Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.

Where are you in the Harvard application process?

I'm applying next year, just reading this thread to prepare
38
12%
Applying this year, I got an extension on my application
1
0%
I applied and haven't gotten a JS1 yet
64
20%
I applied and got a JS1, but haven't had it yet.
7
2%
I had my JS1 but I'm waiting for a magical phone call
43
13%
Already had my JS2, just here to help
62
19%
Waitlisted
61
19%
Dinged D:
49
15%
 
Total votes: 325

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby drawstring » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:13 pm

Consensus seems to be that it doesn't, but this post suggests that retakes can have a negative impact.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=209878&hilit=

edwardt1988
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:59 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby edwardt1988 » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:21 pm

The-Specs wrote:
edwardt1988 wrote:Is there no column in the spreadsheet regarding the number of times people took the LSAT?

Any JS1s/JS2s with multiple LSATs, and what was the difference between the scores? If anyone is willing to share that information but doesn't want to do it here, you can PM me


I took it three times, 164, 162, 176.


That's pretty similar to mine, took it three times, twice under 170, last one 177. I really hope they'll at least give me an interview at one point. I have to drive by that place 3-4 times a week to go to work, that will be a really depressing drive over the next 9 months if I don't even get a js1, lol

User avatar
mindarmed
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:16 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby mindarmed » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:21 pm

there is no way retakes matter with the drop in applicants and even larger drop of 99th percentile LSAT scorers applying to schools.

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:23 pm

mindarmed wrote:there is no way retakes matter with the drop in applicants and even larger drop of 99th percentile LSAT scorers applying to schools.


This is what I'm thinking. Much of the data analyzed in that thread comes from before the decline in apps when schools could be much more picky about LSAT scores. They do not have that luxury this time around.

User avatar
jingosaur
Posts: 2195
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby jingosaur » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:24 pm

drawstring wrote:Consensus seems to be that it doesn't, but this post suggests that retakes can have a negative impact.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=209878&hilit=


Meh, I don't like how that study was done. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence of lower scores not mattering and I'm yet to find any anecdotal evidence of someone getting hurt by retakes at a school other than Yale and Stanford. I'm a 3 time LSAT taker so I may have a different opinion after my cycle is over.

armysgt
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:12 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby armysgt » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:38 pm

When an asst. director of admissions at HLS came to my school back in October for an info session, she explicitly stated that they only look at the top score, unless the applicant took it more than 3 times.

User avatar
The-Specs
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:55 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby The-Specs » Wed Dec 04, 2013 6:03 pm

armysgt wrote:When an asst. director of admissions at HLS came to my school back in October for an info session, she explicitly stated that they only look at the top score, unless the applicant took it more than 3 times.


Wow, my first time hearing this but this seems to back up what has been happening this cycle.

User avatar
jingosaur
Posts: 2195
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby jingosaur » Wed Dec 04, 2013 6:06 pm

The-Specs wrote:
armysgt wrote:When an asst. director of admissions at HLS came to my school back in October for an info session, she explicitly stated that they only look at the top score, unless the applicant took it more than 3 times.


Wow, my first time hearing this but this seems to back up what has been happening this cycle.


+1. This is very consistent with the data we're seeing. This also makes me very happy.

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby drawstring » Wed Dec 04, 2013 6:16 pm

In the link above various factors (e.g. LSAT, GPA, time of application) were controlled for, meaning that people who didn't retake generally had better outcomes than others who were highly similar but had retaken. Those findings may not reflect what's actually the case, but even if they do it doesn't mean that a retaken 173 is considered inferior or equal to a first take 171, or that someone with a retaken 176 and a solid GPA should prepare for a disappointing cycle.

Given the drop is applicants, especially high scoring ones, it seems like retaking might be less of an issue than it may have been in the past anyway.

