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

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

Postby lawschool22 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:06 pm

IrishJew wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:
Leo wrote:Here is the percentage of those who had JS1s that have been accepted (eg, of the 22 applicants who are below both medians and had JS1s, 7 (32%) have been accepted):

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 32%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 52%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 50%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 73%


This is the one I've been wondering but haven't had the time to calculate. It shows how the distribution of the 850/1200 JS1->JS2 folks is not evenly distributed.


Certainly looks that way. AEBE low numbers make you a long shot even if you get an interview (not getting into causation here). But I'm wondering how much of this is more indicative of haste than final decision? I mean, maybe they just admit the high numbers faster/earlier and they will take a disproportionately larger share of lower numbers in later rounds (because they already accepted the good numbered people they want). In other words, how different do you think these numbers will look in May?


I think haste is playing some role, but we'll still see a disparity among these groups. I expect all of these to increase a bit. I would be shocked if the above/above people didn't get accepted at a rate a fair amount greater than the overall rate (850/1200 = 70%) to offset the people at the below/below level getting accepted below this rate. I could see something like a 40%/60%/60%/80% breakdown when it's all said and done.

IrishJew
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

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

Postby IrishJew » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:15 pm

lawschool22 wrote:
IrishJew wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:
Leo wrote:Here is the percentage of those who had JS1s that have been accepted (eg, of the 22 applicants who are below both medians and had JS1s, 7 (32%) have been accepted):

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 32%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 52%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 50%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 73%


This is the one I've been wondering but haven't had the time to calculate. It shows how the distribution of the 850/1200 JS1->JS2 folks is not evenly distributed.


Certainly looks that way. AEBE low numbers make you a long shot even if you get an interview (not getting into causation here). But I'm wondering how much of this is more indicative of haste than final decision? I mean, maybe they just admit the high numbers faster/earlier and they will take a disproportionately larger share of lower numbers in later rounds (because they already accepted the good numbered people they want). In other words, how different do you think these numbers will look in May?


I think haste is playing some role, but we'll still see a disparity among these groups. I expect all of these to increase a bit. I would be shocked if the above/above people didn't get accepted at a rate a fair amount greater than the overall rate (850/1200 = 70%) to offset the people at the below/below level getting accepted below this rate. I could see something like a 40%/60%/60%/80% breakdown when it's all said and done.


I'm not so sure about that, because aren't we looking at a pre-selected pool (people who got JS1s)? The top scorers already get more JS1s (at least, they have so far). Surely we could imagine a system where once you get the JS1 that means Harvard has already decided you have Harvard potential on paper and it then comes down to the interview. Would it be crazy if the stats indicated that 100 75/75 people got interviews and 70 got in while 10 25/25 people got interviews and 7 got in?

In practice, though, I doubt it works this way. When they invite you there must be longer shots and shorter shots and maybe the interview bar is set higher for low-scoring candidates. (For someone who is Yale-worthy the Harvard interview is probably sometimes a formality), but clearly the low-scorers who get interviews must have some reasonable chance, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if the numbers began to come closer together as the cycle wears on.

LawSchoolOrNah
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:33 pm

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

Postby LawSchoolOrNah » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:24 pm

I'm sure this may be a tad bit far-fetched given the variety in available interview appointments, but has anyone bothered to explore the possibility of a correlation between the numbers of a particular individual and the interviewer he/she receives? Or the interviewer and the rate of acceptances?

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, just curious.

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

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

Postby lawschool22 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:26 pm

IrishJew wrote:
I'm not so sure about that, because aren't we looking at a pre-selected pool (people who got JS1s)? The top scorers already get more JS1s (at least, they have so far). Surely we could imagine a system where once you get the JS1 that means Harvard has already decided you have Harvard potential on paper and it then comes down to the interview. Would it be crazy if the stats indicated that 100 75/75 people got interviews and 70 got in while 10 25/25 people got interviews and 7 got in?

In practice, though, I doubt it works this way. When they invite you there must be longer shots and shorter shots and maybe the interview bar is set higher for low-scoring candidates. (For someone who is Yale-worthy the Harvard interview is probably sometimes a formality), but clearly the low-scorers who get interviews must have some reasonable chance, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if the numbers began to come closer together as the cycle wears on.


