Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

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

Why do you think you STILL haven't heard from S?

MS9 is about to confirm any second ..... COUNTERCYCLE
26
28%
My app was so bad that Dean Deal wants to make it SEEM like I have a chance when in reality she is punishing me for having her read it
22
24%
S won't be outdone by Y (battle for who can hold onto apps the longest)
36
39%
glitch in my status checker and I actually went DLS months ago
9
10%
 
Total votes: 93

ProductofUnreality

Bronze
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:29 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby ProductofUnreality » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:52 pm

Aquinas wrote:
ProductofUnreality wrote:Stanford's thread is always the chillest. I wonder if it's because of the black box that is the admissions process, or because of the people who apply.

Finally went UR. Don't know when I was complete. Submitted my app mid Sept, but needed one extra LoR because I'm a reapplicant. No clue if that set me back or by how much, but oh well. Way ahead of last year's pace still.

Good luck, folks.


By UR, do you mean "Submitted for Review"? Or is there a distinct status actually called "Under Review" or something of the like? I've been at "Submitted for Review" since 10/28...


Submitted for review, sorry. IIRC that's all we get until decisions come out.

nuseri134

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:53 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby nuseri134 » Thu Dec 01, 2016 8:07 pm

ArtistOfManliness wrote:
acz26 wrote:Could any 1Ls speak to the grading system at Stanford? What percentage pass versus high pass?


4L, not a 1L, but I like to think I'm qualified.

Hard cap of 40% Honors. They target 30%, though.


any idea on how many people get RCs though?

User avatar
ArtistOfManliness

Silver
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:56 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby ArtistOfManliness » Thu Dec 01, 2016 8:12 pm

nuseri134 wrote:
ArtistOfManliness wrote:
acz26 wrote:Could any 1Ls speak to the grading system at Stanford? What percentage pass versus high pass?


4L, not a 1L, but I like to think I'm qualified.

Hard cap of 40% Honors. They target 30%, though.


any idea on how many people get RCs though?


As in response to your other thread: Rs are practically unheard of. A couple of professors are known for being okay with giving them, but they are certainly the exception, and the administration makes sure that they don't teach any 1L classes.

zaetoroftheprotoss

Bronze
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 1:42 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby zaetoroftheprotoss » Fri Dec 02, 2016 7:45 am

ArtistOfManliness wrote:
acz26 wrote:Could any 1Ls speak to the grading system at Stanford? What percentage pass versus high pass?


4L, not a 1L, but I like to think I'm qualified.

Hard cap of 40% Honors. They target 30%, though.


Current 2L. It's 30% Hs for doctrinal classes, 40% for seminars with exams, and 50% for seminars with final (R) papers. Top 1-2 students in most classes get book prizes (if the instructor wants to award them); these are noted on the transcript.

But from what I can tell, grades are mostly arbitrary. Beyond the few kids who ace every class (and will likely clerk for SCOTUS), most people end up in a band around the H/P cut-off where on a good day, you are given an H and on a bad day, you get a P. As such, grades mean somewhat less here than they may at a school where the gradations are finer (e.g., A vs. A- vs. B+). Coupled with the demand for SLS students in the open market, this greatly alleviates the stress on 1Ls in searching for summer positions and then at OCI for 2L SA recruiting.

ArtistOfManliness wrote:
As in response to your other thread: Rs are practically unheard of. A couple of professors are known for being okay with giving them, but they are certainly the exception, and the administration makes sure that they don't teach any 1L classes.


From what I've been told anecdotally, RCs rarely happen outside of instances where the student is actively disrespecting the professor (e.g., writing a 1 page exam answer for a 4 hour exam).

User avatar
hammy393

Bronze
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby hammy393 » Fri Dec 02, 2016 3:38 pm

submitted 11/12, status checker changed to "Submitted for review" on 11/18

User avatar
dietcoke1

Silver
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2016 8:18 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby dietcoke1 » Tue Dec 06, 2016 1:54 pm

new poll!

