Stanford 2010!!!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
lawyering
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:27 am

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby lawyering » Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:30 pm

Am I the only one right now who has SLS in as a #3 choice? At the moment it's Y > H > S, but you never know, financial aid could change things.

User avatar
Tangerine Gleam
Posts: 1349
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:55 pm

Applied 10/30 with sub-par numbers and still no word.

User avatar
Jericwithers
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Jericwithers » Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:03 pm

los blancos wrote:Dinged. Funny how I got my only two rejections so far from the schools I vastly preferred to all of the others. :mrgreen:


This is why I act indifferent to all the schools I applied to. Take em or leave em; never show that you're interest. Sorry to hear about your rejection though; I am expecting mine tomorrow.

democrattotheend
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:04 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby democrattotheend » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:30 pm

My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?

User avatar
tintin
Posts: 952
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:26 am

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby tintin » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:34 pm

democrattotheend wrote:My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?


sounds like a ding :( sorry, that sucks.

democrattotheend
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:04 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby democrattotheend » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:44 pm

tintin wrote:
democrattotheend wrote:My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?


sounds like a ding :( sorry, that sucks.


Yeah, I figured. Why can't they just ding by e-mail? Why do they have to torture you with a letter in the mail?

User avatar
Jericwithers
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Jericwithers » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:47 pm

democrattotheend wrote:
tintin wrote:
democrattotheend wrote:My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?


sounds like a ding :( sorry, that sucks.


Yeah, I figured. Why can't they just ding by e-mail? Why do they have to torture you with a letter in the mail?


It seems there are too many trees in the world.

User avatar
WhiskeyGuy
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby WhiskeyGuy » Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:14 pm

CardinalRules wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:
amandap wrote:Stanford is my only outstanding application. I did not initially send out any targeted LOR's, but since I have not been rejected yet and I have a good potential writer I am thinking about it.

The thing is I am a current UC Berkeley undergrad, last semester I took a Law and Econ course that is taught by a faculty of the law school (Boalt) and I did really well in the course. I was thinking I would ask that professor to write a targeted letter to Stanford, but I kind of feel weird doing that since I was already admitted to Boalt. Any thoughts?


Make it happen. Not sending any targeted LORs is not a death knell, but it sure doesn't help. Let SLS know they are one of your top choices by putting in the extra effort.


+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.


Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.

User avatar
EijiMiyake
Posts: 277
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 12:29 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby EijiMiyake » Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:19 pm

WhiskeyGuy wrote:
CardinalRules wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:
amandap wrote:Stanford is my only outstanding application. I did not initially send out any targeted LOR's, but since I have not been rejected yet and I have a good potential writer I am thinking about it.

The thing is I am a current UC Berkeley undergrad, last semester I took a Law and Econ course that is taught by a faculty of the law school (Boalt) and I did really well in the course. I was thinking I would ask that professor to write a targeted letter to Stanford, but I kind of feel weird doing that since I was already admitted to Boalt. Any thoughts?


Make it happen. Not sending any targeted LORs is not a death knell, but it sure doesn't help. Let SLS know they are one of your top choices by putting in the extra effort.


+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.


Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.



Hm, that sucks. It seems silly to weight something that isn't really your effort, but your recommenders. I'm pretty sure that my letters were the same as my normal letters, except with the addition of that rating matrix.

lawyering
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:27 am

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby lawyering » Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:30 pm

WhiskeyGuy wrote:
CardinalRules wrote:
+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.


Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.


I did not submit targeted letters; my LORs did not complete the SLS matrix.

User avatar
tomhobbes
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby tomhobbes » Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:34 pm

lawyering wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:
CardinalRules wrote:
+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.


Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.


I did not submit targeted letters; my LORs did not complete the SLS matrix.


I got the sense that targeted letters are only useful if your letter writers have some connection to Stanford. I didn't do anything Stanford-specific either.

User avatar
WhiskeyGuy
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby WhiskeyGuy » Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:00 pm

The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby CardinalRules » Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:09 pm

WhiskeyGuy wrote:The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.


Right. I didn't mean to suggest that the targeted letter was a prerequisite. It just seems like an easy way to demonstrate interest,

User avatar
WhiskeyGuy
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby WhiskeyGuy » Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:20 pm

CardinalRules wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.


Right. I didn't mean to suggest that the targeted letter was a prerequisite. It just seems like an easy way to demonstrate interest,


Right. I am agreeing with you :)

User avatar
Jericwithers
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Jericwithers » Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:52 pm

WhiskeyGuy wrote:
CardinalRules wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.