Fair point, and I guess it depends on the overall numbers of people who fall into each category. If you have 1200 JS1's, and 1,050 are above/above, then yeah, you could have a scenario where 62% get JS2's (650). Then the other three categories would have 50 people each, with 100% of those individuals getting a JS2. So it could work out mathematically. I guess I just don't see that happening en masse. For the above/above people to be under 70% you have to expect some pretty high rates of acceptance in the non above/above people.

I think it's more likely that there are fewer above/above, but that they have really high rates of acceptance, which offset the lower rates among the above/below and below/below people.

User avatar
FuriousDuck
Posts: 507
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:33 pm

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

Postby FuriousDuck » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:30 pm

...
Last edited by FuriousDuck on Fri Feb 21, 2014 4:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

IrishJew
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

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

Postby IrishJew » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:30 pm

LawSchoolOrNah wrote:I'm sure this may be a tad bit far-fetched given the variety in available interview appointments, but has anyone bothered to explore [1] the possibility of a correlation between the numbers of a particular individual and [2] the interviewer he/she receives? Or the interviewer and the rate of acceptances?

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, just curious.


I strongly suspect 1 is meaningless, but that's just a hunch.

I wonder about 2 myself. I think someone mentioned a few pages back ITT that KB mentioned there was no goal of acceptance parity between interviewers. though I'd be surprised if the team didn't have any kind of discussion about what they are looking for/training on whom to admit. Another possibility, much harder if not impossible to measure, is how different people fare with different interviewers. Given that a fifteen-minute "click" could make or break your app (not to mention save you 15% or more on car insurance), it would be an interesting experiment for the office to have a random group of 10 people interview with each interviewer and see how their evaluations compare. I'd be shocked if they matched up perfectly.

IrishJew
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

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

Postby IrishJew » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:35 pm

lawschool22 wrote:
IrishJew wrote:
I'm not so sure about that, because aren't we looking at a pre-selected pool (people who got JS1s)? The top scorers already get more JS1s (at least, they have so far). Surely we could imagine a system where once you get the JS1 that means Harvard has already decided you have Harvard potential on paper and it then comes down to the interview. Would it be crazy if the stats indicated that 100 75/75 people got interviews and 70 got in while 10 25/25 people got interviews and 7 got in?

In practice, though, I doubt it works this way. When they invite you there must be longer shots and shorter shots and maybe the interview bar is set higher for low-scoring candidates. (For someone who is Yale-worthy the Harvard interview is probably sometimes a formality), but clearly the low-scorers who get interviews must have some reasonable chance, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if the numbers began to come closer together as the cycle wears on.


Fair point, and I guess it depends on the overall numbers of people who fall into each category. If you have 1200 JS1's, and 1,050 are above/above, then yeah, you could have a scenario where 62% get JS2's (650). Then the other three categories would have 50 people each, with 100% of those individuals getting a JS2. So it could work out mathematically. I guess I just don't see that happening en masse. For the above/above people to be under 70% you have to expect some pretty high rates of acceptance in the non above/above people.

I think it's more likely that there are fewer above/above, but that they have really high rates of acceptance, which offset the lower rates among the above/below and below/below people.


Yeah, it would take more granular analysis about the total pool than we have access to, I was just pointing out that because the JS1s are a pre-selected group that already favors high scores it's theoretically possible that the JS1 to JS2 conversion rate isn't super skewed. It sounds like we both agree on the theory there, but I have no clue how it really works out in practice. (It's also totally possible that "interview skill" is correlated with high scoring, which would be another point in favor of your hypothesis.) Like I said, I'll be curious to see these numbers in May.

User avatar
FuriousDuck
Posts: 507
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:33 pm

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

Postby FuriousDuck » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:40 pm

...
Last edited by FuriousDuck on Fri Feb 21, 2014 4:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

LawSchoolOrNah
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:33 pm

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

Postby LawSchoolOrNah » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:46 pm

IrishJew wrote:
LawSchoolOrNah wrote:I'm sure this may be a tad bit far-fetched given the variety in available interview appointments, but has anyone bothered to explore [1] the possibility of a correlation between the numbers of a particular individual and [2] the interviewer he/she receives? Or the interviewer and the rate of acceptances?

