Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

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

Next JS2 wave(s) will be...

Monday 3/27
2
2%
Tuesday 3/28
18
17%
Wednesday 3/29
35
33%
Thursday 3/30
13
12%
Friday 3/31
29
27%
Saturday 4/1
10
9%
 
Total votes: 107

LHS17

Bronze
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 4:29 am

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby LHS17 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:51 pm

Rigo wrote:
LHS17 wrote:
I find it hard to believe there is a 26% drop in APPLICATIONS from the 175-180 cohort attributable solely to their decision not to apply. Why invest so much in getting such a good score not to even see what it will yield? What am I missing?

These are likely already really smart and capable people who have other great options.
The economy is healthy, so less incentive to take yourself out of the marketplace and go into likely debt for school again.


The 26% number is hard to buy. So is "likely debt" with a 175 or above. Human nature is to at least see where one gets in, and at what price, with such a good score. Then pursue something else.

User avatar
Kinch08

Bronze
Posts: 309
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Kinch08 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:52 pm

I know a guy who took the LSAT for fun. Knew for a fact he'd never apply to any law schools, just liked taking tests. He claims to have gotten a 176 (without studying), but I don't believe him. I also don't think there are enough hims to seriously skew the data, but who knows?
Last edited by Kinch08 on Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

HonestlyThough

Bronze
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby HonestlyThough » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:53 pm

VapidP wrote:
LHS17 wrote:
Rigo wrote:
LHS17 wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
LegalAAA wrote:Do you mean applicants in January on or JS1 in Jan on?
I agree with your hypothesis, especially given the drop in high 172+ scorers this year. It's messing with the admissions committee at HYS for sure.

Can you explain more? What do you mean drop in high 172+? I thought LSAT scores were curved so that approx the same number of people got top scores on each test?

In terms of who is actually applying.
==error==/2016-2 ... -02-03-17/


My interpretation based on what I've read, and I haven't looked at the language recently, is that the test is pre-curved to represent what percentile a score should represent over a normalized time horizon. That's how you get specific score drops on any one exam.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

What we are saying is that less people with those numbers are APPLYING. As in, they get their score and they choose not to apply to law school. This has absolutely nothing to do with how the LSAT is equated.


I find it hard to believe there is a 26% drop in APPLICATIONS from the 175-180 cohort attributable solely to their decision not to apply. Why invest so much in getting such a good score not to even see what it will yield? What am I missing?


Because there are so few people with those scores anyway, even just a handful of them deciding not to apply would shift the numbers enough to result in percentage point drops. The economy is good, law school is expensive, people with good scores who get a good job might just stick with their job instead of going to school. You saw law school applications rise sharply during the financial crisis, probably because a bunch of super smart kids were out of luck. No they aren't. I don't think this is the sole attributor to the decline in 175+ scores, but I do think it could be a factor.

From a previous discussion, doesn't Harvard seemingly have a hard GPA floor of 3.5? Do people think that will hold up this year.


If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16642
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Rigo » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:53 pm

texteach wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
LegalAAA wrote:Do you mean applicants in January on or JS1 in Jan on?
I agree with your hypothesis, especially given the drop in high 172+ scorers this year. It's messing with the admissions committee at HYS for sure.

Can you explain more? What do you mean drop in high 172+? I thought LSAT scores were curved so that approx the same number of people got top scores on each test?

In terms of who is actually applying.
==error==/2016-2 ... -02-03-17/


Am I the only one that thinks HYS are not going to be phased all that much by the current applicants' LSAT scores? There are more than enough to maintain all 3 schools' high medians and 75 percentiles. Assuming that many of those applicants will also have respectable GPAs (above each school's medians), I just don't see this cycle being all that numerically different from the past. Timing has been atypical, but I don't think we'll see that much of a shift in the class profiles.

To be fair, Harvard's median fell last year. So they will be impacted. Harvard especially is more likely to be impacted simply due to math with their huge class size.
That being said, the situation will be more dire at other schools that have to give out big scholarships to attract qualified matriculants. HYS can get by in large part due to prestige.
Last edited by Rigo on Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Pozzo

Gold
Posts: 1907
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Pozzo » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:54 pm

texteach wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
LegalAAA wrote:Do you mean applicants in January on or JS1 in Jan on?
I agree with your hypothesis, especially given the drop in high 172+ scorers this year. It's messing with the admissions committee at HYS for sure.

Can you explain more? What do you mean drop in high 172+? I thought LSAT scores were curved so that approx the same number of people got top scores on each test?

In terms of who is actually applying.
==error==/2016-2 ... -02-03-17/


Am I the only one that thinks HYS are not going to be phased all that much by the current applicants' LSAT scores? There are more than enough to maintain all 3 schools' high medians and 75 percentiles. Assuming that many of those applicants will also have respectable GPAs (above each school's medians), I just don't see this cycle being all that numerically different from the past. Timing has been atypical, but I don't think we'll see that much of a shift in the class profiles.