Right. I didn't mean to suggest that the targeted letter was a prerequisite. It just seems like an easy way to demonstrate interest,


Right. I am agreeing with you :)


Wrong. I think you both are correct. :lol:

User avatar
BioEBear2010
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby BioEBear2010 » Mon Mar 22, 2010 11:47 pm

I had one prof without any affiliation to Stanford write a targeted letter. Don't really know what I was thinking, haha.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:34 am

BioEBear2010 wrote:I had one prof without any affiliation to Stanford write a targeted letter. Don't really know what I was thinking, haha.


But Dean Deal did. :wink:

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

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby adameus » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:49 pm

I sincerely want to attend SLS. However I'm not sure my application made that clear. I did not have targeted letters and I submitted on the last day. do you think it would be wise to send in a LOCI stating my interest in Stanford? I don't really have anything to update them on as I've just been working at the same job that I've been at for the last 3 years. I just want to convey to them the fact that I am very interested in Attending Stanford.

I was thinking of sending them an email about the fact that I haven't been told that I went complete and as part of that email stating my dying love for Stanford. Thoughts?

BenJ
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby BenJ » Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:04 pm

That sounds reasonable to me. I had no significant updates in my LOCI, either, but I thought I needed to make clear that I really was enthusiastic about attending Stanford. (Who knows if it will work.)

Although combining it with a question about completion might not be the greatest idea if you're just your LOCI in the body of the email. Maybe send an email asking about completion and also mention "additional materials" attached, and attach the LOCI as a Word document or PDF. That way, the question about completion doesn't end up being part of the LOCI. Just a thought.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:44 pm

BenJ wrote:That sounds reasonable to me. I had no significant updates in my LOCI, either, but I thought I needed to make clear that I really was enthusiastic about attending Stanford. (Who knows if it will work.)

Although combining it with a question about completion might not be the greatest idea if you're just your LOCI in the body of the email. Maybe send an email asking about completion and also mention "additional materials" attached, and attach the LOCI as a Word document or PDF. That way, the question about completion doesn't end up being part of the LOCI. Just a thought.


I agree that you might want to send it as an attachment, so that the secretary doesn't just read the email, send you the completion notification, and delete your message, thinking "problem solved."

User avatar
JohnnyTrojan08
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:46 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby JohnnyTrojan08 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:39 pm

What are the forum's thoughts on a LOCI even if I haven't heard anything since going under review? I applied late, didn't go under review until early March, didn't submit targeted letters or the matrix (because of silly LSAC, not because my recommenders didn't fill it out)... it's ironic that I didn't resubmit the forms on LSAC because I ended up having to wait for transcripts to be cleared anyway. Hindsight.

However, since early March I've been nominated for a competitive national Teach For America award (i.e. 1 of 7) and got my school a 150K grant. Those seem like worthy resume-updates based on other stuff in the thread, which also allows me to reiterate my interest in Stanford.

And in response to a few pages back, virtually tied with Harvard but with completely different reasons. I'd like to hear back from Stanford so I can actually start comparing.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:42 pm

JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:What are the forum's thoughts on a LOCI even if I haven't heard anything since going under review? I applied late, didn't go under review until early March, didn't submit targeted letters or the matrix (because of silly LSAC, not because my recommenders didn't fill it out)... it's ironic that I didn't resubmit the forms on LSAC because I ended up having to wait for transcripts to be cleared anyway. Hindsight.

However, since early March I've been nominated for a competitive national Teach For America award (i.e. 1 of 7) and got my school a 150K grant. Those seem like a worthy resume-updates based on other stuff in the thread, which also allows me to reiterate my interest in Stanford.

And in response to a few pages back, virtually tied with Harvard but with completely different reasons. I'd like to hear back from Stanford so I can actually start comparing.


I LOL'd at the modesty in the last line. :lol: Not surprising from a Trojan, though. :wink: I kid, of course.

You should send the new information, definitely, but present it as a resume update rather than as a LOCI. If you didn't go under review until early March, it's not surprising that you haven't heard from them.

User avatar
JohnnyTrojan08
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:46 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby JohnnyTrojan08 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:52 pm

Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW. :oops:

But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good. :wink:

And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:15 pm

JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW. :oops:

But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good. :wink:

And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.

Need I remind you what the Trojans' record is against the Cardinal the last three years?

User avatar
BioEBear2010
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby BioEBear2010 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:17 pm

crackberry wrote:
JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW. :oops:

But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good. :wink:

And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.

Need I remind you what the Trojans' record is against the Cardinal the last three years?

The Trojans' record against unwanted pregnancies is pretty solid, though.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AustinLu, bcapace, ellielaw, Hildegard15, Veil of Ignorance and 20 guests