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, just curious.


I strongly suspect 1 is meaningless, but that's just a hunch.

I wonder about 2 myself. I think someone mentioned a few pages back ITT that KB mentioned there was no goal of acceptance parity between interviewers. though I'd be surprised if the team didn't have any kind of discussion about what they are looking for/training on whom to admit. Another possibility, much harder if not impossible to measure, is how different people fare with different interviewers. Given that a fifteen-minute "click" could make or break your app (not to mention save you 15% or more on car insurance), it would be an interesting experiment for the office to have a random group of 10 people interview with each interviewer and see how their evaluations compare. I'd be shocked if they matched up perfectly.


Just wanted to let you know I think you deserve to be accepted (if you haven't been already).

That being said, yeah, I'm a bit curious myself. There's been such variance in interview experiences with certain interviewers, but I guess you have to attribute some of that to personality differences. We'll see.

User avatar
Leo
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:58 pm

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

Postby Leo » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:50 pm

By the way, these stats do not include 11 applicants that were accepted because they failed to enter the date of their JS1 request and their JS1 itself. Interestingly, 9 of those 11 were above at least one median, and 6 of them were above both medians. Evidently, people with high GPA and/or LSAT can't follow directions :P

Leo wrote:Okay friends, even more useless stats!

Here is just a general breakdown of the TLS applicant pool:

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 26%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 33%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 18%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 23%

As you can see, pretty even distribution.

For each group, here is the percentage that have received JS1s so far (eg, 34% of the applicants represented on TLS who are below both medians have received JS1s):

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 34%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 62%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 55%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 77%

The average wait time, in days from complete, for those JS1s by group is as follows:

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 30.2
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 17.1
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 15.1
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 11.0

As expected, those with better stats are receiving their JS1 requests much earlier.

Here is the percentage of those who had JS1s that have been accepted (eg, of the 22 applicants who are below both medians and had JS1s, 7 (32%) have been accepted):

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 32%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 52%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 50%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 73%

The average wait time, in days after JS1, for those acceptances by group is as follows:

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 30.0
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 23.8
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 25.2
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 24.1

Enjoy!

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

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

Postby lawschool22 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:54 pm

Leo wrote:By the way, these stats do not include 11 applicants that were accepted because they failed to enter the date of their JS1 request and their JS1 itself. Interestingly, 9 of those 11 were above at least one median, and 6 of them were above both medians. Evidently, people with high GPA and/or LSAT can't follow directions :P

Leo wrote:Okay friends, even more useless stats!

Here is just a general breakdown of the TLS applicant pool:

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 26%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 33%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 18%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 23%

As you can see, pretty even distribution.

For each group, here is the percentage that have received JS1s so far (eg, 34% of the applicants represented on TLS who are below both medians have received JS1s):

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 34%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 62%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 55%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 77%

The average wait time, in days from complete, for those JS1s by group is as follows:

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 30.2
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 17.1
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 15.1
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 11.0

As expected, those with better stats are receiving their JS1 requests much earlier.

Here is the percentage of those who had JS1s that have been accepted (eg, of the 22 applicants who are below both medians and had JS1s, 7 (32%) have been accepted):

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 32%
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 52%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 50%
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 73%

The average wait time, in days after JS1, for those acceptances by group is as follows:

    GPA<3.88 / LSAT<173 = 30.0
    GPA<3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 23.8
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT<173 = 25.2
    GPA>=3.88 / LSAT>=173 = 24.1

Enjoy!


Or they are super paranoid (see: frozen in the HLS c/o 2017 thread). :D

User avatar
barrelofmonkeys
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:41 pm

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

Postby barrelofmonkeys » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:50 pm

On days like this, when you all are being crazy (I mean this lovingly), I like to walk away from TLS and pretend that Harvard doesn't even exist.

User avatar
chneyo
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 7:46 pm

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

Postby chneyo » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:54 pm

...
Last edited by chneyo on Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

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

Postby lawschool22 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:22 pm

barrelofmonkeys wrote:On days like this, when you all are being crazy (I mean this lovingly), I like to walk away from TLS and pretend that Harvard doesn't even exist.


Was wondering where you were. Glad to see we didn't scare you away for too long.

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

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

Postby NoDayButToday » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:23 pm

.
Last edited by NoDayButToday on Fri Apr 15, 2016 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
barrelofmonkeys
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:41 pm

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

Postby barrelofmonkeys » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:23 pm

lawschool22 wrote:
barrelofmonkeys wrote:On days like this, when you all are being crazy (I mean this lovingly), I like to walk away from TLS and pretend that Harvard doesn't even exist.


Was wondering where you were. Glad to see we didn't scare you away for too long.


I can't quit this thread.

User avatar
Typhoon24
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 2:09 pm

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

Postby Typhoon24 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:27 pm

chneyo wrote:
barrelofmonkeys wrote:On days like this, when you all are being crazy (I mean this lovingly), I like to walk away from TLS and pretend that Harvard doesn't even exist.


Image


LOL

manu6926
Posts: 285
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 9:05 pm

...

Postby manu6926 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:59 pm

...
Last edited by manu6926 on Sun May 25, 2014 10:38 am, edited 2 times in total.

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

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

Postby lawschool22 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:24 pm

IF YOU WANT ACCESS TO THE SPREADSHEET, FILL OUT THIS GOOGLE FORM:


https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Ldw-ZoSkeML_oXXxzJt_VIAkme12VHauYSMsuY3YMks/viewform

User avatar
kershka
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm

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

Postby kershka » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:44 pm

jy9626 wrote:I got my JS1 today!! I hope I won't panic in front of my laptop

Congrats! Go fill out LS22's form in the post right after yours so that you can update the spreadsheet :D

User avatar
pseu
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:40 pm

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

Postby pseu » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:55 pm

I don't know about you
But I want a JS2

Everything will be alright
If JS calls me in a day or two

You haven't made an offer to me
But I'll bet you want to

Everything will be alright
If you just call me up for a

JS2, ooh-ooh
JS2, ooh-ooh

if it's not apparent I'm losing my mind

IrishJew
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

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

Postby IrishJew » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:00 pm

pseu wrote:I don't know about you
But I want a JS2

Everything will be alright
If JS calls me in a day or two

You haven't made an offer to me
But I'll bet you want to

Everything will be alright
If you just call me up for a

JS2, ooh-ooh
JS2, ooh-ooh

if it's not apparent I'm losing my mind


A green frog just told me he's going crazy in the HLS thread. Should I be worried that I'm losing it?

User avatar
pseu
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:40 pm

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

Postby pseu » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:05 pm

IrishJew wrote:
pseu wrote:I don't know about you
But I want a JS2

Everything will be alright
If JS calls me in a day or two

You haven't made an offer to me
But I'll bet you want to

Everything will be alright
If you just call me up for a

JS2, ooh-ooh
JS2, ooh-ooh

if it's not apparent I'm losing my mind


A green frog just told me he's going crazy in the HLS thread. Should I be worried that I'm losing it?


Don't worry, I'm not actually a green frog, I just play one on the internet.

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

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

Postby lawschool22 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:18 pm

pseu wrote:
IrishJew wrote:
pseu wrote:I don't know about you
But I want a JS2

Everything will be alright
If JS calls me in a day or two

You haven't made an offer to me
But I'll bet you want to

Everything will be alright
If you just call me up for a

JS2, ooh-ooh
JS2, ooh-ooh

if it's not apparent I'm losing my mind


A green frog just told me he's going crazy in the HLS thread. Should I be worried that I'm losing it?


Don't worry, I'm not actually a green frog, I just play one on the internet.


Whew.

User avatar
FuriousDuck
Posts: 507
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:33 pm

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

Postby FuriousDuck » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:30 pm

...
Last edited by FuriousDuck on Fri Feb 21, 2014 4:33 am, edited 1 time in total.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baby Gaga, BACsop, Baidu [Spider], lillawyer2 and 6 guests