USC 2010!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
philosoraptor
Posts: 708
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:49 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby philosoraptor » Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:35 pm

OneKnight wrote:Anyone else notice the gaping hole in the upper 166s on LSN? Spiderlegs appears to be the only one who has heard one way or the other!

EDIT: In addition to two URM candidates, those are the only 166s to have heard back ><


FWIW, Spiderlegs' LSN says his numbers are "slightly off." So it's entirely possible that nobody at 166 and >3.65 has heard anything. AFAIK, 166 is median and 3.71 is 75th percentile, so I don't know why they've been avoiding us like the plague.

I can just imagine the staff meeting in September: "Hey guys, great new admissions plan: Let's take all the apps that indicate a strong numerical fit with our current student body and ignore them. So now when we're trying to raise our medians, those good apps will filter themselves out by forgetting about us and choosing other schools, and they'll eventually withdraw, saving us from having to WL them for no good reason. If they ask why they've been complete for 19 weeks, let's act all pissed off and blame it on the app increase. Kids these days don't compare notes on the intertubes, so there's no way they can discover our nefarious schemes. Best idea evar!"

User avatar
OneKnight
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:00 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby OneKnight » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:08 pm

philosoraptor wrote:
OneKnight wrote:Anyone else notice the gaping hole in the upper 166s on LSN? Spiderlegs appears to be the only one who has heard one way or the other!

EDIT: In addition to two URM candidates, those are the only 166s to have heard back ><


FWIW, Spiderlegs' LSN says his numbers are "slightly off." So it's entirely possible that nobody at 166 and >3.65 has heard anything. AFAIK, 166 is median and 3.71 is 75th percentile, so I don't know why they've been avoiding us like the plague.

I can just imagine the staff meeting in September: "Hey guys, great new admissions plan: Let's take all the apps that indicate a strong numerical fit with our current student body and ignore them. So now when we're trying to raise our medians, those good apps will filter themselves out by forgetting about us and choosing other schools, and they'll eventually withdraw, saving us from having to WL them for no good reason. If they ask why they've been complete for 19 weeks, let's act all pissed off and blame it on the app increase. Kids these days don't compare notes on the intertubes, so there's no way they can discover our nefarious schemes. Best idea evar!"


Haha, seriously. I'm not one to say CONSPIWACY THEOWY!!! ZOMG. Whatever the reason, they must realize we have other offers. USC was one of the few schools I visited BEFORE receiving an admissions decision (and I live on the East Coast) and I was impressed. Now I'm just wondering what the heck is going on. UCLA is doing the same thing for 166/3.95+

User avatar
danidancer
Posts: 841
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 9:46 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby danidancer » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:21 pm

Sneaky bastards. :lol:

madhatter01
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:46 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby madhatter01 » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:39 pm

^ also 166 and complete since 11/1

User avatar
Lieut Kaffee
Posts: 774
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 2:01 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Lieut Kaffee » Sat Mar 06, 2010 6:04 pm

roundabout wrote:Got a nice folder today with more materials about admissions . . . but still no info on scholarships. Makes sense, since I only submitted financial aid info last weekend, but has anyone else heard about money yet (other than Rothman ppl)?


Wondering the same thing. I got the little folder/viewbook/welcome letter today. I'm wondering when/if I will hear about scholarship info.

musicfor18
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:15 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby musicfor18 » Sat Mar 06, 2010 6:06 pm

OneKnight wrote:
Haha, seriously. I'm not one to say CONSPIWACY THEOWY!!! ZOMG. Whatever the reason, they must realize we have other offers. USC was one of the few schools I visited BEFORE receiving an admissions decision (and I live on the East Coast) and I was impressed. Now I'm just wondering what the heck is going on. UCLA is doing the same thing for 166/3.95+


Would you mind telling a bit about what impressed you at USC? I'm not going to be able to visit, but it's one of my top choices, and it would be helpful to hear your impressions. Thanks!

User avatar
Quine
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:49 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Quine » Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:09 pm

philosoraptor wrote:
OneKnight wrote:Anyone else notice the gaping hole in the upper 166s on LSN? Spiderlegs appears to be the only one who has heard one way or the other!

EDIT: In addition to two URM candidates, those are the only 166s to have heard back ><


FWIW, Spiderlegs' LSN says his numbers are "slightly off." So it's entirely possible that nobody at 166 and >3.65 has heard anything. AFAIK, 166 is median and 3.71 is 75th percentile, so I don't know why they've been avoiding us like the plague.

