U Chicago 2010 Forum

[crackberry]

The WL emails are all the same people.

[opus127]

The WL emails are all the same people.

Thanks for the info.

[crackberry]

The WL emails are all the same people.

Thanks for the info.

You and I have exactly the same numbers (to the same one-hundreth of a GPA point). I think we'd be near the top of their WL pile. I've already withdrawn, but if you want Chicago, you should definitely pursue it.

[TheWire]

The WL emails are all the same people.

Thanks for the info.

You and I have exactly the same numbers (to the same one-hundreth of a GPA point). I think we'd be near the top of their WL pile. I've already withdrawn, but if you want Chicago, you should definitely pursue it.

Crack, i got the WL too...do you think it could have anything to do with the fact that cali residents would self-select schools from the coasts?

[crackberry]

The WL emails are all the same people.

Thanks for the info.

You and I have exactly the same numbers (to the same one-hundreth of a GPA point). I think we'd be near the top of their WL pile. I've already withdrawn, but if you want Chicago, you should definitely pursue it.

Crack, i got the WL too...do you think it could have anything to do with the fact that cali residents would self-select schools from the coasts?

Haha maybe? BioE was also WLed and I would have thought at least one of us would have gotten in.

Chicago definitely takes some California kids though.

[opus127]

The WL emails are all the same people.

Thanks for the info.

You and I have exactly the same numbers (to the same one-hundreth of a GPA point). I think we'd be near the top of their WL pile. I've already withdrawn, but if you want Chicago, you should definitely pursue it.

Crack, i got the WL too...do you think it could have anything to do with the fact that cali residents would self-select schools from the coasts?

Speaking of self-selecting, I did my undergrad at that other good university in the Chicago area -- you know, where students are well-rounded and stuff... Maybe the U of C knew I'd have a hard time swallowing my prejudices, even though I know their law school is outstanding.

[js87]

The WL emails are all the same people.

Thanks for the info.

You and I have exactly the same numbers (to the same one-hundreth of a GPA point). I think we'd be near the top of their WL pile. I've already withdrawn, but if you want Chicago, you should definitely pursue it.

Crack, i got the WL too...do you think it could have anything to do with the fact that cali residents would self-select schools from the coasts?

I got WL'd with identical numbers to you from the east coast (South FL). Maybe the coast theory is correct. Or maybe my application sucked

[crackberry]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

It can't be numbers-related. People with lower numbers than many people on the WL have gotten in, and people with numbers above both medians (and, in some cases, above one 75th and median>other>75) have been WLed.

I think Chicago knows who is a good fit and who is not.

[Dignan]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

Besides Y and S, Chicago is the only law school in the T10 with a small class size. I've noticed that schools with smaller class sizes tend to make more difficult-to-explain decisions. Even Cornell, which is obviously quite a bit less selective than Chicago, makes some curious choices during the admissions cycle. It makes sense, I guess. When a school has 180 seats to fill instead of 500, they're more free to rely on "will they fit in?" intuitions and other idiosyncratic criteria.

[TheWire]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

It can't be numbers-related. People with lower numbers than many people on the WL have gotten in, and people with numbers above both medians (and, in some cases, above one 75th and median>other>75) have been WLed.

I think Chicago knows who is a good fit and who is not.

I agree. I mean, they kinda hit it on the money...the WLers in this thread don't seem nearly as heart broken as those in other threads. My friend from Berkeley was trying to give me perspective on how Boalt yield like 4 times the amount of cross admits with Michigan. I think in this case, maybe UofC realizes the some people (for varying reasons) aren't necessarily Uber excited about the midwest. FWIW, bioE and I went to high school together, and it seems like our decisions to go to public UG's didn't fly with UofC

[js87]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

It can't be numbers-related. People with lower numbers than many people on the WL have gotten in, and people with numbers above both medians (and, in some cases, above one 75th and median>other>75) have been WLed.

I think Chicago knows who is a good fit and who is not.

My last realistic shot at entering legal academia, my dream career, most likely just went out the window, so if they were banking on "A" then they're unfortunately incorrect. That said, I was exactly at medians, an LSAT retaker, and a non URM with less than a year of work experience. I sincerely doubt that I'm YP material.

[crackberry]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

It can't be numbers-related. People with lower numbers than many people on the WL have gotten in, and people with numbers above both medians (and, in some cases, above one 75th and median>other>75) have been WLed.

I think Chicago knows who is a good fit and who is not.

My last realistic shot at entering legal academia, my dream career, most likely just went out the window, so if they were banking on "A" then they're unfortunately incorrect. That said, I was exactly at medians, an LSAT retaker, and a non URM with less than a year of work experience. I sincerely doubt that I'm YP material.

Be #1 in your class next year and transfer to Yale.

Yes I know it's not that simple.

[crackberry]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

Besides Y and S, Chicago is the only law school in the T10 with a small class size. I've noticed that schools with smaller class sizes tend to make more difficult-to-explain decisions. Even Cornell, which is obviously quite a bit less selective than Chicago, makes some curious choices during the admissions cycle. It makes sense, I guess. When a school has 180 seats to fill instead of 500, they're more free to rely on "will they fit in?" intuitions and other idiosyncratic criteria.

Credited.

[BioEBear2010]

Crack, I think you've hit the nail on the head with this "fitting in" thing. As Dignan mentioned, Chicago is small and has the ability to be more selective in terms of non-quantitative criteria.