NoDayButToday
Posts: 1031
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby NoDayButToday » Wed Dec 04, 2013 7:21 pm

.
Last edited by NoDayButToday on Sun Mar 20, 2016 1:40 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Howl
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:11 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Howl » Wed Dec 04, 2013 8:46 pm

Just my two cents, but could other variables have been at play as to why one-time takers were more likely to be admitted? The study controls for GPA, etc but it can't control for softs. Maybe the one-time takers tend to be more naturally brilliant in class and therefore tended to get a better rec on average from their retaking peers (i.e. Differences like "he is the best student I've taught in my thirty years" vs "he is a top student"). Or maybe one-time takers tend to have slightly better PSs, or extracurric activities? These are less likely, but possible factors...

Not implying that one-time takers are inherently better or that retakers are not brilliant - just throwing my thoughts out into the open :)

Kimikho
Posts: 3971
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Kimikho » Wed Dec 04, 2013 8:59 pm

Howl wrote:Just my two cents, but could other variables have been at play as to why one-time takers were more likely to be admitted? The study controls for GPA, etc but it can't control for softs. Maybe the one-time takers tend to be more naturally brilliant in class and therefore tended to get a better rec on average from their retaking peers (i.e. Differences like "he is the best student I've taught in my thirty years" vs "he is a top student"). Or maybe one-time takers tend to have slightly better PSs, or extracurric activities? These are less likely, but possible factors...

Not implying that one-time takers are inherently better or that retakers are not brilliant - just throwing my thoughts out into the open :)


i actually would think it would be the opposite. retakers usually end up taking time off i've noticed.

somuchwaiting
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:00 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby somuchwaiting » Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:29 pm

Does anyone know the actual statistics about the decline in applicants/high LSAT scorers? Or is it just general knowledge that numbers for both have decreased?

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby drawstring » Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:45 pm

Per Spivey, here are some LSAT statistics for applicants who matriculated in 2013:

Highest LSAT
Number of Applicants
Pct Chg YTD
< 140 5,016 -0.5%
140–144 6,114 -7.2%
145–149 9,439 -7.4%
150–154 11,430 -10.6%
155–159 10,920 -15.9%
160–164 7,913 -15.0%
165–169 4,967 -16.1%
170–174 1,995 -24.6%
175–180 534 -20.7%

I'm liking those drops at the top 8)

somuchwaiting
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:00 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby somuchwaiting » Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:53 pm

drawstring wrote:Per Spivey, here are some LSAT statistics for applicants who matriculated in 2013:

Highest LSAT
Number of Applicants
Pct Chg YTD
< 140 5,016 -0.5%
140–144 6,114 -7.2%
145–149 9,439 -7.4%
150–154 11,430 -10.6%
155–159 10,920 -15.9%
160–164 7,913 -15.0%
165–169 4,967 -16.1%
170–174 1,995 -24.6%
175–180 534 -20.7%


I'm liking those drops at the top 8)


That is HUGE! Thank you!

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:54 pm

drawstring wrote:Per Spivey, here are some LSAT statistics for applicants who matriculated in 2013:

Highest LSAT
Number of Applicants
Pct Chg YTD
< 140 5,016 -0.5%
140–144 6,114 -7.2%
145–149 9,439 -7.4%
150–154 11,430 -10.6%
155–159 10,920 -15.9%
160–164 7,913 -15.0%
165–169 4,967 -16.1%
170–174 1,995 -24.6%
175–180 534 -20.7%

I'm liking those drops at the top 8)


Amen

User avatar
jingosaur
Posts: 2195
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby jingosaur » Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:57 pm

drawstring wrote:Per Spivey, here are some LSAT statistics for applicants who matriculated in 2013:

Highest LSAT
Number of Applicants
Pct Chg YTD
< 140 5,016 -0.5%
140–144 6,114 -7.2%
145–149 9,439 -7.4%
150–154 11,430 -10.6%
155–159 10,920 -15.9%
160–164 7,913 -15.0%
165–169 4,967 -16.1%
170–174 1,995 -24.6%
175–180 534 -20.7%

I'm liking those drops at the top 8)


