Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014) Forum
- Quest4Knowledge
- Posts: 293
- Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 2:36 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Okay so I doubt this is representative of the greater population, but on LSN for 12-13:
Of the 238 reported with an LSAT of 170+, 177 had a GPA >3.65, and 61 had a GPA <3.65.
61/238= ~25%
~25% of 170+ LSAT scorers had a GPA <3.65.
(I know this is super simple, if I'm making an erroneous assumption please let me know)
ETA: If we change that GPA cutoff to 3.7 (HLS's 'floor'), it becomes ~30%.
ETAx2: I'm foolish. These numbers are from people who APPLIED to HLS, not all 170+ LSAT takers. So they must have thought they had a GPA reasonable enough for Harvard, and people with much lower GPAs but high LSAT's wouldn't even be included in this sample. The % I came up with is absolutely not reliable. I don't have the data available for all of LSN last year right now though, but will find it later.
Of the 238 reported with an LSAT of 170+, 177 had a GPA >3.65, and 61 had a GPA <3.65.
61/238= ~25%
~25% of 170+ LSAT scorers had a GPA <3.65.
(I know this is super simple, if I'm making an erroneous assumption please let me know)
ETA: If we change that GPA cutoff to 3.7 (HLS's 'floor'), it becomes ~30%.
ETAx2: I'm foolish. These numbers are from people who APPLIED to HLS, not all 170+ LSAT takers. So they must have thought they had a GPA reasonable enough for Harvard, and people with much lower GPAs but high LSAT's wouldn't even be included in this sample. The % I came up with is absolutely not reliable. I don't have the data available for all of LSN last year right now though, but will find it later.
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Yeah, both of those are really good points and TBH I don't have time to sort those out. I just meant it as a rough approximation. Take with a whole lot of saltPneumonia wrote:yeah all i know is that the data Spivey tweeted indicated that it was closer to 350. Don't forget multiple test takers. Also, the percentiles have changed a bit since 2007-2010 which is what is represented on the chart you referenced.IrishJew wrote:170 is 97.4th percentile (source: http://www.alphascore.com/resources/lsa ... onversion/).Pneumonia wrote:there aren't even a thousand that score 175+
If I recall correctly it was like 330 of them last year and 350 of them this year.
175 is 99.4th percentile.
Given that 112K LSATs were taken last year, there were just about 3000 170+ scores. A 1 percent increase is about 30 more people. Similarly, there should have been 750 175+, and a 6% gain would be about 45 people. All this is a rough approximation, of course.
Remember also, though, that the total number of LSATs is also dropping, so a 1% increase is a big deal proportionately speaking (I mean if the whole stockmarket is tanking and your shares in XYZ inc are "only" up one percent, you substantially outperformed the market).
(maybe headed for about 110 LSATs this year) just under 3000 people score about 170. A
- gobears!!
- Posts: 2080
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 12:04 am
Post removed.
Post removed.
Last edited by gobears!! on Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1473
- Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:34 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
.
Last edited by NoDayButToday on Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- wealtheow
- Posts: 1034
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 1:45 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
this. some schools do seem to actively discourage it.NoDayButToday wrote:gobears!! wrote:I would look for one in case. If a professor sends and email with a letter attached on your behalf saying that I heard that so and so is waitlisted and this is why I think that you should take them, it would look good.riverwater wrote:In the event that I'm waitlisted and not rejected, would Harvard accept an additional letter of recommendation? Wondering if I should start looking for someone...
I would look just in case, but definitely wait for their instructions before having the recommender send. Don't know about HLS, but some schools say "you do not need to submit additional letters of recommendation," which I think is a more polite way of saying "we don't want you to submit additional letters of recommendation."
you're jumping the gun here. you can always ask them personally in the event that you do get a w/l, and i'm sure they'll be forthcoming about their feelings.
alternatively, you could ask your recommender to write as though the letter was entirely unsolicited. that might still piss them off, though, haha.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- drawstring
- Posts: 1933
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Yep.NoDayButToday wrote:gobears!! wrote:I would look for one in case. If a professor sends and email with a letter attached on your behalf saying that I heard that so and so is waitlisted and this is why I think that you should take them, it would look good.riverwater wrote:In the event that I'm waitlisted and not rejected, would Harvard accept an additional letter of recommendation? Wondering if I should start looking for someone...
I would look just in case, but definitely wait for their instructions before having the recommender send. Don't know about HLS, but some schools say "you do not need to submit additional letters of recommendation," which I think is a more polite way of saying "we don't want you to submit additional letters of recommendation."