User avatar
carlos_danger

Bronze
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:21 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby carlos_danger » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:05 pm

What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.

dmc1275

New
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 4:44 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby dmc1275 » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:38 pm

carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:

User avatar
RictusErectus

Bronze
Posts: 132
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:31 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby RictusErectus » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:40 pm

Poll results = lawl. It's pretty obvious who's regularly stalking this thread.

User avatar
Thomas Hagan, ESQ.

Silver
Posts: 1225
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:55 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby Thomas Hagan, ESQ. » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:42 pm

dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


Besides my diploma and eventual law degree, the Stanford rejection letter is probably the most expensive piece of paper I'll ever purchase.

curry1

Silver
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:41 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby curry1 » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:45 pm

Thomas Hagan, ESQ. wrote:
dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


Besides my diploma and eventual law degree, the Stanford rejection letter is probably the most expensive piece of paper I'll ever purchase.


wedding certificate, passport?

User avatar
Assasindowntheavenue

Silver
Posts: 818
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:45 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby Assasindowntheavenue » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:45 pm

dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


+100

User avatar
Thomas Hagan, ESQ.

Silver
Posts: 1225
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:55 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby Thomas Hagan, ESQ. » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:48 pm

curry1 wrote:
Thomas Hagan, ESQ. wrote:
dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


Besides my diploma and eventual law degree, the Stanford rejection letter is probably the most expensive piece of paper I'll ever purchase.


wedding certificate, passport?


Just let me use my hyperbole! hahaha

User avatar
carlos_danger

Bronze
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:21 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby carlos_danger » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:09 pm

dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


Ya I feel that. The big emphasis they put on alum LoRs makes it feel like not going to a super elite undergrad is a handicap.

eck456

Bronze
Posts: 321
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:07 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby eck456 » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:15 pm

ProductofUnreality wrote:Stanford's thread is always the chillest. I wonder if it's because of the black box that is the admissions process, or because of the people who apply.

Finally went UR. Don't know when I was complete. Submitted my app mid Sept, but needed one extra LoR because I'm a reapplicant. No clue if that set me back or by how much, but oh well. Way ahead of last year's pace still.

Good luck, folks.


Wait, did you find stanford spcific requirements for reapplicants somewhere? or just submitted a new LOR to change it up? I'm also a reapplicant and submitted a new LOR from my current grad program (dual degree/ policy) but didn't see anything specific about having to do that

User avatar
jjcorvino

Silver
Posts: 1456
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:49 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby jjcorvino » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:18 pm

dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


That is definitely one of the reasons I didn't even attempt to apply to Stanford (besides them not being splitter friendly). The Stanford letter was too much hassle for an almost guaranteed rejection.

User avatar
carlos_danger

Bronze
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:21 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby carlos_danger » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:22 pm

jjcorvino wrote:
That is definitely one of the reasons I didn't even attempt to apply to Stanford (besides them not being splitter friendly). The Stanford letter was too much hassle for an almost guaranteed rejection.


Wait is it basically a guaranteed ding without the Stanford-specific letter? Or do you have a shot if you're above medians?

HamlinMcgill

New
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 7:04 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby HamlinMcgill » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:25 pm

I'm a 1L at SLS currently. Below both medians and didn't do Stanford-specific letters. So take that for what it's worth. None of my recommenders went to Stanford, so what were they supposed to say?

curry1

Silver
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:41 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby curry1 » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:28 pm

carlos_danger wrote:
dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


Ya I feel that. The big emphasis they put on alum LoRs makes it feel like not going to a super elite undergrad is a handicap.



I think that handicap exists at other places like YLS, and they don't ask for alum rec letters. Stanford's emphasis on targeted letters is just a manifestation of that mindset not a cause.

User avatar
jjcorvino

Silver
Posts: 1456
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:49 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby jjcorvino » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:31 pm

carlos_danger wrote:
jjcorvino wrote:
That is definitely one of the reasons I didn't even attempt to apply to Stanford (besides them not being splitter friendly). The Stanford letter was too much hassle for an almost guaranteed rejection.


Wait is it basically a guaranteed ding without the Stanford-specific letter? Or do you have a shot if you're above medians?


