2013-2014 Admissions Spreadsheets

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
redsoxfan1989
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby redsoxfan1989 » Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:58 pm

Where does paralegal for V10 biglaw firm rank?

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby Kimikho » Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:58 pm

iamgeorgebush wrote:
scoobers wrote:
iamgeorgebush wrote:
kwu wrote:"Highly Unique" : Rhodes
"Above Average" : Marshall/Gates/Fulbright/Truman; MBB Consulting/bulge bracket Investment Banking
"Average" : student government, student newspaper, neighborhood outreach, fund raising
"Below Average" : one or two of "average," internships at no-name firms revealing lack of focus
"Weak" : few to no ECs, few to no internships

Eh, you make it seem like adcoms only care about brand names. From everything I've heard and read, an interesting story goes a lot further than having all the right checkboxes marked (excluding the LSAT and GPA checkboxes). You're leaving out all kinds of uncommon softs like "Sommelier at a Michelin starred restaurant" that, paired with a compelling personal statement, could strengthen an application more than stuff like consulting and i-banking.

-_______-

what is your list then

"Highly Unique" : Rhodes, founder of a nonprofit/startup, chef at a Michelin starred restaurant, NFL player, published novelist, etc.
"Above Average" : Marshall/Gates/Fulbright/Truman, MBB Consulting/bulge bracket Investment Banking, production assistant at CNN, paralegal at the ACLU, software engineer at a venture-funded startup, officer of a state or national student organization, etc.
"Average" : student government, student newspaper, neighborhood outreach, fund raising, officer at a student club or two, etc. (some combination of at least three of these)
"Below Average" : one or two of "average" internships at no-name firms revealing lack of focus
"Weak" : few to no ECs/internships , few to no internships


- what about K-JD who work during school?
- there is no time commitment here. a student could hold one student gov position at 20 hours a week, or he/she could edit the school newspaper once a week, participate in a committee, and be and an officer for a club, all only coming to like, 3 hours a week.

User avatar
iamgeorgebush
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby iamgeorgebush » Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:44 pm

scoobers wrote:- what about K-JD who work during school?
- there is no time commitment here. a student could hold one student gov position at 20 hours a week, or he/she could edit the school newspaper once a week, participate in a committee, and be and an officer for a club, all only coming to like, 3 hours a week.

1. I'd place K-JD who work during school probably as either average or above average, depending on the amount of work per week (two shifts per week at a the campus convenience store would probably be average, but full-time work would definitely be above average).

2. Yeah, but a lot of schools don't ask for time commitment on their apps (some do, of course). As far as UG ECs go, I think the best way to distinguish them (for the sake of these spreadsheets) would be not through number of hours (how could an adcom verify number of hours anyway?), but rather based on responsibilities and accomplishments as expressed in the resume and conveyed through the PS/DS/etc...because that's what the adcoms will be seeing.

Obviously I'm a 0L though, and these are just opinions based on my research...
Last edited by iamgeorgebush on Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:48 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
iamgeorgebush
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby iamgeorgebush » Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:46 pm

redsoxfan1989 wrote:Where does paralegal for V10 biglaw firm rank?

Dunno, above average, assuming good college ECs and a compelling PS?

User avatar
iamgeorgebush
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby iamgeorgebush » Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:53 pm

I think there's a deeper issue, though. Maybe I'm wrong, but my impression is that much of the significance of softs derives from the way an applicant ties them into a compelling PS/DS/250/etc., so looking at them in a "checklist" sort of way is flawed.

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby Kimikho » Mon Nov 18, 2013 11:18 pm

iamgeorgebush wrote:I think there's a deeper issue, though. Maybe I'm wrong, but my impression is that much of the significance of softs derives from the way an applicant ties them into a compelling PS/DS/250/etc., so looking at them in a "checklist" sort of way is flawed.


then why is it a problem if the majority of people on TLS think their softs are average or above average? we're a well-educated group.

User avatar
nothingtosee
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby nothingtosee » Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:03 am

I would add military/peace corps/Tfa to above average.

User avatar
iamgeorgebush
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby iamgeorgebush » Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:18 am

scoobers wrote:
iamgeorgebush wrote:I think there's a deeper issue, though. Maybe I'm wrong, but my impression is that much of the significance of softs derives from the way an applicant ties them into a compelling PS/DS/250/etc., so looking at them in a "checklist" sort of way is flawed.


then why is it a problem if the majority of people on TLS think their softs are average or above average? we're a well-educated group.

I don't know...it's really the K-JD people I'm skeptical of. I mean come on, there's no way 75% of CLS K-JD applicants, even the ones who put their numbers in that spreadsheet, have above average softs (and remember, for any given school, we're talking about above average softs for applicants to that school, not above average softs for Cooley applicants or LS applicants in general).

Also, well-educated/high numbers ≠ above average softs. I have no doubt TSLers have way better numbers than the typical applicant, but softs? Eh.

nothingtosee wrote:I would add military/peace corps/Tfa to above average.

Yeah I'd def agree with that. This is the problem with the "checklist" approach, though. There are a billion things that could qualify someone as "above average." White House intern? CPA? Florist? Cobbler? All these things, with the right PS, could be "above average," and there are so many other things that they'd be too numerous to list. I doubt even admissions officers could give a good answer as to what exactly qualifies each category, even if they were injected with truth serum.

User avatar
iamgeorgebush
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby iamgeorgebush » Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:21 am

This answer of Karen's from another thread may be of interst, though:

KarenButtenbaum wrote:
dcpanther wrote:Karen,

Apologies if this has been asked ad nauseum, but during your time at HLS what are some of the more memorable examples of "soft" factors that caused you to overlook or think twice about an applicant with lower numbers?