And Wire, just because Chicago doesn't seem to love the UCs doesn't mean they're not awesome

My last realistic shot at entering legal academia, my dream career, most likely just went out the window, so if they were banking on "A" then they're unfortunately incorrect. That said, I was exactly at medians, an LSAT retaker, and a non URM with less than a year of work experience. I sincerely doubt that I'm YP material.

Sorry to hear this, js.

[WhatUpKells]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

It can't be numbers-related. People with lower numbers than many people on the WL have gotten in, and people with numbers above both medians (and, in some cases, above one 75th and median>other>75) have been WLed.

I think Chicago knows who is a good fit and who is not.

My last realistic shot at entering legal academia, my dream career, most likely just went out the window, so if they were banking on "A" then they're unfortunately incorrect. That said, I was exactly at medians, an LSAT retaker, and a non URM with less than a year of work experience. I sincerely doubt that I'm YP material.

This. My cycle is driving me insane.

[opus127]

My last realistic shot at entering legal academia, my dream career, most likely just went out the window, so if they were banking on "A" then they're unfortunately incorrect. That said, I was exactly at medians, an LSAT retaker, and a non URM with less than a year of work experience. I sincerely doubt that I'm YP material.

Sounds like you should write that extra essay! Good luck!

[soullesswonder]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

It can't be numbers-related. People with lower numbers than many people on the WL have gotten in, and people with numbers above both medians (and, in some cases, above one 75th and median>other>75) have been WLed.

I think Chicago knows who is a good fit and who is not.

Maybe I should send the adcomms a note: "Hey guys, while you're plumbing the depths of my soul, can you tell me what season I am?"

Theory: Chicago is putting out more merit money in an effort to pull some applicants away from HYS, and is using the WL as a reserve in case that gambit fails. The WL'ed applicants are not necessarily YP, but their desire didn't jump out for some reason and so the school isn't ready to commit to them just yet.

If I'm anywhere close to the truth (disclaimer: probably not), then there could be some significant WL action in March and April

[Jericwithers]

I have to say my PS was perfect to fit in at Chicago if they took it seriously. However, my numbers are what kept me out. Also I'm not sure if I would pay sticker at any school, so maybe they followed me on this board and figured that out.

[stopscreaming]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

Besides Y and S, Chicago is the only law school in the T10 with a small class size. I've noticed that schools with smaller class sizes tend to make more difficult-to-explain decisions. Even Cornell, which is obviously quite a bit less selective than Chicago, makes some curious choices during the admissions cycle. It makes sense, I guess. When a school has 180 seats to fill instead of 500, they're more free to rely on "will they fit in?" intuitions and other idiosyncratic criteria.

As one of the aforementioned people who got in with lower numbers, I think that the second explanation sounds right. My U of C acceptance letter was the first one I have seen which actually seemed tailored to me specifically. "You were chosen because of..." Even with Michigan, where Dean Z adds hand written notes, nothing was this specific.

[puppleberry finn]

now am terrified re: WLs.

[TheWire]

Crack, I think you've hit the nail on the head with this "fitting in" thing. As Dignan mentioned, Chicago is small and has the ability to be more selective in terms of non-quantitative criteria.

And Wire, just because Chicago doesn't seem to love the UCs doesn't mean they're not awesome

My last realistic shot at entering legal academia, my dream career, most likely just went out the window, so if they were banking on "A" then they're unfortunately incorrect. That said, I was exactly at medians, an LSAT retaker, and a non URM with less than a year of work experience. I sincerely doubt that I'm YP material.

Sorry to hear this, js.

Bio...
Of course; not like I'm trippin' about future prospects.

If i get into berk. ill be there to visit and u should kick it with me and Mr.Trojan-boalt. I'm gonna show you how to slay them bitches...ask our boy, my advice has paid dividends for him @ boalt. Imagine the tools I can supply you with to dominate an entire undergrad...

[D Brooks]

now am terrified re: WLs.

Don't be. Rejection email will arrive soon enough. hth.

[DanInALionsDen]

My status checker has said "Application Received" since 01/06. Should I send them an email to find out why I still haven't gone complete or is this the standard length?

[puppleberry finn]

My status checker has said "Application Received" since 01/06. Should I send them an email to find out why I still haven't gone complete or is this the standard length?

I was at app received for months.

[mi-chan17]

At the risk of sounding extremely immodest, I am shocked by some of the applicants Chicago is WLing this cycle, including myself. My best guesses are A) they know some of us aren't interested and it's a very selective form of YP or B) something about our applications rubbed them the wrong way.

Besides Y and S, Chicago is the only law school in the T10 with a small class size. I've noticed that schools with smaller class sizes tend to make more difficult-to-explain decisions. Even Cornell, which is obviously quite a bit less selective than Chicago, makes some curious choices during the admissions cycle. It makes sense, I guess. When a school has 180 seats to fill instead of 500, they're more free to rely on "will they fit in?" intuitions and other idiosyncratic criteria.

As one of the aforementioned people who got in with lower numbers, I think that the second explanation sounds right. My U of C acceptance letter was the first one I have seen which actually seemed tailored to me specifically. "You were chosen because of..." Even with Michigan, where Dean Z adds hand written notes, nothing was this specific.

I got WL'd today with numbers that, by all rights, should have gotten me dinged straight out. I may actually start to believe that they're even reading our applications. There's no other reason for them to have kept me, really.