Harvard 2010!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
scribelaw
Posts: 771
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby scribelaw » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:15 pm

I don't see much motivation for HLS to increase its numbers, either. If they really wanted to make a run at Yale for No. 1, they'd just cut the class size down to 400.

georgina
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby georgina » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:16 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:i think this data suggests that traditional splitters are going to be in a better position for acceptance in the next couple months.


hope so!

User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby somewhatwayward » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:16 pm

of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:why did your other post say 3.87/3.97/3.98 for this year and now it says 3.94 for median? yesterday's admits?

geez, the rise of that 25th percentile GPA is pretty phenomenal; it is bad news for both traditional splitters and for us 'soft' reverse splitters.....actually, i guess it is worse for us bc for traditional splitters their GPA will be below median no matter what but their LSAT will be way above whereas for 'soft' reverse splitters now our GPAs are may be barely above the 25th percentile and our LSATs significantly below 25th percentile

i think this data suggests that traditional splitters are going to be in a better position for acceptance in the next couple months.


or it just means that higher numbers are admitted earlier.
here is the really important issue: harvard has only admitted around 60% as many applicants so far on lsn as it did last year: ~105 this year and around 165 last year. Thing is, looking at lsn there aren't very many january applicants with autoadmit numbers (most really qualified applicants apply earlier on). What's clear is that Harvard has held way more applicants this year than before and that many of these holds are going to be admitted. As I discussed earlier on the hold thread, it seems like holds might make up around 20% of the total admits. Even if thats generous I think due to new dean etc Harvard has mostly only accepted autoadmit applicants on a rolling basis and is waiting until later to get to its borderline-admits. There's no reason to think the 25th will be higher this year; it just seems that increased holds mean that Harvard is holding on to its numerically weaker admits until later in the cycle.


the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?

georgina
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby georgina » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:17 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?


to get the interviews out of the way early on while the apps are fresh on their minds?

User avatar
CoaltoNewCastle
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:40 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby CoaltoNewCastle » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:28 pm

of Benito Cereno wrote:harvard has only admitted around 60% as many applicants so far on lsn as it did last year: ~105 this year and around 165 last year.


To be clear, do you mean 60% as many applicants as it had at this time last year, or 60% of the total last year?

georgina
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby georgina » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:37 pm

CoaltoNewCastle wrote:
of Benito Cereno wrote:harvard has only admitted around 60% as many applicants so far on lsn as it did last year: ~105 this year and around 165 last year.


To be clear, do you mean 60% as many applicants as it had at this time last year, or 60% of the total last year?


60% of total. BUT i do have the number of admits up to the end of January for the past few years over on the JR1-no-JR2 thread, and it was something like 90 vs. an expected 110+, or something

User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby somewhatwayward » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:55 pm

georgina wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?


to get the interviews out of the way early on while the apps are fresh on their minds?


maybe they can just accept me and you as a pair - i'll mitigate your GPA and you can mitigate my LSAT.

User avatar
$1.99
Posts: 684
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:49 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby $1.99 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:57 pm

it does seem odd that many people with jr1s were held, but i would rather be in that position than no jr1 held.

User avatar
of Benito Cereno
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:40 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby of Benito Cereno » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:58 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:why did your other post say 3.87/3.97/3.98 for this year and now it says 3.94 for median? yesterday's admits?

geez, the rise of that 25th percentile GPA is pretty phenomenal; it is bad news for both traditional splitters and for us 'soft' reverse splitters.....actually, i guess it is worse for us bc for traditional splitters their GPA will be below median no matter what but their LSAT will be way above whereas for 'soft' reverse splitters now our GPAs are may be barely above the 25th percentile and our LSATs significantly below 25th percentile

i think this data suggests that traditional splitters are going to be in a better position for acceptance in the next couple months.


or it just means that higher numbers are admitted earlier.
here is the really important issue: harvard has only admitted around 60% as many applicants so far on lsn as it did last year: ~105 this year and around 165 last year. Thing is, looking at lsn there aren't very many january applicants with autoadmit numbers (most really qualified applicants apply earlier on). What's clear is that Harvard has held way more applicants this year than before and that many of these holds are going to be admitted. As I discussed earlier on the hold thread, it seems like holds might make up around 20% of the total admits. Even if thats generous I think due to new dean etc Harvard has mostly only accepted autoadmit applicants on a rolling basis and is waiting until later to get to its borderline-admits. There's no reason to think the 25th will be higher this year; it just seems that increased holds mean that Harvard is holding on to its numerically weaker admits until later in the cycle.