It is asked a lot, and I'm sorry to say that there really is no satisfactory answer.
In almost every case, at least one of the numbers indicated potential success in law school (splitters or reverse splitters).
Because the answers are so incredibly specific to the individual applicant, I think it is more helpful to reply with more general categories.
--> Overcoming something extreme in their life (extreme poverty, family issues, illness or amputation, etc.) with the right attitude. That last bit is important - don't invite us to your pity party.
--> Really smart second career folks whose first career didn't really need a college degree. The late bloomers for whom the LSAT is the first standardized test they've ever taken
--> Success in another area (great work experience, Olympic medalist, member of successful rock band

I'm sure I'm missing something, but I hope this is helpful!
Cheers,
karen

User avatar
neprep
Posts: 1066
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby neprep » Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:06 am

iamgeorgebush wrote:This answer of Karen's from another thread may be of interst, though:

KarenButtenbaum wrote:
dcpanther wrote:Karen,

Apologies if this has been asked ad nauseum, but during your time at HLS what are some of the more memorable examples of "soft" factors that caused you to overlook or think twice about an applicant with lower numbers?


It is asked a lot, and I'm sorry to say that there really is no satisfactory answer.
In almost every case, at least one of the numbers indicated potential success in law school (splitters or reverse splitters).
Because the answers are so incredibly specific to the individual applicant, I think it is more helpful to reply with more general categories.
--> Overcoming something extreme in their life (extreme poverty, family issues, illness or amputation, etc.) with the right attitude. That last bit is important - don't invite us to your pity party.
--> Really smart second career folks whose first career didn't really need a college degree. The late bloomers for whom the LSAT is the first standardized test they've ever taken
--> Success in another area (great work experience, Olympic medalist, member of successful rock band

I'm sure I'm missing something, but I hope this is helpful!
Cheers,
karen


"Average" and "Above Average" softs are never going to help you overcome poor numbers; here's where "highly unique" comes into play. What Karen remembers over her many years at HLS isn't really indicative of what's "above average," right? I mean obviously I'll remember if Beyoncé sends in her application, but I'll forget 20 impressive veterans whom I admitted but then promptly forgot about.

I see no issue that the spreadsheets have a high percentage of K-JDs thinking their softs are above average: TLS is populated with Type-A gunners. In this group, I wouldn't be surprised if 75% of us were at some point the president of a student organization, the captain of a varsity team, head of the student government, or class president for two years in a row. I'd be more concerned that people were deluded if there were a high percentage of posters who identified their softs to be "highly unique."

User avatar
wowhio
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby wowhio » Wed Nov 20, 2013 4:26 pm

The EC problem was going to happen regardless. Illusory superiority!

80% of people think they're above average drivers. Which is impossible. Same sorta deal here.

I don't think it's that concerning. ECs don't make a big difference anyway. Maybe it would be better even to just simplify it: "Do you have stand-out extracurriculars?" Yes/No

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby barrelofmonkeys » Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:21 pm

tag

04102014
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:42 am

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby 04102014 » Thu Nov 21, 2013 2:26 pm

There's no URM tab on the GULC sheet, just a head's up.

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby Pishee77 » Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:43 pm

Is there any way we can have these links in a new topic in the accept, waitlist, deny forum too? I feel like more people would input their stats and results!

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby lawschool22 » Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:47 pm

Yeah I sort of feel like that's probably the best forum for this. Mods?

User avatar
phillywc
Posts: 3043
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:17 am

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby phillywc » Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:16 pm

I put average or below average on most of the spreadsheets as a K-JD who works 40 hours a week in a management capacity. I also have one other fairly unique soft that might out me but many of of yall know. I feel like TLSers overstate the value of their softs.

Or i'm underselling myself idk

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby Kimikho » Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:17 pm

phillywc wrote:I put average or below average on most of the spreadsheets as a K-JD who works 40 hours a week in a management capacity. I also have one other fairly unique soft that might out me but many of of yall know. I feel like TLSers overstate the value of their softs.

Or i'm underselling myself idk

User avatar
jk148706
Posts: 2499
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 11:14 am

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby jk148706 » Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:21 pm

TLSers overvalue themselves.

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby Kimikho » Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:42 pm

thread moved and stickied! :mrgreen:

User avatar
phillywc
Posts: 3043
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:17 am

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby phillywc » Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:44 pm

scoobers wrote:
phillywc wrote:I put average or below average on most of the spreadsheets as a K-JD who works 40 hours a week in a management capacity. I also have one other fairly unique soft that might out me but many of of yall know. I feel like TLSers overstate the value of their softs.

Or i'm underselling myself idk

I disagree but thanks

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:42 am

scoobers wrote:thread moved and stickied! :mrgreen:


Thanks!

User avatar
neprep
Posts: 1066
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby neprep » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:41 am

lawschool22 wrote:
scoobers wrote:thread moved and stickied! :mrgreen:


Thanks!


Scoobs is gonna be mod soon.

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:38 pm

ohpobrecito wrote:There's no URM tab on the GULC sheet, just a head's up.


Fixed - thanks for letting me know.

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

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby Kimikho » Fri Nov 22, 2013 1:26 pm

neprep wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:
scoobers wrote:thread moved and stickied! :mrgreen:


Thanks!


Scoobs is gonna be mod soon.


L O L.

lawbeahs
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 12:23 pm

Re: 2013-2014 Admissions Results: Spreadsheet Compendium

Postby lawbeahs » Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:25 pm

I would really love to see an HLS spreadsheet! These are awesome.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 7 guests