"Additional letters of recommendation are not necessary."
https://blogs.law.harvard.edu/admission ... dest-part/
- gobears!!
- Posts: 2080
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 12:04 am
Post removed.
Post removed.
Last edited by gobears!! on Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
- drawstring
- Posts: 1933
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
It sort of seems like a hint to me that they don't want them, especially given what they say about new grades, awards, and jobs.
- rseaney
- Posts: 393
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 7:53 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
+1drawstring wrote:It sort of seems like a hint to me that they don't want them, especially given what they say about new grades, awards, and jobs.
i think i know the answer, but "awards" does not include scholarship offers from other law schools, i presume? I just want H to know they should love me too haha
- Nonconsecutive
- Posts: 2398
- Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:58 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
This is how I read it as well.drawstring wrote:It sort of seems like a hint to me that they don't want them, especially given what they say about new grades, awards, and jobs.
And nope, those aren't the kinds of awards they are referring to, haha.rseaney wrote:+1drawstring wrote:It sort of seems like a hint to me that they don't want them, especially given what they say about new grades, awards, and jobs.
i think i know the answer, but "awards" does not include scholarship offers from other law schools, i presume? I just want H to know they should love me too haha
- mirroroferised7
- Posts: 616
- Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:35 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
So.... was it a BAD idea to send an LOCI with my updated LSAT if they haven't emailed me since early November, and I haven't emailed them?
- bhs12
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:03 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
How could information about a new score (assuming it was better) be detrimental to your application?mirroroferised7 wrote:So.... was it a BAD idea to send an LOCI with my updated LSAT if they haven't emailed me since early November, and I haven't emailed them?
-
- Posts: 1473
- Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:34 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
.
Last edited by NoDayButToday on Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- mirroroferised7
- Posts: 616
- Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:35 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
I guess, knowing that LSAC would directly send them the score, I am worried I would be bothering/annoying them.bhs12 wrote:How could information about a new score (assuming it was better) be detrimental to your application?mirroroferised7 wrote:So.... was it a BAD idea to send an LOCI with my updated LSAT if they haven't emailed me since early November, and I haven't emailed them?
-
- Posts: 538
- Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 4:06 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
My LOCI:NoDayButToday wrote:No, I think that was a good idea.mirroroferised7 wrote:So.... was it a BAD idea to send an LOCI with my updated LSAT if they haven't emailed me since early November, and I haven't emailed them?
I would love a really good excuse to send them a LOCI.
Dear Harvard,
I still think you're awesome because you are still awesome. I'm sorry if that didn't come through in my application or interview.
Sincerely,
Me
- bbkk
- Posts: 728
- Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:28 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
It's so quiet today. I'm bored at work.
JS:
JS:
- bhs12
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:03 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
mirroroferised7 wrote:I guess, knowing that LSAC would directly send them the score, I am worried I would be bothering/annoying them.bhs12 wrote:How could information about a new score (assuming it was better) be detrimental to your application?mirroroferised7 wrote:So.... was it a BAD idea to send an LOCI with my updated LSAT if they haven't emailed me since early November, and I haven't emailed them?
I figured that was your concern (and I completely understand it). With that said, given its determinative power in this process, ensuring that they're aware of an LSAT score improvement is worth the very small risk of annoyance. Also, it's perfectly reasonable, in my opinion anyways, to be proactive— particularly at this point in the cycle.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- bhs12
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:03 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
[quote="bbkk"]It's so quiet today. I'm bored at work.
JS:
[img]http://www.imagesbuddy.com/images/43/20 ... raphic.jpg[/img][/quote]
Call me* maybe?
*or email me with a JS1 request, as it were
JS:
[img]http://www.imagesbuddy.com/images/43/20 ... raphic.jpg[/img][/quote]
Call me* maybe?
*or email me with a JS1 request, as it were
- OMAR_COMIN_YO
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:10 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
So... I guess nothing is happening today. Cool then.
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
I kind of agree with you on that one. I've never worked in an admissions office, but there was a Spivey post recently that said AdComs get tons of stuff and you don't want to piss them off. I can't tell you what to do, but if it were me and I really wanted to send something I'd probably keep to a SUPER short e-mail kissing a little Boston behind and reminding them of your score.mirroroferised7 wrote:I guess, knowing that LSAC would directly send them the score, I am worried I would be bothering/annoying them.bhs12 wrote:How could information about a new score (assuming it was better) be detrimental to your application?mirroroferised7 wrote:So.... was it a BAD idea to send an LOCI with my updated LSAT if they haven't emailed me since early November, and I haven't emailed them?