the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?

well a very very very high percentage of JR1-but-no-JR2 holds consists of people who applied quite early in the cycle (before November 10th or so). At that point, JR1 had far fewer files then and more time to call borderline applicants. Most of the JR1-but-no-JR2 holds wouldn't have received a JR1 had they applied a little later and many of the no JR1 holds would have received a JR1 had they applied earlier. For the most part I don't really see any difference in numbers between holds with and without JR1s, just dates.

User avatar
dudester
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:23 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby dudester » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:09 pm

of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:
of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:why did your other post say 3.87/3.97/3.98 for this year and now it says 3.94 for median? yesterday's admits?

geez, the rise of that 25th percentile GPA is pretty phenomenal; it is bad news for both traditional splitters and for us 'soft' reverse splitters.....actually, i guess it is worse for us bc for traditional splitters their GPA will be below median no matter what but their LSAT will be way above whereas for 'soft' reverse splitters now our GPAs are may be barely above the 25th percentile and our LSATs significantly below 25th percentile

i think this data suggests that traditional splitters are going to be in a better position for acceptance in the next couple months.


or it just means that higher numbers are admitted earlier.
here is the really important issue: harvard has only admitted around 60% as many applicants so far on lsn as it did last year: ~105 this year and around 165 last year. Thing is, looking at lsn there aren't very many january applicants with autoadmit numbers (most really qualified applicants apply earlier on). What's clear is that Harvard has held way more applicants this year than before and that many of these holds are going to be admitted. As I discussed earlier on the hold thread, it seems like holds might make up around 20% of the total admits. Even if thats generous I think due to new dean etc Harvard has mostly only accepted autoadmit applicants on a rolling basis and is waiting until later to get to its borderline-admits. There's no reason to think the 25th will be higher this year; it just seems that increased holds mean that Harvard is holding on to its numerically weaker admits until later in the cycle.


the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?

well a very very very high percentage of JR1-but-no-JR2 holds consists of people who applied quite early in the cycle (before November 10th or so). At that point, JR1 had far fewer files then and more time to call borderline applicants. In my opinion,most of the JR1-but-no-JR2 holds wouldn't have received a JR1 had they applied a little later and many of the no JR1 holds would have received a JR1 had they applied earlier. For the most part I don't really see any difference in numbers between holds with and without JR1s, just dates. Granted, I don't really know how/why JR1s are doled out to some high-numbers people, but not to others.


Fixed.

User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby somewhatwayward » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:11 pm

deleted for lack of relevance
Last edited by somewhatwayward on Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
$1.99
Posts: 684
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:49 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby $1.99 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:12 pm

looks like everything is quiet on the harvard jr1/jr2 front still, i was expecting a storm of activity this week

User avatar
Sogui
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:32 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby Sogui » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:13 pm

Going to play some Bioshock 2 so I can stop compulsively checking my inbox

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby somewhatwayward » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:17 pm

of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:
of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:why did your other post say 3.87/3.97/3.98 for this year and now it says 3.94 for median? yesterday's admits?

geez, the rise of that 25th percentile GPA is pretty phenomenal; it is bad news for both traditional splitters and for us 'soft' reverse splitters.....actually, i guess it is worse for us bc for traditional splitters their GPA will be below median no matter what but their LSAT will be way above whereas for 'soft' reverse splitters now our GPAs are may be barely above the 25th percentile and our LSATs significantly below 25th percentile

i think this data suggests that traditional splitters are going to be in a better position for acceptance in the next couple months.


