Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby JCougar » Wed Dec 30, 2009 4:31 pm

Katz has a point: it's seemingly useless and not all that generous to admit people into the class if they are very unlikely to succeed. People like this are likely to graduate at the bottom of their class. Although they are getting full rides, it's probably going to be tough for them to make much of their careers if they can't survive in law school. There's nothing wrong with giving URMs a boost, especially when it comes to LSAT score, but people with numbers as poor as that may just be better off pursuing other avenues.

Slimpee
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby Slimpee » Wed Dec 30, 2009 4:34 pm

JCougar wrote:Katz has a point: it's seemingly useless and not all that generous to admit people into the class if they are very unlikely to succeed. People like this are likely to graduate at the bottom of their class. Although they are getting full rides, it's probably going to be tough for them to make much of their careers if they can't survive in law school. There's nothing wrong with giving URMs a boost, especially when it comes to LSAT score, but people with numbers as poor as that may just be better off pursuing other avenues.


That's exactly why automatically labeling someone as failing based on two numbers is such a load of crap. The adcomms won't give that scholarship to someone they think will fail. Obviously there is more to the application than we know and they felt this person would succeed and be a valuable addition to the class.

BobDole34
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:03 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby BobDole34 » Wed Dec 30, 2009 6:17 pm

Wow, I need to jump in here on a few things:

1. For the guy who has a 162/3.51 from Illinois: you're truly a 50/50 shot. I hope you've already applied. Expect to get the "Why Wisconsin" LOCI waitlist deal and if you really want to attend, drive up to Madison and meet with Mike Hall to deliver a well crafted letter.

2. To JCougar: you're correct to attend Madison over UIUC/WUSTL in this economy. Every school is getting rocked. It'd be insane to take on upwards of 50, maybe 100K more debt. You are wrong however to think the top 1/3 at either school is getting "chicago biglaw" - Illinois had about 60 firms show up to OCI. I wouldn't be surprised if you need top 10% in this economy.

3. To the person who said wisconsin games the rankings: are you fucking kidding me? Wisconsin is the poster child for a school that does THE EXACT OPPOSITE. Unlike the Indiana/WUSTL/Illinois/etc of the world that have an illogical LSAT wall (I'm thinking Indiana specifically here), where a 3.99/163 is waitlisted, but the 3.0/164 gets 25K in scholarships, Wisconsin makes you state your case and show commitment. It serves the same function as other yield protection tactics by other t1 schools, but it's far more humane and lets those who WANT Wisconsin articulate their goal.

4. I have to defend Katz here; he's not being David Duke. Black, white, purple, or red, anyone with a 148/3.1 is going to get rocked at a t1 school. I think Wisconsin can do better and recruit students of color with 155s, or 160s, not sub-150 LSATs.

lewis louis
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby lewis louis » Wed Dec 30, 2009 6:49 pm

BobDole34 wrote:Wow, I need to jump in here on a few things:

1. For the guy who has a 162/3.51 from Illinois: you're truly a 50/50 shot. I hope you've already applied. Expect to get the "Why Wisconsin" LOCI waitlist deal and if you really want to attend, drive up to Madison and meet with Mike Hall to deliver a well crafted letter.

2. To JCougar: you're correct to attend Madison over UIUC/WUSTL in this economy. Every school is getting rocked. It'd be insane to take on upwards of 50, maybe 100K more debt. You are wrong however to think the top 1/3 at either school is getting "chicago biglaw" - Illinois had about 60 firms show up to OCI. I wouldn't be surprised if you need top 10% in this economy.

3. To the person who said wisconsin games the rankings: are you fucking kidding me? Wisconsin is the poster child for a school that does THE EXACT OPPOSITE. Unlike the Indiana/WUSTL/Illinois/etc of the world that have an illogical LSAT wall (I'm thinking Indiana specifically here), where a 3.99/163 is waitlisted, but the 3.0/164 gets 25K in scholarships, Wisconsin makes you state your case and show commitment. It serves the same function as other yield protection tactics by other t1 schools, but it's far more humane and lets those who WANT Wisconsin articulate their goal.

4. I have to defend Katz here; he's not being David Duke. Black, white, purple, or red, anyone with a 148/3.1 is going to get rocked at a t1 school. I think Wisconsin can do better and recruit students of color with 155s, or 160s, not sub-150 LSATs.


If you're going to come to the defense of Katz (though I wish you wouldn't, so we could let that comment die), it's crucial you identify 2 things: 1)What Katz was saying 2)Why everyone here took issue with that.

If you did those two things I think you would realize that 1) He not only threw a defenseless (likely made-up) individuals personal business onto a public forum without their knownlege or consent (which i think is just a bit inconsiderate), he 2) by 'wishing me not', lumped me into a generic group of 'underachieving' AA. Both of which are questionable acts in nature to say the least.

Was the argument EVER made that Wisconsin could/can/should/will accept a higher caliber of URM? No.

If you are coming to the defense of the 2 acts described above, thats fine. If not, what you have done is a bit hasty.

tamlyric
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:21 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby tamlyric » Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:26 pm

lewis louis wrote:If you're going to come to the defense of Katz (though I wish you wouldn't, so we could let that comment die), it's crucial you identify 2 things: 1)What Katz was saying 2)Why everyone here took issue with that.

If you did those two things I think you would realize that 1) He not only threw a defenseless (likely made-up) individuals personal business onto a public forum without their knownlege or consent (which i think is just a bit inconsiderate), he 2) by 'wishing me not', lumped me into a generic group of 'underachieving' AA. Both of which are questionable acts in nature to say the least.

Was the argument EVER made that Wisconsin could/can/should/will accept a higher caliber of URM? No.

If you are coming to the defense of the 2 acts described above, thats fine. If not, what you have done is a bit hasty.


This.

02122015
Posts: 5317
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:57 pm

.

Postby 02122015 » Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:53 pm

.
Last edited by 02122015 on Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

lewis louis
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby lewis louis » Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:13 pm

MSPeast wrote:How long does it usually take the admissions packet to show up? I know it's the holidays, but I just got my packet from Minnesota, which was dated 12/28, and they admitted me about a week after Wisconsin did.


Does Wisconsin's Status checker update before they end you the decision letter? Also, does wisconsin have a complete status, or does it go straight to review? (Im sure this has already been addressed, but bear with me).

User avatar
superflush
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:45 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby superflush » Wed Dec 30, 2009 11:05 pm

BobDole34 wrote:Wisconsin makes you state your case and show commitment. It serves the same function as other yield protection tactics by other t1 schools, but it's far more humane and lets those who WANT Wisconsin articulate their goal.


They essentially are yield-protecting by waitlisting more-than-qualified candidates

User avatar
coolkatz321
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:31 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby coolkatz321 » Thu Dec 31, 2009 1:43 am

tamlyric wrote:
superflush wrote:
tamlyric wrote:Sorry, I should I have been more clear. The eye roll -- which really didn't capture the emotion I wanted to convey but was the closest thing I could find -- was for pointing at a particular person and denigrating her. Even if the more general point you're making is well-taken, did you really need to throw a specific person under the bus in order to make it? Why not just make the statement in bold and stop while you're ahead?


Eh, I don't think he is lashing out at this particular woman, rather the seemingly crazy way that Madison deals with their applicants (particularly their URM grab).


Yeah you're right, superflush; I stand corrected. Coolkatz's original post is a paradigm of compassionate and clear thinking.


No, you're right, I shouldn't have lashed out at the one particular person. I suppose it's just my own frustration with the way Wisconsin deals with URMs in the admissions process.

Anyways, I apologize.

Also, I was not grouping you into a group of underachieving URMs (or I wasn't trying to, at least). So, I doubly apologize, if that makes any sense.

User avatar
MoS
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:59 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby MoS » Thu Dec 31, 2009 3:05 am

coolkatz321 wrote:
tamlyric wrote:
superflush wrote:
tamlyric wrote:Sorry, I should I have been more clear. The eye roll -- which really didn't capture the emotion I wanted to convey but was the closest thing I could find -- was for pointing at a particular person and denigrating her. Even if the more general point you're making is well-taken, did you really need to throw a specific person under the bus in order to make it? Why not just make the statement in bold and stop while you're ahead?


Eh, I don't think he is lashing out at this particular woman, rather the seemingly crazy way that Madison deals with their applicants (particularly their URM grab).


Yeah you're right, superflush; I stand corrected. Coolkatz's original post is a paradigm of compassionate and clear thinking.