Over 5000 people with sub-140 LSAT scores were accepted to and matriculated in ABA certified law schools. Whoa.

btmoney84
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:25 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby btmoney84 » Wed Dec 04, 2013 10:04 pm

Howl wrote:Just my two cents, but could other variables have been at play as to why one-time takers were more likely to be admitted? The study controls for GPA, etc but it can't control for softs. Maybe the one-time takers tend to be more naturally brilliant in class and therefore tended to get a better rec on average from their retaking peers (i.e. Differences like "he is the best student I've taught in my thirty years" vs "he is a top student"). Or maybe one-time takers tend to have slightly better PSs, or extracurric activities? These are less likely, but possible factors...

Not implying that one-time takers are inherently better or that retakers are not brilliant - just throwing my thoughts out into the open :)

What you would have to do is cluster. You would find people who are statistically similar in terms of GPA and softs, but one would have taken the LSAT multiple times, whereas the other only once. This would show the true difference, but could still be slightly biased due to tendencies that control unknown factors, such as quality of LOR's or quality personal statements.
For example, someone who was able to take the time to study enough for the LSAT so that they only had to take it once may be willing to (or simply able to) put more time into the other components of the application. This could bias the effect of the retake, but you would expect it to be minimal.

No matter what regression you run, it isn't going to be 100% accurate, but some will be pretty darn close.

User avatar
Howl
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:11 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Howl » Wed Dec 04, 2013 10:29 pm

btmoney84 wrote:
Howl wrote:Just my two cents, but could other variables have been at play as to why one-time takers were more likely to be admitted? The study controls for GPA, etc but it can't control for softs. Maybe the one-time takers tend to be more naturally brilliant in class and therefore tended to get a better rec on average from their retaking peers (i.e. Differences like "he is the best student I've taught in my thirty years" vs "he is a top student"). Or maybe one-time takers tend to have slightly better PSs, or extracurric activities? These are less likely, but possible factors...

Not implying that one-time takers are inherently better or that retakers are not brilliant - just throwing my thoughts out into the open :)

What you would have to do is cluster. You would find people who are statistically similar in terms of GPA and softs, but one would have taken the LSAT multiple times, whereas the other only once. This would show the true difference, but could still be slightly biased due to tendencies that control unknown factors, such as quality of LOR's or quality personal statements.
For example, someone who was able to take the time to study enough for the LSAT so that they only had to take it once may be willing to (or simply able to) put more time into the other components of the application. This could bias the effect of the retake, but you would expect it to be minimal.

No matter what regression you run, it isn't going to be 100% accurate, but some will be pretty darn close.


Right, it will never be exact because no one has the exact same set of softs... 8) But I would love to see more detailed regressions too. Now if we just could get every single applicant/matriculant from 2010-2012 to fess up their softs on lsn! :mrgreen:

Ah well, as a 3-time taker myself, I'm just happy that H has basically come out and said they only consider the top score.

User avatar
midwest17
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby midwest17 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 1:45 am

btmoney84 wrote:
Howl wrote:Just my two cents, but could other variables have been at play as to why one-time takers were more likely to be admitted? The study controls for GPA, etc but it can't control for softs. Maybe the one-time takers tend to be more naturally brilliant in class and therefore tended to get a better rec on average from their retaking peers (i.e. Differences like "he is the best student I've taught in my thirty years" vs "he is a top student"). Or maybe one-time takers tend to have slightly better PSs, or extracurric activities? These are less likely, but possible factors...

Not implying that one-time takers are inherently better or that retakers are not brilliant - just throwing my thoughts out into the open :)

What you would have to do is cluster. You would find people who are statistically similar in terms of GPA and softs, but one would have taken the LSAT multiple times, whereas the other only once. This would show the true difference, but could still be slightly biased due to tendencies that control unknown factors, such as quality of LOR's or quality personal statements.
For example, someone who was able to take the time to study enough for the LSAT so that they only had to take it once may be willing to (or simply able to) put more time into the other components of the application. This could bias the effect of the retake, but you would expect it to be minimal.