or it just means that higher numbers are admitted earlier.
here is the really important issue: harvard has only admitted around 60% as many applicants so far on lsn as it did last year: ~105 this year and around 165 last year. Thing is, looking at lsn there aren't very many january applicants with autoadmit numbers (most really qualified applicants apply earlier on). What's clear is that Harvard has held way more applicants this year than before and that many of these holds are going to be admitted. As I discussed earlier on the hold thread, it seems like holds might make up around 20% of the total admits. Even if thats generous I think due to new dean etc Harvard has mostly only accepted autoadmit applicants on a rolling basis and is waiting until later to get to its borderline-admits. There's no reason to think the 25th will be higher this year; it just seems that increased holds mean that Harvard is holding on to its numerically weaker admits until later in the cycle.


the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?

well a very very very high percentage of JR1-but-no-JR2 holds consists of people who applied quite early in the cycle (before November 10th or so). At that point, JR1 had far fewer files then and more time to call borderline applicants. Most of the JR1-but-no-JR2 holds wouldn't have received a JR1 had they applied a little later and many of the no JR1 holds would have received a JR1 had they applied earlier. For the most part I don't really see any difference in numbers between holds with and without JR1s, just dates.



i think the trend you are describing appears to be true bc there were so many weeks of JR1s before the first round of JR2s that a whole bunch of JR1-but-no-JR2s were from that time period, but there may not be proportionally more. it seems that pretty much every week from early december on, there have been JR1s in varying numbers (10? 20?....hard to know bc of people not reporting online), and every week there are a couple more JR1-but-no-JR2s. it just seems like more of a trickle bc JR2s are coming out every week now.

georgina
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby georgina » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:20 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
georgina wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?


to get the interviews out of the way early on while the apps are fresh on their minds?


maybe they can just accept me and you as a pair - i'll mitigate your GPA and you can mitigate my LSAT.


deal! can you let JR know? thanks, and see you in cambridge this fall.

georgina
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby georgina » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:26 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
of Benito Cereno wrote:well a very very very high percentage of JR1-but-no-JR2 holds consists of people who applied quite early in the cycle (before November 10th or so). At that point, JR1 had far fewer files then and more time to call borderline applicants. Most of the JR1-but-no-JR2 holds wouldn't have received a JR1 had they applied a little later and many of the no JR1 holds would have received a JR1 had they applied earlier. For the most part I don't really see any difference in numbers between holds with and without JR1s, just dates.


i think the trend you are describing appears to be true bc there were so many weeks of JR1s before the first round of JR2s that a whole bunch of JR1-but-no-JR2s were from that time period, but there may not be proportionally more. it seems that pretty much every week from early december on, there have been JR1s in varying numbers (10? 20?....hard to know bc of people not reporting online), and every week there are a couple more JR1-but-no-JR2s. it just seems like more of a trickle bc JR2s are coming out every week now.


agree with my admit-pair. i'm really making more public than i'd like my obsession here, but i do have a list that shows 24 JR1-no-JR2's (took off mozhou YAY). 12 from before thanksgiv, 12 after. if you add URM consideration to the mix, 5 of the first 12 appear to be URM, 2 of the last 12 appear to be URM. after all that counting i gave up on analyzing.

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:30 pm

of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:
of Benito Cereno wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:why did your other post say 3.87/3.97/3.98 for this year and now it says 3.94 for median? yesterday's admits?

geez, the rise of that 25th percentile GPA is pretty phenomenal; it is bad news for both traditional splitters and for us 'soft' reverse splitters.....actually, i guess it is worse for us bc for traditional splitters their GPA will be below median no matter what but their LSAT will be way above whereas for 'soft' reverse splitters now our GPAs are may be barely above the 25th percentile and our LSATs significantly below 25th percentile

i think this data suggests that traditional splitters are going to be in a better position for acceptance in the next couple months.


or it just means that higher numbers are admitted earlier.
here is the really important issue: harvard has only admitted around 60% as many applicants so far on lsn as it did last year: ~105 this year and around 165 last year. Thing is, looking at lsn there aren't very many january applicants with autoadmit numbers (most really qualified applicants apply earlier on). What's clear is that Harvard has held way more applicants this year than before and that many of these holds are going to be admitted. As I discussed earlier on the hold thread, it seems like holds might make up around 20% of the total admits. Even if thats generous I think due to new dean etc Harvard has mostly only accepted autoadmit applicants on a rolling basis and is waiting until later to get to its borderline-admits. There's no reason to think the 25th will be higher this year; it just seems that increased holds mean that Harvard is holding on to its numerically weaker admits until later in the cycle.