No, you're right, I shouldn't have lashed out at the one particular person. I suppose it's just my own frustration with the way Wisconsin deals with URMs in the admissions process.

Anyways, I apologize.

Also, I was not grouping you into a group of underachieving URMs (or I wasn't trying to, at least). So, I doubly apologize, if that makes any sense.

So does this signal the end of all the Badgering posts about the comment.

User avatar
shanemahsa
Posts: 655
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:46 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby shanemahsa » Thu Dec 31, 2009 3:28 am

coolkatz321 wrote:
No, you're right, I shouldn't have lashed out at the one particular person. I suppose it's just my own frustration with the way Wisconsin deals with URMs in the admissions process.

Anyways, I apologize.

Also, I was not grouping you into a group of underachieving URMs (or I wasn't trying to, at least). So, I doubly apologize, if that makes any sense.


Good on ya mate... respect.

Edit: formatting error

lewis louis
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby lewis louis » Thu Dec 31, 2009 3:46 am

coolkatz321 wrote:
tamlyric wrote:
superflush wrote:
tamlyric wrote:Sorry, I should I have been more clear. The eye roll -- which really didn't capture the emotion I wanted to convey but was the closest thing I could find -- was for pointing at a particular person and denigrating her. Even if the more general point you're making is well-taken, did you really need to throw a specific person under the bus in order to make it? Why not just make the statement in bold and stop while you're ahead?


Eh, I don't think he is lashing out at this particular woman, rather the seemingly crazy way that Madison deals with their applicants (particularly their URM grab).


Yeah you're right, superflush; I stand corrected. Coolkatz's original post is a paradigm of compassionate and clear thinking.


No, you're right, I shouldn't have lashed out at the one particular person. I suppose it's just my own frustration with the way Wisconsin deals with URMs in the admissions process.

Anyways, I apologize.

Also, I was not grouping you into a group of underachieving URMs (or I wasn't trying to, at least). So, I doubly apologize, if that makes any sense.


There were never any ill feelings, coolkatz. I knew what you were trying to do, and what you weren't. Apology accepted. If im lucky enough to get into Wisconsin, i'd be glad to have you as a classmate.

Anyone know about the status'?

lewis louis
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby lewis louis » Thu Dec 31, 2009 5:14 am

Gah, i hate to blow up this thread, but one more question. knowing my stats (153, 3.31 urm AA) should I submit the "Why Wisconsin?" addedum now, or wait for a waitlist? If accepted at UW, im certain to go, but i wonder what you all think the best strategy would be. Thanks!

User avatar
xanderdellus
Posts: 156
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:58 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby xanderdellus » Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:29 am

I spoke to the the Dean at UW twice. Both times he mentioned the phrase, "A legitimate reason to be at Wisconsin." He wouldn't elaborate, or take my bait when I suggested some possible "legitimate reasons," e.g. my wife is from WI and I will likely practice in the midwest to be close to them and I think WI is one of the most underrated schools in T1. So I don't know with any definiteness what he wants.

Regardless between those conversations, and the WL/YP, I am seriously considering sending a "Why WI" addendum. I have to decide if WI is my first choice before I do so. If I decide it is, I am DEFINITELY sending that addendum.

User avatar
robin600
Posts: 1583
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:07 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby robin600 » Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:38 am

lewis louis wrote:Anyone know about the status'?


my status checker doesn't say anything about snail mail just decision email sent the same day that decision made is.

tamlyric
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:21 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby tamlyric » Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:53 am

coolkatz321 wrote:No, you're right, I shouldn't have lashed out at the one particular person. I suppose it's just my own frustration with the way Wisconsin deals with URMs in the admissions process.

Anyways, I apologize.

Also, I was not grouping you into a group of underachieving URMs (or I wasn't trying to, at least). So, I doubly apologize, if that makes any sense.


Cheers, coolkatz! :D

Sorry about the original eye roll: to say the least, it didn't set the right tone.

tamlyric
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:21 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby tamlyric » Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:01 am

lewis louis wrote:Gah, i hate to blow up this thread, but one more question. knowing my stats (153, 3.31 urm AA) should I submit the "Why Wisconsin?" addedum now, or wait for a waitlist? If accepted at UW, im certain to go, but i wonder what you all think the best strategy would be. Thanks!


