Columbia 2010

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
HerseyChris
Posts: 315
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:30 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby HerseyChris » Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:09 am

Tofu wrote:
LieutKaffee wrote:That said, an LSAT score of 170+ is not as common as hanging out in TLS would lead us to believe


i always feel so inadequate with a 171 when i'm on this site haha :(

makes me wish i took my lsat studying more seriously


I don't know how anyone could say they wished they studied for the LSAT more. You got into frickin' Columbia! From now on, your LSAT score may as well not exist.

User avatar
Hattori Hanzo
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 12:17 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Hattori Hanzo » Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:30 am

HerseyChris wrote:
Tofu wrote:
LieutKaffee wrote:That said, an LSAT score of 170+ is not as common as hanging out in TLS would lead us to believe


i always feel so inadequate with a 171 when i'm on this site haha :(

makes me wish i took my lsat studying more seriously


I don't know how anyone could say they wished they studied for the LSAT more. You got into frickin' Columbia! From now on, your LSAT score may as well not exist.


Obvious: he could have gotten into HYS.

User avatar
fidesverita
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:04 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby fidesverita » Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:47 am

Their index sucks. They have such a heavy bias towards a test in comparison to a GPA that's been earned over the course of four years. I would think that the classes you've taken, your performance, your school name, etc. would be a better indicator of your ability as a student and skill set than a standardized test.

User avatar
parker09
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:15 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby parker09 » Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:59 am

fidesverita wrote:Their index sucks. They have such a heavy bias towards a test in comparison to a GPA that's been earned over the course of four years. I would think that the classes you've taken, your performance, your school name, etc. would be a better indicator of your ability as a student and skill set than a standardized test.


I believe the key word there is "standardized," which is what quality/difficulty of classes and quality/difficulty of undergrad school are not...

And I'm saying this as someone with a mediocre LSAT, pretty good GPA, and prestigious undergrad school, so my bias would be to agree with what you're saying.

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Unitas » Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:24 am

fidesverita wrote:Their index sucks. They have such a heavy bias towards a test in comparison to a GPA that's been earned over the course of four years. I would think that the classes you've taken, your performance, your school name, etc. would be a better indicator of your ability as a student and skill set than a standardized test.


So wrong... Just so wrong. Me being poor in high school then going to a cheap school is not an indication of my intelligence or my ability.

LSAT on the other hand is the great equator. If you go to IVY league and get below 170 and I go to a state college or below and get above a 175 obviously adcomms can see who is more capable. And don't say you just don't do well on standardized test, because otherwise you wouldn't have gotten into a top college, SAT and all.

I am not talking about you or me personally fidesverita, just talking in general.

User avatar
Fancy Pants
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:32 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Fancy Pants » Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:22 am

Kakarot wrote:
fidesverita wrote:Their index sucks. They have such a heavy bias towards a test in comparison to a GPA that's been earned over the course of four years. I would think that the classes you've taken, your performance, your school name, etc. would be a better indicator of your ability as a student and skill set than a standardized test.


So wrong... Just so wrong. Me being poor in high school then going to a cheap school is not an indication of my intelligence or my ability.

LSAT on the other hand is the great equator. If you go to IVY league and get below 170 and I go to a state college or below and get above a 175 obviously adcomms can see who is more capable. And don't say you just don't do well on standardized test, because otherwise you wouldn't have gotten into a top college, SAT and all.

I am not talking about you or me personally fidesverita, just talking in general.


And something tells me if fidesverita wants the name of their UG to be an important admissions factor, they probably weren't complaining in high school about the weight that standardized tests were given in the UG admissions process.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Helmholtz » Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:24 am

crackberry wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:m51 (a current CLS student who has been incredibly good about CLS admittance discussion) said this about index:

M51 wrote:Basically, if a school has an index #, use that instead of your GPA/LSAT when trying to figure out your odds.

Thanks for the info, Helm. Did he say anything about Stanford's use of indexes or just CLS? (Sorry to hijack the thread. PM me if you want.)


Not that I know of, no.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Helmholtz » Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:27 am

AngryAvocado wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
AngryAvocado wrote:Thanks for digging up the info, Helm. Did you catch any indication as to the success rate of 4.3 indices who apply ED but get deferred?


I have never heard of anybody being deferred ED and then being accepted RD, which sort of makes sense. Not saying there isn't a first time......


Wow, didn't realize deferral was that big of a death sentence. Good to know.

Excuse me while I go piss my pants.

Which thread is that stuff from M51 from? I didn't see it in the Columbia 2012 one.