From what I have read it is not an automatic no if you do not have them. They are "Highly Reccomended" which I take to mean that having them would put an applicant above another similar level of applicant.

dmc1275

New
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 4:44 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby dmc1275 » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:33 pm

curry1 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:
dmc1275 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:What did y'all do for the Stanford specific LoR? I realized I don't know anyone who went to/worked at Stanford and just ended up using my same default letters that I sent to other schools.


Seriously absurd that they even like this. Pretty archaic means of evaluating applicants, many of whom you would hope aren't legacy applicants/applicants with some connection to Stanford. I just submitted my normal letters. It's a huge reach school for me, but still, come on, Stanford :roll:


Ya I feel that. The big emphasis they put on alum LoRs makes it feel like not going to a super elite undergrad is a handicap.



I think that handicap exists at other places like YLS, and they don't ask for alum rec letters. Stanford's emphasis on targeted letters is just a manifestation of that mindset not a cause.


Very true. Just I wish they'd have the decency to at least mask their elitism a little given their and all other law schools' stated "commitments to diversity."

User avatar
carlos_danger

Bronze
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:21 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby carlos_danger » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:34 pm

curry1 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:
Ya I feel that. The big emphasis they put on alum LoRs makes it feel like not going to a super elite undergrad is a handicap.



I think that handicap exists at other places like YLS, and they don't ask for alum rec letters. Stanford's emphasis on targeted letters is just a manifestation of that mindset not a cause.


lol in that case I guess I might as well buy my Cooley gear now instead of waiting til fall

User avatar
jjcorvino

Silver
Posts: 1456
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:49 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby jjcorvino » Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:36 pm

carlos_danger wrote:
curry1 wrote:
carlos_danger wrote:
Ya I feel that. The big emphasis they put on alum LoRs makes it feel like not going to a super elite undergrad is a handicap.



I think that handicap exists at other places like YLS, and they don't ask for alum rec letters. Stanford's emphasis on targeted letters is just a manifestation of that mindset not a cause.


lol in that case I guess I might as well buy my Cooley gear now instead of waiting til fall


Man, Cooley's matriculation rate is about to skyrocket.

ProductofUnreality

Bronze
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:29 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby ProductofUnreality » Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:02 pm

eck456 wrote:
ProductofUnreality wrote:Stanford's thread is always the chillest. I wonder if it's because of the black box that is the admissions process, or because of the people who apply.

Finally went UR. Don't know when I was complete. Submitted my app mid Sept, but needed one extra LoR because I'm a reapplicant. No clue if that set me back or by how much, but oh well. Way ahead of last year's pace still.

Good luck, folks.


Wait, did you find stanford spcific requirements for reapplicants somewhere? or just submitted a new LOR to change it up? I'm also a reapplicant and submitted a new LOR from my current grad program (dual degree/ policy) but didn't see anything specific about having to do that


I sent them an email asking why I hadn't gone complete yet, they told me about the LOR and directed me to their admissions page. There's a section about reapplicants, but pretty much the only requirement was the new LOR if I remember correctly.

eck456

Bronze
Posts: 321
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:07 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2020 Applicants (2016-2017 Cycle)

Postby eck456 » Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:17 pm

ProductofUnreality wrote:
eck456 wrote:
ProductofUnreality wrote:Stanford's thread is always the chillest. I wonder if it's because of the black box that is the admissions process, or because of the people who apply.

Finally went UR. Don't know when I was complete. Submitted my app mid Sept, but needed one extra LoR because I'm a reapplicant. No clue if that set me back or by how much, but oh well. Way ahead of last year's pace still.

Good luck, folks.


Wait, did you find stanford spcific requirements for reapplicants somewhere? or just submitted a new LOR to change it up? I'm also a reapplicant and submitted a new LOR from my current grad program (dual degree/ policy) but didn't see anything specific about having to do that


I sent them an email asking why I hadn't gone complete yet, they told me about the LOR and directed me to their admissions page. There's a section about reapplicants, but pretty much the only requirement was the new LOR if I remember correctly.


thanks! i'll check that out



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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: buggiebooks, Exabot [Bot], SWK89 and 27 guests