I say send the "Why Wisconsin?" now. Let them know how bad you want to be there and why from the outset. If possible, I think it's best to avoid the WL, and you can always send them additional letters of continued interest if the need arises later in the process.

Fwiw.

HAPPY NEW YEAR! :mrgreen:

Slimpee
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby Slimpee » Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:11 am

tamlyric wrote:
lewis louis wrote:Gah, i hate to blow up this thread, but one more question. knowing my stats (153, 3.31 urm AA) should I submit the "Why Wisconsin?" addedum now, or wait for a waitlist? If accepted at UW, im certain to go, but i wonder what you all think the best strategy would be. Thanks!


I say send the "Why Wisconsin?" now. Let them know how bad you want to be there and why from the outset. If possible, I think it's best to avoid the WL, and you can always send them additional letters of continued interest if the need arises later in the process.

Fwiw.

HAPPY NEW YEAR! :mrgreen:


Isn't an unsolicited "Why Wisconsin" an automatic ticket to admission? :D

User avatar
coolkatz321
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:31 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby coolkatz321 » Thu Dec 31, 2009 6:00 pm

MoS wrote:So does this signal the end of all the Badgering posts about the comment.


Please tell me this was an intended pun. The capitalization almost confirms it. :mrgreen:

adonai
Posts: 1033
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:09 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby adonai » Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:03 pm

I'm just curious, but coolkatz do you know the specified person of debate personally? I don't mean to respark anything, but I am curious as to if his/her stats are actually correlating to his/her grades in law school...

User avatar
MoS
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:59 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby MoS » Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:23 pm

coolkatz321 wrote:
MoS wrote:So does this signal the end of all the Badgering posts about the comment.


Please tell me this was an intended pun. The capitalization almost confirms it. :mrgreen:


I thought everyone could use a bad joke.

jasonpaul94317
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby jasonpaul94317 » Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:21 pm

Well, I mean, at some point it seems that "standards" have become irrelevant, at least in terms of AA admissions. If a 148, regardless of race, can succeed at a T1 in the eyes of an admissions council, then it could be argued that the LSAT as a whole is irrelevant. High scores, while nice for US News and Report, don't mean much as far as student success during school and post-graduation.

In other words, at some point some schools stopped being concernced with simply creating solid lawyers, and took a role of "social justice" in society. Is this good or bad? Well, I guess that's for our future generations to decide.

User avatar
superflush
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:45 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby superflush » Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:05 pm

jasonpaul94317 wrote:Well, I mean, at some point it seems that "standards" have become irrelevant, at least in terms of AA admissions. If a 148, regardless of race, can succeed at a T1 in the eyes of an admissions council, then it could be argued that the LSAT as a whole is irrelevant. High scores, while nice for US News and Report, don't mean much as far as student success during school and post-graduation.

In other words, at some point some schools stopped being concernced with simply creating solid lawyers, and took a role of "social justice" in society. Is this good or bad? Well, I guess that's for our future generations to decide.


great argument :roll:

lewis louis
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby lewis louis » Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:35 am

Slimpee wrote:
tamlyric wrote:
lewis louis wrote:Gah, i hate to blow up this thread, but one more question. knowing my stats (153, 3.31 urm AA) should I submit the "Why Wisconsin?" addedum now, or wait for a waitlist? If accepted at UW, im certain to go, but i wonder what you all think the best strategy would be. Thanks!


I say send the "Why Wisconsin?" now. Let them know how bad you want to be there and why from the outset. If possible, I think it's best to avoid the WL, and you can always send them additional letters of continued interest if the need arises later in the process.

Fwiw.

HAPPY NEW YEAR! :mrgreen:


Whats the best way to send it? E-mail or snail mail? Also, what would you view as the appropriate wording for such a message. thanks!

jasonpaul94317
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Wisconsin 2010 Application Cycle

Postby jasonpaul94317 » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:10 am

Please go ahead and disregard that last post of mine. I guess that's the result of posting on TLS after consuming a few Long Island Iced Teas. :)

I would like to echo the above commenter's question, though. As a borderline candidate myself, I might be looking to submit an LOCI. I'm also overseas,
so really the only way of showing my interest is through a letter. I guess email is the standard procedure?




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Kimmysradscreenname and 4 guests