I can just imagine the staff meeting in September: "Hey guys, great new admissions plan: Let's take all the apps that indicate a strong numerical fit with our current student body and ignore them. So now when we're trying to raise our medians, those good apps will filter themselves out by forgetting about us and choosing other schools, and they'll eventually withdraw, saving us from having to WL them for no good reason. If they ask why they've been complete for 19 weeks, let's act all pissed off and blame it on the app increase. Kids these days don't compare notes on the intertubes, so there's no way they can discover our nefarious schemes. Best idea evar!"


167 is their median.

nyydjluver2
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby nyydjluver2 » Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:23 pm

I also have a 166, and 3.8 GPA. Submitted my app at the end of December and been complete since 1/14 :(

User avatar
philosoraptor
Posts: 708
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:49 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby philosoraptor » Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:29 pm

mctj wrote:167 is their median.


Princeton Review says 166 is "average," but maybe they mean mean. Whatevs.

finalaspects
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:21 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby finalaspects » Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:36 pm

philosoraptor wrote:
mctj wrote:167 is their median.


Princeton Review says 166 is "average," but maybe they mean mean. Whatevs.


167 is USC's median for both 50% and 75%. i believe they will try to raise it this year. even if they keep their 50% at 167 their 75% will go up, or they will try to raise both.

User avatar
OneKnight
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:00 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby OneKnight » Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:36 pm

mctj wrote:
philosoraptor wrote:
OneKnight wrote:Anyone else notice the gaping hole in the upper 166s on LSN? Spiderlegs appears to be the only one who has heard one way or the other!

EDIT: In addition to two URM candidates, those are the only 166s to have heard back ><


FWIW, Spiderlegs' LSN says his numbers are "slightly off." So it's entirely possible that nobody at 166 and >3.65 has heard anything. AFAIK, 166 is median and 3.71 is 75th percentile, so I don't know why they've been avoiding us like the plague.

I can just imagine the staff meeting in September: "Hey guys, great new admissions plan: Let's take all the apps that indicate a strong numerical fit with our current student body and ignore them. So now when we're trying to raise our medians, those good apps will filter themselves out by forgetting about us and choosing other schools, and they'll eventually withdraw, saving us from having to WL them for no good reason. If they ask why they've been complete for 19 weeks, let's act all pissed off and blame it on the app increase. Kids these days don't compare notes on the intertubes, so there's no way they can discover our nefarious schemes. Best idea evar!"


167 is their median.


Which means that 50% of their matriculants have a sub-167 LSAT - those can't all be URMs. According to LSN, the only confirmed sub-167 whose numbers are certain is sandiecohen47, who has some admittedly killer softs.

EDIT: BTW, I'm not trying to say all 166s should be expecting admission, but rather that they deserve a decision of some kind.

dsa1
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 9:06 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby dsa1 » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:07 pm

how fun. DF 3/5 and nothing in the mail.

Shoot me an e-mail regarding the decision..fck..

User avatar
Sauer Grapes
Posts: 1222
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:02 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Sauer Grapes » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:08 pm

OneKnight wrote:
mctj wrote:
philosoraptor wrote:
OneKnight wrote:Anyone else notice the gaping hole in the upper 166s on LSN? Spiderlegs appears to be the only one who has heard one way or the other!

EDIT: In addition to two URM candidates, those are the only 166s to have heard back ><


FWIW, Spiderlegs' LSN says his numbers are "slightly off." So it's entirely possible that nobody at 166 and >3.65 has heard anything. AFAIK, 166 is median and 3.71 is 75th percentile, so I don't know why they've been avoiding us like the plague.

I can just imagine the staff meeting in September: "Hey guys, great new admissions plan: Let's take all the apps that indicate a strong numerical fit with our current student body and ignore them. So now when we're trying to raise our medians, those good apps will filter themselves out by forgetting about us and choosing other schools, and they'll eventually withdraw, saving us from having to WL them for no good reason. If they ask why they've been complete for 19 weeks, let's act all pissed off and blame it on the app increase. Kids these days don't compare notes on the intertubes, so there's no way they can discover our nefarious schemes. Best idea evar!"


167 is their median.


Which means that 50% of their matriculants have a sub-167 LSAT - those can't all be URMs. According to LSN, the only confirmed sub-167 whose numbers are certain is sandiecohen47, who has some admittedly killer softs.

EDIT: BTW, I'm not trying to say all 166s should be expecting admission, but rather that they deserve a decision of some kind.

Incorrect.

144, 156, 160, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 170, 179.

What is the median of the above?

User avatar
OneKnight
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:00 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby OneKnight » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:21 pm

Sauer Grapes wrote:Incorrect.

