisfy a median (Harvard digged for held high GPAs it had saved till last week, for example), and if there was something particularly interesting about the app to make up for lower numbers they are admitted on time for that reason. I don't have numbers worth holding onto for median-driven purposes, but clearly nothing about my app was truly worth grabbing or I'd have gotten the call.
- chickpea
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
We're numbers twins and I also haven't heard anything from SLS since applying months ago. Perhaps they're on the fence about us since our LSAT scores aren't especially great?uconjak wrote:I can't figure it out, I have not heard a thing, good or bad. my numbers are not that great. NonURM 168/3.9. It is my first choice, got some great LOR's but still? I am waiting and hoping.jbagelboy wrote:ya I have the same LSAT as you. I highly doubt they "need" our lsats. theres gotta be another explanationarrggg wrote:I feel the same way. While my LSAT score is 75 percentile for Stanford, I feel like there's probably a large pool of applicants with LSAT scores at least that high and probably GPAs higher than mine as well. It's what makes waiting for Stanford so puzzling and frustrating. If it weren't my top choice, I would've given up hope by now...jbagelboy wrote:While I know I'm only one member of a perennial group of nearly half-year waiters, I am curious why my application hasn't been DLS'd yet. At most schools people held till April have a number potentially useful to satisfy a median (Harvard digged for held high GPAs it had saved till last week, for example), and if there was something particularly interesting about the app to make up for lower numbers they are admitted on time for that reason. I don't have numbers worth holding onto for median-driven purposes, but clearly nothing about my app was truly worth grabbing or I'd have gotten the call.
-
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:07 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I just want them to tell me already! It's april
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:20 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
Numbers triples here. Chickpea I thought you retook the LSAT this February? Or did you decide against it after all?chickpea wrote:We're numbers twins and I also haven't heard anything from SLS since applying months ago. Perhaps they're on the fence about us since our LSAT scores aren't especially great?uconjak wrote:
I can't figure it out, I have not heard a thing, good or bad. my numbers are not that great. NonURM 168/3.9. It is my first choice, got some great LOR's but still? I am waiting and hoping.
- chickpea
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I did... and I scored lower. There was some major stress in my life the morning of the (blizzard-rescheduled) test that certainly didn't help matters much. Oh well, guess HYS just wasn't in the cards for me. Not too bothered by it at this point.swordking90 wrote:Numbers triples here. Chickpea I thought you retook the LSAT this February? Or did you decide against it after all?chickpea wrote:We're numbers twins and I also haven't heard anything from SLS since applying months ago. Perhaps they're on the fence about us since our LSAT scores aren't especially great?uconjak wrote:
I can't figure it out, I have not heard a thing, good or bad. my numbers are not that great. NonURM 168/3.9. It is my first choice, got some great LOR's but still? I am waiting and hoping.
-
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:20 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I'm so sorry to hear that chickpea - yeah this whole drawn out process has numbed me to the ups and downs too. Really glad NYU came through for us Best of luck from here on out!chickpea wrote:
I did... and I scored lower. There was some major stress in my life the morning of the (blizzard-rescheduled) test that certainly didn't help matters much. Oh well, guess HYS just wasn't in the cards for me. Not too bothered by it at this point.
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
this is my fear about a potential June retake. so much going on right now to distract me.swordking90 wrote:I'm so sorry to hear that chickpea - yeah this whole drawn out process has numbed me to the ups and downs too. Really glad NYU came through for us Best of luck from here on out!chickpea wrote:
I did... and I scored lower. There was some major stress in my life the morning of the (blizzard-rescheduled) test that certainly didn't help matters much. Oh well, guess HYS just wasn't in the cards for me. Not too bothered by it at this point.
- chickpea
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
Thanks guys. I wish you the best of luck with the rest of your cycles as well. I'm 99.9% sure I'll be at NYU next fall and am really excited about it. I haven't been on TLS much these past couple of months. You wouldn't believe how much better I feel about attending NYU after having spent that period of time among normal folk (as opposed to TLS superhumans).
Edit: That's not a negative judgement on the superhumans
Edit: That's not a negative judgement on the superhumans
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
yes -- this is something to always keep in mind. nearly all the schools we discuss are actually very prestigious, elite institutions to be proud of and happy to go to. TLS debt-mongering nearly caused me to second guess attending at all last week until I talked with some family and alumns over the weekend who straightened me outchickpea wrote:Thanks guys. I wish you the best of luck with the rest of your cycles as well. I'm 99.9% sure I'll be at NYU next fall and am really excited about it. I haven't been on TLS much these past couple of months. You wouldn't believe how much better I feel about attending NYU after having spent that period of time among normal folk (as opposed to TLS superhumans).
- chickpea
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I went through the exact same process. TLS can be supportive but it can also make you feel irrationally terrible about yourself.jbagelboy wrote:yes -- this is something to always keep in mind. nearly all the schools we discuss are actually very prestigious, elite institutions to be proud of and happy to go to. TLS debt-mongering nearly caused me to second guess attending at all last week until I talked with some family and alumns over the weekend who straightened me outchickpea wrote:Thanks guys. I wish you the best of luck with the rest of your cycles as well. I'm 99.9% sure I'll be at NYU next fall and am really excited about it. I haven't been on TLS much these past couple of months. You wouldn't believe how much better I feel about attending NYU after having spent that period of time among normal folk (as opposed to TLS superhumans).