This has been my feeling too. Of course, if lower ranked schools are changing up how they give out money to maintain their medians, then HYS might have to react to a lower than average yield. Not sure that we've seen this, though. Of course, I'm not sure how we, the unqualified internet pontificators, would ever get data to assess this kind of change. Still, it's fun to speculate.

User avatar
KateMcKitten

Bronze
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:07 am

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby KateMcKitten » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:55 pm

Kinch08 wrote:I know a guy who took the LSAT for fun. Knew for a fact he'd never apply to any law schools, just liked taking tests. He claims to have gotten a 176 (without studying), but I don't believe him. I also don't think there are enough hims to seriously skew the data, but who knows?

fake news

(or maybe I'm just jealous and wish I could've done that)

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16642
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Rigo » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:00 pm

HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.

HonestlyThough

Bronze
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby HonestlyThough » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:02 pm

Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.


You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.

User avatar
jjcorvino

Silver
Posts: 1453
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:49 am

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby jjcorvino » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:02 pm

Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.


I don't think they all are. There are probably a fair amount of people with lowish GPAs (like me) and high scores that don't have a shot at the big money.

User avatar
CHyde

Bronze
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 10:17 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby CHyde » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:03 pm

.
Last edited by CHyde on Wed Mar 22, 2017 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jjcorvino

Silver
Posts: 1453
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:49 am

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby jjcorvino » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:04 pm

HonestlyThough wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.


You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


I don't think any of the scholarships he mentioned you need to apply for. you are nominated based on the application.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16642
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Rigo » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:06 pm

jjcorvino wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.


I don't think they all are. There are probably a fair amount of people with lowish GPAs (like me) and high scores that don't have a shot at the big money.

I was working within her "also have good other numbers and softs" parameter, although I do think the splitters I know have had pretty good cycles thus far.

User avatar
Kinch08

Bronze
Posts: 309
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Kinch08 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:06 pm

HonestlyThough wrote:
You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


You could get a Ruby next year, or you could go to HYS this year. HYS don't give out merit aid, period, so you can't really do much better than simple admittance to the one you prefer.

User avatar
jjcorvino

Silver
Posts: 1453
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:49 am

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby jjcorvino » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:12 pm

Rigo wrote:
jjcorvino wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.


I don't think they all are. There are probably a fair amount of people with lowish GPAs (like me) and high scores that don't have a shot at the big money.

I was working within her "also have good other numbers and softs" parameter, although I do think the splitters I know have had pretty good cycles thus far.


Oh whoops, reading comprehension :lol:

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16642
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Rigo » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:17 pm

jjcorvino wrote:
Rigo wrote:
jjcorvino wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.


I don't think they all are. There are probably a fair amount of people with lowish GPAs (like me) and high scores that don't have a shot at the big money.

I was working within her "also have good other numbers and softs" parameter, although I do think the splitters I know have had pretty good cycles thus far.


Oh whoops, reading comprehension :lol:

I'm not the most clear with word choice, so no prob bb :mrgreen:

HonestlyThough

Bronze
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby HonestlyThough » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:18 pm

jjcorvino wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
Rigo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:If all of the schools are actually dealing with only 350 people with 175s or higher, does anyone know if that is translating into some killer negotiating power for top LSAT scorers (who also have good other numbers and softs)? I'm wondering if people will maybe be able to get better offers than those that are usually on the table.

I mean, these people are the likely Hamiltons, Rubys, Dillards anyways so really not too much more they can get out of the law school negotiation game.

The 169-174 people probably gained the most power this cycle since that's where all the top law school medians lie for the most part.


You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


I don't think any of the scholarships he mentioned you need to apply for. you are nominated based on the application.


Thanks! Continuing to be absolutely uninformed (oops!) :oops:

HonestlyThough

Bronze
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby HonestlyThough » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:19 pm

Kinch08 wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


You could get a Ruby next year, or you could go to HYS this year. HYS don't give out merit aid, period, so you can't really do much better than simple admittance to the one you prefer.


I'd rather take an HYS. I'm PI, and going to need to ride that loan repayment assistance anyway. :)

Pozzo

Gold
Posts: 1907
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Pozzo » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:30 pm

HonestlyThough wrote:
Kinch08 wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


You could get a Ruby next year, or you could go to HYS this year. HYS don't give out merit aid, period, so you can't really do much better than simple admittance to the one you prefer.


I'd rather take an HYS. I'm PI, and going to need to ride that loan repayment assistance anyway. :)

You wouldn't need that with a Ruby.