the question that that leaves us JR1-but-no-JR2 holds with is, if they were using that auto-admit-only strategy, why interview us early in the cycle? why not wait to interview us with all the other more borderline candidates?

well a very very very high percentage of JR1-but-no-JR2 holds consists of people who applied quite early in the cycle (before November 10th or so). At that point, JR1 had far fewer files then and more time to call borderline applicants. Most of the JR1-but-no-JR2 holds wouldn't have received a JR1 had they applied a little later and many of the no JR1 holds would have received a JR1 had they applied earlier. For the most part I don't really see any difference in numbers between holds with and without JR1s, just dates.


Us early applicants with no JR1 are pity waitlists under this scenario, which sounds about right.

georgina
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby georgina » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:34 pm

Kretzy wrote:Us early applicants with no JR1 are pity waitlists under this scenario, which sounds about right.


i was so happy when you changed your avatar back to ryan.

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:36 pm

georgina wrote:
Kretzy wrote:Us early applicants with no JR1 are pity waitlists under this scenario, which sounds about right.


i was so happy when you changed your avatar back to ryan.


:) I love Arrested Development and all, but he's so goddamn good looking.

User avatar
of Benito Cereno
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:40 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby of Benito Cereno » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:39 pm

Kretzy wrote:
georgina wrote:
Kretzy wrote:Us early applicants with no JR1 are pity waitlists under this scenario, which sounds about right.


i was so happy when you changed your avatar back to ryan.


:) I love Arrested Development and all, but he's so goddamn good looking.

and so very annoying

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:42 pm

of Benito Cereno wrote:
Kretzy wrote:
georgina wrote:
Kretzy wrote:Us early applicants with no JR1 are pity waitlists under this scenario, which sounds about right.


i was so happy when you changed your avatar back to ryan.


:) I love Arrested Development and all, but he's so goddamn good looking.

and so very annoying


You bite your tongue. No one speaks ill of Ryan like that. "The Proposal," "Definitely, Maybe"...and look at that jaw-line!

User avatar
adameus
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 2:07 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby adameus » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:43 pm

georgina wrote:
englawyer wrote:hmm it would be a good idea to compute the LSN quartiles from last year and compare IMO


LSN only, outright admits only:

09-10 173/175/177 3.87/3.94/3.98
08-09 172/175/177 3.8175/3.905/3.96
07-08 173/175/177 3.8/3.91/3.98
06-07 172/175/177 3.8/3.91/3.96
05-06 172/174/177 3.8/3.89/3.955

yes, i really do have nothing better to do with my time. jk, excel made it easy.



Actual Median LSAT/GPA in 05-06 was 173/3.81 which is a fair bit lower than LSN.

For 07-08 it was, also a fair bit lower than LSN.
LSAT Median: 173
LSAT 25/75 Percentile: 170/176
UGPA Median: 3.85
UGPA 25/75 Percentile: 3.74/3.95


I couldn't find other numbers but based on this LSN trends a point to two points higher on the median for LSAT and a tenth to 5 hundredths higher on the GPA than the actual admits. Also these stats represent a full cycle while this years number definetely do not.


My whole point is to say, as others have, but with a little bit of research to back it up, that the LSN numbers are definetely skewed to the high side and those with numbers below the current LSN medians should not be discouraged.

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:46 pm

adameus wrote:My whole point is to say, as others have, but with a little bit of research to back it up, that the LSN numbers are definetely skewed to the high side and those with numbers below the current LSN medians should not be discouraged.


We forget that TS knew what sort of numbers he could admit throughout the entire cycle, whereas JR, being his first year, is probably erring on the high side. In years past, lower numbers got in throughout the whole cycle (not many, but some), this year, they'll probably be clustered toward the end.

User avatar
$1.99
Posts: 684
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:49 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby $1.99 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:00 pm

you think most jr1 holds will get jr2s?

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby DoubleChecks » Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:23 pm

Sogui wrote:Going to play some Bioshock 2 so I can stop compulsively checking my inbox

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?


this is ridiculous. dont do that.

go play mass effect 2 ;)




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gaaooo, Google Adsense [Bot], hoping4scholy, lawschoolapplicant9 and 11 guests