-
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:20 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I'm so glad to hear I wasn't the only one second-guessing my own ability/financial sanity in going for law school after dwelling for too long on TLS. Talking to friends and family can really bring back some perspective and much-needed encouragementchickpea wrote:I went through the exact same process. TLS can be supportive but it can also make you feel irrationally terrible about yourself.jbagelboy wrote:yes -- this is something to always keep in mind. nearly all the schools we discuss are actually very prestigious, elite institutions to be proud of and happy to go to. TLS debt-mongering nearly caused me to second guess attending at all last week until I talked with some family and alumns over the weekend who straightened me outchickpea wrote:Thanks guys. I wish you the best of luck with the rest of your cycles as well. I'm 99.9% sure I'll be at NYU next fall and am really excited about it. I haven't been on TLS much these past couple of months. You wouldn't believe how much better I feel about attending NYU after having spent that period of time among normal folk (as opposed to TLS superhumans).
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:26 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
TLS is the 0L stress incubator.
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I bet on a case by case basis, 3-5 hours to read PS/LoRs/resume/#s and make a decision, but they have to adjust their median/URM-likelihood estimators for each new data point. I bet there's a statistical significance assigned to each applicant shot out by a series of linked excel spreadsheets, and if your output falls in a certain range they can't reject you until the likelihood function can generate p-value < 0.01/0.05 of failure to matriculate a designed null net class score. so yea, it could be complicated and take a long time.ohpobrecito wrote:Maybe I just don't belong in admissions, but how long does it really take to render a decision on someone?
- cwid1391
- Posts: 475
- Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:41 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I like to imagine it's this complicated, but my gut tells me it's far simpler.jbagelboy wrote:I bet on a case by case basis, 3-5 hours to read PS/LoRs/resume/#s and make a decision, but they have to adjust their median/URM-likelihood estimators for each new data point. I bet there's a statistical significance assigned to each applicant shot out by a series of linked excel spreadsheets, and if your output falls in a certain range they can't reject you until the likelihood function can generate p-value < 0.01/0.05 of failure to matriculate a designed null net class score. so yea, it could be complicated and take a long time.ohpobrecito wrote:Maybe I just don't belong in admissions, but how long does it really take to render a decision on someone?
-
- Posts: 1695
- Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:42 am
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I would be a bit disappointed too if it were numbers-based to this extreme. But maybe I'm naive.cwid1391 wrote:I like to imagine it's this complicated, but my gut tells me it's far simpler.jbagelboy wrote:I bet on a case by case basis, 3-5 hours to read PS/LoRs/resume/#s and make a decision, but they have to adjust their median/URM-likelihood estimators for each new data point. I bet there's a statistical significance assigned to each applicant shot out by a series of linked excel spreadsheets, and if your output falls in a certain range they can't reject you until the likelihood function can generate p-value < 0.01/0.05 of failure to matriculate a designed null net class score. so yea, it could be complicated and take a long time.ohpobrecito wrote:Maybe I just don't belong in admissions, but how long does it really take to render a decision on someone?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
I'm not saying the numbers are all determining -- I'm sure every file gets a full read through, and I'm a strong believer in work experience and undergrad institution/coursework selection having more power than TLS gives credit for -- but they must have some mechanism to sort through thousands of potential applications and split auto-rejects from "held" files. A school like Stanford will reject somewhere between 91 and 93% of the files it receives, it can't possibly peruse all of them with the same diligence. So in some sense, we are all numbers that get put into a machine at some point in the process -- how else do these schools keep nearly the exact same numbers year after year.ohpobrecito wrote:I would be a bit disappointed too if it were numbers-based to this extreme. But maybe I'm naive.cwid1391 wrote:I like to imagine it's this complicated, but my gut tells me it's far simpler.jbagelboy wrote:I bet on a case by case basis, 3-5 hours to read PS/LoRs/resume/#s and make a decision, but they have to adjust their median/URM-likelihood estimators for each new data point. I bet there's a statistical significance assigned to each applicant shot out by a series of linked excel spreadsheets, and if your output falls in a certain range they can't reject you until the likelihood function can generate p-value < 0.01/0.05 of failure to matriculate a designed null net class score. so yea, it could be complicated and take a long time.ohpobrecito wrote:Maybe I just don't belong in admissions, but how long does it really take to render a decision on someone?
- Eli
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:35 am
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
On an unrelated and less confusing note, no news is good news, right?
- sinfiery
- Posts: 3310
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
Yes and noEli wrote:On an unrelated and less confusing note, no news is good news, right?
- RSterling
- Posts: 358
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
This. Yes in the sense that you have not been rejected. No in the sense that (in my case), you've been waiting since September and you're probably headed towards the WL at the least.sinfiery wrote:Yes and noEli wrote:On an unrelated and less confusing note, no news is good news, right?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- digifly
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:28 am
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
Yup. Same here. Oh well. Did you submit your UVA deposit or are you waiting until Friday?RSterling wrote:This. Yes in the sense that you have not been rejected. No in the sense that (in my case), you've been waiting since September and you're probably headed towards the WL at the least.sinfiery wrote:Yes and noEli wrote:On an unrelated and less confusing note, no news is good news, right?
- RSterling
- Posts: 358
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
Not yet. I'm going to wait until the last minute.digifly wrote: Yup. Same here. Oh well. Did you submit your UVA deposit or are you waiting until Friday?
- digifly
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:28 am
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
Good strategy. I'm headed to Vegas so I had to get it all out of my bank account before it was too late!RSterling wrote:Not yet. I'm going to wait until the last minute.digifly wrote: Yup. Same here. Oh well. Did you submit your UVA deposit or are you waiting until Friday?
- ssanonymous
- Posts: 513
- Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:27 pm
Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread
Soooo no lowercase emails reported = no good news tomorrow.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login