HonestlyThough

Bronze
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby HonestlyThough » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:34 pm

Pozzo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
Kinch08 wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


You could get a Ruby next year, or you could go to HYS this year. HYS don't give out merit aid, period, so you can't really do much better than simple admittance to the one you prefer.


I'd rather take an HYS. I'm PI, and going to need to ride that loan repayment assistance anyway. :)

You wouldn't need that with a Ruby.


Correct me if I'm wrong (which I totally could be because i'm inches from being Jon Snow) but isn't it full tuition and not full COA? I'm penniless, so I'd be taking out loans for anything short of COA.

But yes, you're right. I wish I'd been more prepared/knowledgeable before applying. :/

User avatar
KateMcKitten

Bronze
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:07 am

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby KateMcKitten » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:36 pm

Pozzo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
Kinch08 wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


You could get a Ruby next year, or you could go to HYS this year. HYS don't give out merit aid, period, so you can't really do much better than simple admittance to the one you prefer.


I'd rather take an HYS. I'm PI, and going to need to ride that loan repayment assistance anyway. :)

You wouldn't need that with a Ruby.

Or a Hamilton or one of the various named schollys at NYU (not including COL, of course). Columbia and NYU are two of the best law schools for PI. As a fellow PI, it breaks my heart that they're in a city that riddles me with unhappiness, or I'd go to one of them in a heartbeat.

Pozzo

Gold
Posts: 1907
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby Pozzo » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:37 pm

HonestlyThough wrote:
Pozzo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
Kinch08 wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


You could get a Ruby next year, or you could go to HYS this year. HYS don't give out merit aid, period, so you can't really do much better than simple admittance to the one you prefer.


I'd rather take an HYS. I'm PI, and going to need to ride that loan repayment assistance anyway. :)

You wouldn't need that with a Ruby.


Correct me if I'm wrong (which I totally could be because i'm inches from being Jon Snow) but isn't it full tuition and not full COA? I'm penniless, so I'd be taking out loans for anything short of COA.

But yes, you're right. I wish I'd been more prepared/knowledgeable before applying. :/


No worries, sorry to be snarky there. Some of the named scholarships, including the Ruby, come with modest living stipends. Put that together with summer PI funding or a Summer Associate somewhere, and you're talking very VERY minimal debt coming out of a top school.

HonestlyThough

Bronze
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby HonestlyThough » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:50 pm

KateMcKitten wrote:
Pozzo wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
Kinch08 wrote:
HonestlyThough wrote:
You never know. A lot of people are just underinformed about the process. I did not apply for any named scholarships at any school and sent all my apps in 2/1 or later because I was just ignorant about the process before applying. Plenty of people with top numbers could be in the same boat.


You could get a Ruby next year, or you could go to HYS this year. HYS don't give out merit aid, period, so you can't really do much better than simple admittance to the one you prefer.


I'd rather take an HYS. I'm PI, and going to need to ride that loan repayment assistance anyway. :)

You wouldn't need that with a Ruby.

Or a Hamilton or one of the various named schollys at NYU (not including COL, of course). Columbia and NYU are two of the best law schools for PI. As a fellow PI, it breaks my heart that they're in a city that riddles me with unhappiness, or I'd go to one of them in a heartbeat.


Yes, you're absolutely right about that. And I think I deserved the snarkiness. However, I'm a bit with McKitten here. I don't know if all that money could tempt me to live in Chicago or NY. I think Yale might be the only thing that could tempt me to live in a place I really wouldn't want to be. (I find Ann Arbor and Boston less objectionable, personally) Hence why Berkeley is high on my list despite not being literally as high on THE list. I care a lot about where I live.

HarvardHopeful95

Bronze
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:55 pm

Re: Chances to get and JS1 at this point.

Postby HarvardHopeful95 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:37 pm

dietcoke1 wrote:
HarvardHopeful95 wrote:Does anyone who doesn't have a JS1 from Harvard have a shot at this point?


yes but probably not a very good one


I seriously would rather they outright reject me rather than string me along :(

User avatar
KaijuOh8

New
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:19 am

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby KaijuOh8 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:50 pm

I think there will be a JS2 wave this Friday. Tomorrow is out of question: the adcoms will be busy with final preparations for the ASW. Thursday too is highy unlikely, as Dean Soban would appear to say her welcome and may oversee some events.

I'm calling Friday because I'm thinking (1) Harvard would be extremely pressed to make all remaining calls next week, with all the JS1s held this week (assuming it still has +250 offers to make); and (2) the adcoms, including Dean Soban, wouldn't need to be present at events on that day. The latter rationale is based on the assumption that adcoms are not required to appear after the first day of an ASW - at least that's how Berkeley's ASW went, as far as my observations and memories are concerned.

myrik

New
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:29 pm

Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)

Postby myrik » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:59 pm

As far as we know there were never interviews scheduled for tomorrow morning right?

Fingers crossed



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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests