3.76/173

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
User avatar
danielhay11
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:32 pm

3.76/173

Postby danielhay11 » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:13 am

Deleted
Last edited by danielhay11 on Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
danielhay11
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:32 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby danielhay11 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:52 am

Bump

User avatar
descartesb4thehorse
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:03 am

Re: 3.76/173

Postby descartesb4thehorse » Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:20 am

Since Grizz et. al. seem to be asleep

Image

User avatar
badfish
Posts: 1160
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:53 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby badfish » Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:37 am

I had very similar statistics and CCN were all very realistic possibilities (I got into Chicago and NYU an withdrew from Columbia before the decision came back). You've got an outside shot at H too.

User avatar
danielhay11
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:32 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby danielhay11 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:12 am

Deleted
Last edited by danielhay11 on Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

extremesplitter
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:12 am

Re: 3.76/173

Postby extremesplitter » Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:18 pm

danielhay11 wrote:Thanks, badfish!

Descartes, while not a "super soft," I do think TFA makes LSN less reliable. TFA won't add 5 points to an LSAT, but it is a way to make middle of the pack applicants stand out. My numbers say I'm a marginal candidate at HLS and it's peer schools; my question is whether TFA gives me a sufficient bump at those schools.


ITT someone thinks law schools care about softs that are not prestigious.

User avatar
vincanity1
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby vincanity1 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:33 pm

Wuddup twin

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:46 pm

extremesplitter wrote:
danielhay11 wrote:Thanks, badfish!

Descartes, while not a "super soft," I do think TFA makes LSN less reliable. TFA won't add 5 points to an LSAT, but it is a way to make middle of the pack applicants stand out. My numbers say I'm a marginal candidate at HLS and it's peer schools; my question is whether TFA gives me a sufficient bump at those schools.


ITT someone thinks law schools care about softs that are not prestigious.


ITT someone thinks TFA is not a prestigious soft. Pretty sure it is shared common knowledge that TFA is an above average soft that, while as OP noted is not like +5 points on the LSAT, is something that would make a middle of the pack applicant stand out. I don't see it as much less super than being a military vet...(either up-playing TFA here or down-playing military service soft, whichever method one prefers)

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby JamMasterJ » Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:53 pm

danielhay11 wrote:Thanks, badfish!

Descartes, while not a "super soft," I do think TFA makes LSN less reliable. TFA won't add 5 points to an LSAT, but it is a way to make middle of the pack applicants stand out. My numbers say I'm a marginal candidate at HLS and it's peer schools; my question is whether TFA gives me a sufficient bump at those schools.

If you know this to be true, why don't you just look at LSN, and anywhere that you see a bunch of waitlists or a fairly even split between admits and denials, assume your chances lie on the more positive side?
btw, you're probably in at 2 or 3 of CCN, and you have an incredibly remote shot at H unless the LSAT median magically drops a point.

User avatar
redsoxfan2495
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:13 am

Re: 3.76/173

Postby redsoxfan2495 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:58 pm

I don't really think CCN are reaches for you. I'd give you better than a 50% chance at all three. NYU is pretty close to a lock. Chicago is very possible, though it's the hardest to predict of the three due to its small class size. If you want to get in there try to apply as early as you can and tailor the app if possible. You're just above both medians at Columbia and you have the TFA thing going for you, so you have a fighting chance there too.

HeavenWood
Posts: 2915
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby HeavenWood » Sun Oct 30, 2011 1:11 pm

CCN on down to Vandy, plus any "strong regionals" (ex: UCLA, UT, Fordham, BU/BC, GW) if they're located in the market of your choice (it's always good to have some strong scholly offers to help with negotiating).

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby Grizz » Sun Oct 30, 2011 1:14 pm

JamMasterJ wrote:
danielhay11 wrote:Thanks, badfish!

Descartes, while not a "super soft," I do think TFA makes LSN less reliable. TFA won't add 5 points to an LSAT, but it is a way to make middle of the pack applicants stand out. My numbers say I'm a marginal candidate at HLS and it's peer schools; my question is whether TFA gives me a sufficient bump at those schools.

If you know this to be true, why don't you just look at LSN, and anywhere that you see a bunch of waitlists or a fairly even split between admits and denials, assume your chances lie on the more positive side?
btw, you're probably in at 2 or 3 of CCN, and you have an incredibly remote shot at H unless the LSAT median magically drops a point.

CR

But OP, I can pull a prediction out of my ass for you if you'd like.

User avatar
Bodhi_mind
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 12:16 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby Bodhi_mind » Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:13 pm

I think you'll get one of CCN and should take it

User avatar
vincanity1
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby vincanity1 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:18 pm

I think you'll get all 3 of CCN considering the drop in applicants, but I'm clearly biased. Good luck, doe

User avatar
Bodhi_mind
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 12:16 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby Bodhi_mind » Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:51 pm

Yeah I hope for that for both y'all. Go get it

vincanity1 wrote:I think you'll get all 3 of CCN considering the drop in applicants, but I'm clearly biased. Good luck, doe

User avatar
danielhay11
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:32 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby danielhay11 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 4:17 pm

Thanks to both of you, and to everyone else who gave feedback.

Good luck, # twin. We'll have to check back and compare cycles (my LSN username is the same as it is here).

Bodhi_mind wrote:Yeah I hope for that for both y'all. Go get it

vincanity1 wrote:I think you'll get all 3 of CCN considering the drop in applicants, but I'm clearly biased. Good luck, doe

User avatar
vincanity1
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby vincanity1 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 4:18 pm

danielhay11 wrote:Thanks to both of you, and to everyone else who gave feedback.

Good luck, # twin. We'll have to check back and compare cycles (my LSN username is the same as it is here).

Bodhi_mind wrote:Yeah I hope for that for both y'all. Go get it

vincanity1 wrote:I think you'll get all 3 of CCN considering the drop in applicants, but I'm clearly biased. Good luck, doe


Same. GL

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby IAFG » Sun Oct 30, 2011 4:23 pm

I don't think TFA helps in the least. I know LSs try to make it sound that way (fee waiver for TFAers, etc) but I don't think it's a game changer or even a game adjuster. Yes, it's prestigious, but there's a big supply of TFA alums among LS applicants. A TON of them end up applying to LSs.

So yes, LSN will serve OP nicely.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby Grizz » Sun Oct 30, 2011 4:29 pm

IAFG wrote:I know LSs try to make it sound that way (fee waiver for TFAers, etc) but I don't think it's a game changer or even a game adjuster.

Based on the LSN data I've seen, this. Nowhere NEAR the results I've seen people pull with military service (esp. combat vets).

User avatar
danielhay11
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:32 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby danielhay11 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:40 pm

Deleted
Last edited by danielhay11 on Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby IAFG » Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:44 pm

danielhay11 wrote:
Grizz wrote:
IAFG wrote:I know LSs try to make it sound that way (fee waiver for TFAers, etc) but I don't think it's a game changer or even a game adjuster.

Based on the LSN data I've seen, this. Nowhere NEAR the results I've seen people pull with military service (esp. combat vets).


I would say I'm far more realistic of the value of TFA than others - some seem to think being in TFA is a one-way ticket to HYS, which it's not. But I also think it's pointless to argue it has no value whatsoever.

I've heard it explained this way: law schools are looking for certain traits: maturity, leadership potential, interpersonal & communication skills, etc. Because law schools can't interview every applicant, they look for softs that screen for similar characteristics (TFA is one example, or consulting for a top firm like McKinsey is another). This also explains why military veterans have an even greater + factor than TFAers - the military both requires in greater amounts and strengthens to an exponential degree these characteristics.

This thread seems to confirm my thoughts: that TFA makes me a longshot at H, whereas I would have been a noshot without it.

I disagree with everything you just said.

User avatar
Flash
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 2:24 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby Flash » Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:47 pm

danielhay11 wrote:
Grizz wrote:
IAFG wrote:I know LSs try to make it sound that way (fee waiver for TFAers, etc) but I don't think it's a game changer or even a game adjuster.

Based on the LSN data I've seen, this. Nowhere NEAR the results I've seen people pull with military service (esp. combat vets).


I would say I'm far more realistic of the value of TFA than others - some seem to think being in TFA is a one-way ticket to HYS, which it's not. But I also think it's pointless to argue it has no value whatsoever.

I've heard it explained this way: law schools are looking for certain traits: maturity, leadership potential, interpersonal & communication skills, etc. Because law schools can't interview every applicant, they look for softs that screen for similar characteristics (TFA is one example, or consulting for a top firm like McKinsey is another). This also explains why military veterans have an even greater + factor than TFAers - the military both requires in greater amounts and strengthens to an exponential degree these characteristics.

This thread seems to confirm my thoughts: that TFA makes me a longshot at H, whereas I would have been a noshot without it.

They could. They don't because they don't really care.

User avatar
danielhay11
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:32 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby danielhay11 » Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:58 pm

Deleted
Last edited by danielhay11 on Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby IAFG » Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:20 pm

What statistics are you citing?

TFA does not signal maturity any more than any other two years of work experience. Schools can interview everyone, and Northwestern very nearly does. Someone with your numbers is a longshot at H anyway.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: 3.76/173

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:27 pm

IAFG wrote:What statistics are you citing?

TFA does not signal maturity any more than any other two years of work experience. Schools can interview everyone, and Northwestern very nearly does. Someone with your numbers is a longshot at H anyway.


Are you saying that, based on a pretty good sample of LSN applicants, those with TFA have not over-performed their numbers? That'd be pretty good evidence against the more commonly shared belief that TFA = strong soft.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: onlyhere4fun, Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest