Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle) Forum
-
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 10:31 am
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
Well...this is pure speculation obviously, but you can get into H with numbers alone (above both medians) and Columbia probably has a limited number of Butlers and Hamiltons to give out. They realistically know that those with HYS numbers will at least get into H and, if Columbia has run out of Butlers and Hamiltons, they know that HYS admits won't choose Columbia with <50% scholarship over Harvard, so what would be the point.
- TheYesGuy
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:21 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
I would guess this tooteampeeta wrote:I think some of these holds, especially for people with numbers over both medians, are Columbia's way of YP-ing. I bet they just think people who have those numbers will end up at HYS and are therefore reluctant to admit some of them. I don't know what differentiates them, at least on paper, from the people who've received Butlers and Hamiltons so far, though.
- waferthinmint
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:57 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
+1whippersnappery wrote:Maybe someone spilled coffee on our applications or something...Kobaine51 wrote:This is where I am exactly. What's up yo?whippersnappery wrote: I went complete mid-October, >75 GPA, >50 LSAT, and nothing-- not even a hold. Just radio silence.
Complete late-November, radio silence; good responses from peer schools already. Essentially a de facto hold, but maybe CLS just "doesn't want to label this and just enjoy what we have without needing to label it." Because it could not have taken three-four months to open a PDF application and print it out and move your eyeballs over the words on the page.
- charlie.black
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:11 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
;sah wrote:Well...this is pure speculation obviously, but you can get into H with numbers alone (above both medians) and Columbia probably has a limited number of Butlers and Hamiltons to give out. They realistically know that those with HYS numbers will at least get into H and, if Columbia has run out of Butlers and Hamiltons, they know that HYS admits won't choose Columbia with <50% scholarship over Harvard, so what would be the point.
This was my point earlier. That odd grey area where you're qualified, but too expensive. (maybe?)
- jingosaur
- Posts: 3188
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
But it does take three-four months for them to holistically move their eyeballs over the words on the page.waferthinmint wrote: Complete late-November, radio silence; good responses from peer schools already. Essentially a de facto hold, but maybe CLS just "doesn't want to label this and just enjoy what we have without needing to label it." Because it could not have taken three-four months to open a PDF application and print it out and move your eyeballs over the words on the page.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:37 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
OKAY.
Judging by how some candidates of the same numbers/complete dates were put on "hold" and some were on on "reserve," I can only conclude that columbia selected a random group of students from each of the number range to put on hold. Hold allows them to postpone making admissions decisions. They want to wait to see how the whole applicant pool for T-14 plays out, and they want to be prudent with the final decisions. Hence the holds we see for both below median AND above median kids.
Judging by how some candidates of the same numbers/complete dates were put on "hold" and some were on on "reserve," I can only conclude that columbia selected a random group of students from each of the number range to put on hold. Hold allows them to postpone making admissions decisions. They want to wait to see how the whole applicant pool for T-14 plays out, and they want to be prudent with the final decisions. Hence the holds we see for both below median AND above median kids.
- waferthinmint
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:57 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
HA nice. This brings to mind a pants-suited woman rolling her eyes crazily while burning the application over incense and whiffing the scent of its smoke as a shaman shakes a rain stick over her head.jingosaur wrote:But it does take three-four months for them to holistically move their eyeballs over the words on the page.waferthinmint wrote: Complete late-November, radio silence; good responses from peer schools already. Essentially a de facto hold, but maybe CLS just "doesn't want to label this and just enjoy what we have without needing to label it." Because it could not have taken three-four months to open a PDF application and print it out and move your eyeballs over the words on the page.
- charlie.black
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:11 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
Nothing is random. That would be foolish. Columbia adcomms are not fools.aena wrote:OKAY.
Judging by how some candidates of the same numbers/complete dates were put on "hold" and some were on on "reserve," I can only conclude that columbia selected a random group of students from each of the number range to put on hold. Hold allows them to postpone making admissions decisions. They want to wait to see how the whole applicant pool for T-14 plays out, and they want to be prudent with the final decisions. Hence the holds for both below median AND above median kids.
- charlie.black
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:11 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
haha i enjoyed this visual. thank you.waferthinmint wrote:HA nice. This brings to mind a pants-suited woman rolling her eyes crazily while burning the application over incense and whiffing the scent of its smoke as a shaman shakes a rain stick over her head.jingosaur wrote:But it does take three-four months for them to holistically move their eyeballs over the words on the page.waferthinmint wrote: Complete late-November, radio silence; good responses from peer schools already. Essentially a de facto hold, but maybe CLS just "doesn't want to label this and just enjoy what we have without needing to label it." Because it could not have taken three-four months to open a PDF application and print it out and move your eyeballs over the words on the page.
- waferthinmint
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:57 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
haha happy to help.charlie.black wrote:haha i enjoyed this visual. thank you.waferthinmint wrote:HA nice. This brings to mind a pants-suited woman rolling her eyes crazily while burning the application over incense and whiffing the scent of its smoke as a shaman shakes a rain stick over her head.jingosaur wrote:But it does take three-four months for them to holistically move their eyeballs over the words on the page.waferthinmint wrote: Complete late-November, radio silence; good responses from peer schools already. Essentially a de facto hold, but maybe CLS just "doesn't want to label this and just enjoy what we have without needing to label it." Because it could not have taken three-four months to open a PDF application and print it out and move your eyeballs over the words on the page.
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:37 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
Just trying to figure out how realistic it is to get off hold and whether writing an LOCI is truly worth it.charlie.black wrote:Nothing is random. That would be foolish. Columbia adcomms are not fools.aena wrote:OKAY.
Judging by how some candidates of the same numbers/complete dates were put on "hold" and some were on on "reserve," I can only conclude that columbia selected a random group of students from each of the number range to put on hold. Hold allows them to postpone making admissions decisions. They want to wait to see how the whole applicant pool for T-14 plays out, and they want to be prudent with the final decisions. Hence the holds for both below median AND above median kids.
Do they actually even read the LOCI's? Especially given how Columbia waitlists pretty much everyone and they must get thousands of the letters saying pretty much the same thing. Like what substantial difference would a LOCI make(assuming no significant change in GPA, LSAT, and softs) unless you are a YP candidate?
-
- Posts: 4475
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:19 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
I don't think its random, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have a particularly good reason for doing it. I'm sure the decision to hold some people was basically a coin flip. My hope, and I think it is the only sensical way for them to do things, is that surviving the hold wave after being complete for months means we'll hear something from them by this time next week. The only advantage they get from these holds seems to be incidental YP from people they didn't mark out for Butlers/Hammys, which, again, has probably reached coin flip status at this point. It would be helpful for both parties, though, if they included a line in the email about what this means for those relying on scholarships...
- charlie.black
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:11 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
Is there a large dose of blunt luck in law school admissions? Yes.EquallyWrong wrote:I don't think its random, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have a particularly good reason for doing it. I'm sure the decision to hold some people was basically a coin flip. My hope, and I think it is the only sensical way for them to do things, is that surviving the hold wave after being complete for months means we'll hear something from them by this time next week. The only advantage they get from these holds seems to be incidental YP from people they didn't mark out for Butlers/Hammys, which, again, has probably reached coin flip status at this point. It would be helpful for both parties, though, if they included a line in the email about what this means for those relying on scholarships...
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 538
- Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 4:06 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
Held today. Not surprised.
non URM Hispanic
non URM Hispanic
Last edited by fivestarfolds on Tue Feb 25, 2014 12:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:46 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
So is the wave over? Was it a mass email (right around 11 AM EST), or have they been going out steadily?
- drawstring
- Posts: 1933
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
Held with a 4.1+/173
- drawstring
- Posts: 1933
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
I hate Columbia this cycle
Last edited by drawstring on Fri Feb 21, 2014 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 9:52 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
it's crazydrawstring wrote:Held with a 4.1+/173
-
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:11 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
what thats insanedrawstring wrote:Held with a 4.1+/173
- neprep
- Posts: 1066
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
drawstring wrote:Held with a 4.1+/173
Well, I guess is this image is in order once again…
-
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:46 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
.
Last edited by Pau.C. on Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
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
- FuriousDuck
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:33 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
...
Last edited by FuriousDuck on Tue Mar 04, 2014 5:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
- charlie.black
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:11 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
blows my mind. sorry drawdrawstring wrote:Held with a 4.1+/173
- drawstring
- Posts: 1933
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
charlie.black wrote:blows my mind. sorry drawdrawstring wrote:Held with a 4.1+/173
Thanks a bunch guys. It made me quite worried that I totally effed up my apps given how long I've waited on HLS and now this at a school where I have practically 100% chances according to mylsn, but seeing so many other strong applicants with the same news makes me a bit less worried. I have no clue wth Columbia is doing this cycle, and can they really afford this given their drop in apps and medians?FuriousDuck wrote:Dammit... I was following this thread hoping that you'd get an acceptance. I still think they'll eventually accept you. For what it's worth, I'm buying the "Columbia is procrastinating" theory.drawstring wrote:Held with a 4.1+/173
- Pishee77
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:14 am
Re: Columbia c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle)
So is the consensus that held is a good or bad sign? Is the acceptance/waitlist from held 50/50 or more waitlists?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login