"Dear Harvard: Thank you so much for everything you do to review our applications thoroughly. As the admissions cycle winds down and I consider my options, Harvard remains my top choice because BLAH. I am sure LSAC has sent you my improved LSAT score. I hope the committee will evaluate this favorably when reviewing my application" or whatever.
But I think if you have something really awesome to add to your app, that might change things. "Since submitting my application I have become the dean of Yale law school and cured cancer."
Just my two cents.
ETA Here's the spivey post http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/timing ... nd-timing/
- Cocoblues
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 10:18 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
IrishJew wrote:I kind of agree with you on that one. I've never worked in an admissions office, but there was a Spivey post recently that said AdComs get tons of stuff and you don't want to piss them off. I can't tell you what to do, but if it were me and I really wanted to send something I'd probably keep to a SUPER short e-mail kissing a little Boston behind and reminding them of your score.mirroroferised7 wrote:I guess, knowing that LSAC would directly send them the score, I am worried I would be bothering/annoying them.bhs12 wrote:How could information about a new score (assuming it was better) be detrimental to your application?mirroroferised7 wrote:So.... was it a BAD idea to send an LOCI with my updated LSAT if they haven't emailed me since early November, and I haven't emailed them?
"Dear Harvard: Thank you so much for everything you do to review our applications thoroughly. As the admissions cycle winds down and I consider my options, Harvard remains my top choice because BLAH. I am sure LSAC has sent you my improved LSAT score. I hope the committee will evaluate this favorably when reviewing my application" or whatever.
But I think if you have something really awesome to add to your app, that might change things. "Since submitting my application I have become the dean of Yale law school and cured cancer."
Just my two cents.
ETA Here's the spivey post http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/timing ... nd-timing/
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
- mirroroferised7
- Posts: 616
- Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:35 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Thanks! I had read the post. BUT I did turn the letter into a more fully-developed LOCI. I highlighted my super-PI-heavy npo job. Also, kissed MAJOR ass. MAJOR. MAJOR ass.IrishJew wrote:I kind of agree with you on that one. I've never worked in an admissions office, but there was a Spivey post recently that said AdComs get tons of stuff and you don't want to piss them off. I can't tell you what to do, but if it were me and I really wanted to send something I'd probably keep to a SUPER short e-mail kissing a little Boston behind and reminding them of your score.mirroroferised7 wrote:I guess, knowing that LSAC would directly send them the score, I am worried I would be bothering/annoying them.bhs12 wrote:
How could information about a new score (assuming it was better) be detrimental to your application?
"Dear Harvard: Thank you so much for everything you do to review our applications thoroughly. As the admissions cycle winds down and I consider my options, Harvard remains my top choice because BLAH. I am sure LSAC has sent you my improved LSAT score. I hope the committee will evaluate this favorably when reviewing my application" or whatever.
But I think if you have something really awesome to add to your app, that might change things. "Since submitting my application I have become the dean of Yale law school and cured cancer."
Just my two cents.
ETA Here's the spivey post http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/timing ... nd-timing/
- lawschool22
- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
I will be anxious to see if this works out, because it's almost in direct opposition to Spivey's advicemirroroferised7 wrote:Thanks! I had read the post. BUT I did turn the letter into a more fully-developed LOCI. I highlighted my super-PI-heavy npo job. Also, kissed MAJOR ass. MAJOR. MAJOR ass.IrishJew wrote:I kind of agree with you on that one. I've never worked in an admissions office, but there was a Spivey post recently that said AdComs get tons of stuff and you don't want to piss them off. I can't tell you what to do, but if it were me and I really wanted to send something I'd probably keep to a SUPER short e-mail kissing a little Boston behind and reminding them of your score.mirroroferised7 wrote:I guess, knowing that LSAC would directly send them the score, I am worried I would be bothering/annoying them.bhs12 wrote:
How could information about a new score (assuming it was better) be detrimental to your application?
"Dear Harvard: Thank you so much for everything you do to review our applications thoroughly. As the admissions cycle winds down and I consider my options, Harvard remains my top choice because BLAH. I am sure LSAC has sent you my improved LSAT score. I hope the committee will evaluate this favorably when reviewing my application" or whatever.
But I think if you have something really awesome to add to your app, that might change things. "Since submitting my application I have become the dean of Yale law school and cured cancer."
Just my two cents.
ETA Here's the spivey post http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/timing ... nd-timing/
- Leo
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:58 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Mirror, aren't you worried about outing yourself?
-
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:48 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
+1Leo wrote:Mirror, aren't you worried about outing yourself?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login