No matter what regression you run, it isn't going to be 100% accurate, but some will be pretty darn close.


I'm not sure why you would, a priori, expect the effect of a strong PS or strong LORs to be smaller than the effect of multiple LSATs. The point is that we simply don't have the data to put together a compelling design that answers this question.

User avatar
Pishee77
Posts: 238
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:14 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Pishee77 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 1:59 am

jingosaur wrote:
drawstring wrote:Per Spivey, here are some LSAT statistics for applicants who matriculated in 2013:

Highest LSAT
Number of Applicants
Pct Chg YTD
< 140 5,016 -0.5%
140–144 6,114 -7.2%
145–149 9,439 -7.4%
150–154 11,430 -10.6%
155–159 10,920 -15.9%
160–164 7,913 -15.0%
165–169 4,967 -16.1%
170–174 1,995 -24.6%
175–180 534 -20.7%

I'm liking those drops at the top 8)


Over 5000 people with sub-140 LSAT scores were accepted to and matriculated in ABA certified law schools. Whoa.
That's scary.

Is this difference between 2012 and 2013 or 2009 and 2013?
I wonder what kind of drop this cycle will have.

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby drawstring » Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:18 am

Pishee77 wrote:
jingosaur wrote:
drawstring wrote:Per Spivey, here are some LSAT statistics for applicants who matriculated in 2013:

Highest LSAT
Number of Applicants
Pct Chg YTD
< 140 5,016 -0.5%
140–144 6,114 -7.2%
145–149 9,439 -7.4%
150–154 11,430 -10.6%
155–159 10,920 -15.9%
160–164 7,913 -15.0%
165–169 4,967 -16.1%
170–174 1,995 -24.6%
175–180 534 -20.7%

I'm liking those drops at the top 8)


Over 5000 people with sub-140 LSAT scores were accepted to and matriculated in ABA certified law schools. Whoa.
That's scary.

Is this difference between 2012 and 2013 or 2009 and 2013?
I wonder what kind of drop this cycle will have.


Difference between the LSATs of those matriculating in 2013 vs 2012.

User avatar
Pishee77
Posts: 238
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:14 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Pishee77 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:30 am

drawstring wrote:
Pishee77 wrote:
jingosaur wrote:
drawstring wrote:Per Spivey, here are some LSAT statistics for applicants who matriculated in 2013:

Highest LSAT
Number of Applicants
Pct Chg YTD
< 140 5,016 -0.5%
140–144 6,114 -7.2%
145–149 9,439 -7.4%
150–154 11,430 -10.6%
155–159 10,920 -15.9%
160–164 7,913 -15.0%
165–169 4,967 -16.1%
170–174 1,995 -24.6%
175–180 534 -20.7%

I'm liking those drops at the top 8)


Over 5000 people with sub-140 LSAT scores were accepted to and matriculated in ABA certified law schools. Whoa.
That's scary.

Is this difference between 2012 and 2013 or 2009 and 2013?
I wonder what kind of drop this cycle will have.


Difference between the LSATs of those matriculating in 2013 vs 2012.
Cray.

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby drawstring » Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:44 am

Yep, and test-takers were down again this year, so there's a good chance of another drop-off in high scoring applicants. Spivey recently said that schools are in a 'free for all' for LSATs of 173 and over, which bodes well for many of us.

Crazy to think there were about 2x as many people matriculating with LSATs under 140 than with 170+ LSATs; shows you how unrepresentative this forum is.

User avatar
Howl
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:11 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Howl » Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:43 am

drawstring wrote:Yep, and test-takers were down again this year, so there's a good chance of another drop-off in high scoring applicants. Spivey recently said that schools are in a 'free for all' for LSATs of 173 and over, which bodes well for many of us.


Woohooo




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 20171lhopeful, canafsa, mccracal, MSNbot Media, NotAGolfer, okf731 and 15 guests