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=38795&p=838887&hilit=index#p838887
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33557&p=702810&hilit=index#p702810
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33518&p=702802&hilit=index#p702802

The Kim Jong illest
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby The Kim Jong illest » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:12 am

I applied to Columbia maybe 3 weeks ago - no E-mail of any kind received. Should I be concerned or is this standard?

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Unitas » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:12 am

The Kim Jong illest wrote:I applied to Columbia maybe 3 weeks ago - no E-mail of any kind received. Should I be concerned or is this standard?


Go to mycolumbia and sign up...

The Kim Jong illest
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby The Kim Jong illest » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:13 am

Kakarot wrote:
The Kim Jong illest wrote:I applied to Columbia maybe 3 weeks ago - no E-mail of any kind received. Should I be concerned or is this standard?


Go to mycolumbia and sign up...


Wait, am I an idiot? Is this something that needs to be done before any processing can occur? If so, I wish I had checked this thread earlier.

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Unitas » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:14 am

The Kim Jong illest wrote:
Kakarot wrote:
The Kim Jong illest wrote:I applied to Columbia maybe 3 weeks ago - no E-mail of any kind received. Should I be concerned or is this standard?


Go to mycolumbia and sign up...


Wait, am I an idiot? Is this something that needs to be done before any processing can occur? If so, I wish I had checked this thread earlier.


No no.. It is just a status checker. My favorite status checker by far.

The Kim Jong illest
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby The Kim Jong illest » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:18 am

Kakarot wrote:
The Kim Jong illest wrote:
Kakarot wrote:
The Kim Jong illest wrote:I applied to Columbia maybe 3 weeks ago - no E-mail of any kind received. Should I be concerned or is this standard?


Go to mycolumbia and sign up...


Wait, am I an idiot? Is this something that needs to be done before any processing can occur? If so, I wish I had checked this thread earlier.


No no.. It is just a status checker. My favorite status checker by far.


Gotcha - but I have zero communication from the school at this point, so no ID etc.

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Unitas » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:20 am

The Kim Jong illest wrote:
Kakarot wrote:No no.. It is just a status checker. My favorite status checker by far.


Gotcha - but I have zero communication from the school at this point, so no ID etc.


Err.. You have a name and LSAC number don't you?
Google Mycolumbia and sign up.... Then come back and thank me.

The Kim Jong illest
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby The Kim Jong illest » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:21 am

God this process makes me needy

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Unitas » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:23 am

https://www-app.law.columbia.edu/webpor ... heckstatus

Now I've done more work then you have to... If we both end up there and in the same section you already owe me.

The Kim Jong illest
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby The Kim Jong illest » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:25 am

They say to allow two weeks for completion. I have allowed nearly four. Heads will roll, people!

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby kittenmittons » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:25 am

The Kim Jong illest wrote:They say to allow two weeks for completion. I have allowed nearly four. Heads will roll, people!


Gonna nuke someone?

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby Unitas » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:25 am

The Kim Jong illest wrote:They say to allow two weeks for completion. I have allowed nearly four. Heads will roll, people!


Did you check the status checker and see what it said yet? You may be complete....

The Kim Jong illest
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby The Kim Jong illest » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:27 am

Kakarot wrote:
The Kim Jong illest wrote:They say to allow two weeks for completion. I have allowed nearly four. Heads will roll, people!


Did you check the status checker and see what it said yet? You may be complete....

You have no power. See what happened with the won..


Yeah, it says completion pending. Bastards.

APimpNamedSlickback
Posts: 1126
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby APimpNamedSlickback » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:45 am

fidesverita wrote:Their index sucks. They have such a heavy bias towards a test in comparison to a GPA that's been earned over the course of four years. I would think that the classes you've taken, your performance, your school name, etc. would be a better indicator of your ability as a student and skill set than a standardized test.



This is wrong....columbia's index implies that they actually places a relatively high premium on gpa relative to lsat. compare their formula to, say, BU's..

tarheel
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:53 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby tarheel » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:48 am

Yeah, does anyone else have all of their application components checked off in green, but still have their status marked as "Completion pending"?

yelldk
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby yelldk » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:56 am

Just got an email. IN!

APimpNamedSlickback
Posts: 1126
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby APimpNamedSlickback » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:58 am

yelldk wrote:Just got an email. IN!


hey congrats! mind sharing your numbers and when you went complete?

yelldk
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia 2010

Postby yelldk » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:59 am

3.61 / 174

Submitted 11/14, Completed 11/19




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