144, 156, 160, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 170, 179.

What is the median of the above?


OK, granted, they could all be 167, and I should've said 167 or below, but, if their median is 167 and their 75th percentile is 167, and they're hardly accepting any below 167, does that mean they're aiming for their 25/50/75 to be 167/167/167??? That would be ridiculous!
And I still stand by my second point that people deserve decisions.

Also, I know this is TLS, but it would be sufficient to simply point out the error (rather than being a smartass and asking a math question)

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Veritas » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:26 pm

can someone hurry up and get a decision so this can stop :wink:

User avatar
Sauer Grapes
Posts: 1222
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:02 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Sauer Grapes » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:33 pm

OneKnight wrote:
Sauer Grapes wrote:Incorrect.

144, 156, 160, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 170, 179.

What is the median of the above?


OK, granted, they could all be 167, and I should've said 167 or below, but, if their median is 167 and their 75th percentile is 167, and they're hardly accepting any below 167, does that mean they're aiming for their 25/50/75 to be 167/167/167??? That would be ridiculous!
And I still stand by my second point that people deserve decisions.

Also, I know this is TLS, but it would be sufficient to simply point out the error (rather than being a smartass and asking a math question)

Wasn't being a smartass, just avoiding the inevitable "why is it incorrect?" question.

I will however be a smartass and point out that it is a statistics question and not really a math question. :wink:

User avatar
OneKnight
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:00 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby OneKnight » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:38 pm

Sauer Grapes wrote:
OneKnight wrote:
Sauer Grapes wrote:Incorrect.

144, 156, 160, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 170, 179.

What is the median of the above?


OK, granted, they could all be 167, and I should've said 167 or below, but, if their median is 167 and their 75th percentile is 167, and they're hardly accepting any below 167, does that mean they're aiming for their 25/50/75 to be 167/167/167??? That would be ridiculous!
And I still stand by my second point that people deserve decisions.

Also, I know this is TLS, but it would be sufficient to simply point out the error (rather than being a smartass and asking a math question)

Wasn't being a smartass, just avoiding the inevitable "why is it incorrect?" question.

I will however be a smartass and point out that it is a statistics question and not really a math question. :wink:


It's on now.

Statistics:
1 : a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of numerical data
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/statistics

User avatar
Sauer Grapes
Posts: 1222
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:02 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Sauer Grapes » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:40 pm

OneKnight wrote:
Sauer Grapes wrote:
OneKnight wrote:
Sauer Grapes wrote:Incorrect.

144, 156, 160, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 167, 170, 179.

What is the median of the above?


OK, granted, they could all be 167, and I should've said 167 or below, but, if their median is 167 and their 75th percentile is 167, and they're hardly accepting any below 167, does that mean they're aiming for their 25/50/75 to be 167/167/167??? That would be ridiculous!
And I still stand by my second point that people deserve decisions.

Also, I know this is TLS, but it would be sufficient to simply point out the error (rather than being a smartass and asking a math question)

Wasn't being a smartass, just avoiding the inevitable "why is it incorrect?" question.

I will however be a smartass and point out that it is a statistics question and not really a math question. :wink:


It's on now.

Statistics:
1 : a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of numerical data
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/statistics

:lol: :oops:

ylee0331
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:18 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby ylee0331 » Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:07 pm

^You guys make me laugh.

Anyway, here's one more applicant DF'd 3/5.
Didn't get any mail today as I am in Iowa.

Apple Tree
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:19 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Apple Tree » Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:35 pm

When the hell is the scholarship coming out?! :evil:

User avatar
Quine
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:49 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby Quine » Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:50 pm

Apple Tree wrote:When the hell is the scholarship coming out?! :evil:


Is there only one this year?!?

rccohla
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:05 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby rccohla » Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:22 pm

To all the guys/girls who went DF 3/5, FWIW, I didn't get my decision letter on the east coast until more than a week after the DF date.

amb123
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:33 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby amb123 » Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:31 pm

DF 3/5... Not holding out much hope being as I have been rejected from almost everywhere. I have to go out of town for work next week so I'll just have to see how things went on here.

App complete in Dec, IR 2/1, and DF 3/5.
165 LSAT
3.61 GPA

User avatar
dvd
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:13 pm

Re: USC 2010!

Postby dvd » Sun Mar 07, 2010 12:50 am

`
Last edited by dvd on Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
1800calturk
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:32 am

Re: USC 2010!

Postby 1800calturk » Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:02 am

dvd wrote:Any word on scholarships yet?


I wish.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kaziende, mm2368, proteinshake, uhwrestler and 14 guests