I would think that you will get into at least M or P. But I can't say that with any certainty obviouslydjwjddl wrote:With my #s if I don't apply ED anywhere, but just early in the application cycle will this be too much of a risk if I'm looking to go to a school ranked no lower than Penn? In other words, if I don't ED anywhere is it highly likely I'll be WL'd and then rejected?
. Forum
- JamMasterJ
- Posts: 6649
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
- TaipeiMort
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
Another actual Chicago student rejecting what you say. I know people with median GPA and 168, as well as 169. I would at least give it a try. Chicago is holistic and not about just the numbers. They really like people who bring something to the table.JamMasterJ wrote:doesn't matter. A lot of the ED boost is for improving a median with someone who is bound to attend. If he's not actually improving the median, he's not benefiting the school in that way. Regardless of how holistic a school tries to be, applicants still really need to be above one of the medians.anewaphorist wrote:Eh, I'll disagree with soj. I think you have a good chance, and this is coming from a fellow UChicago EDer, although my GPA is significantly higher than yours. Yes, you're below the GPA median, but you went to an Ivy, so I feel like the adcom would at least give your GPA the same consideration they give a 3.9. That puts you at/above their GPA median. Your LSAT is below their LSAT median but above their 25th percentile. So, that said, you would not be disqualified on the basis of your stats alone from the RD pool, let alone the ED one. Factor in the fact that apps are down this year, and I think you have a strong chance.
There was a kid last year (http://lawschoolnumbers.com/beatrock) waitlisted with similar numbers (3.83, 169), but, by his own admission, he had average softs and an average UG. In that same cycle, there was a 3.74/170 that was accepted ED with $ (http://lawschoolnumbers.com/etd20). S/he went to a T5 undergrad.
- soj
- Posts: 7888
- Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
Not necessarily rejecting the bold, but someone who's at the median GPA is helping Chicago secure that median, so Chicago certainly could have accepted that person for numbers-related reasons only. Without the median/168 and median/169 students, Chicago's GPA median might have fallen by .01, while its LSAT median might have stayed the same.TaipeiMort wrote:Another actual Chicago student rejecting what you say. I know people with median GPA and 168, as well as 169. I would at least give it a try. Chicago is holistic and not about just the numbers. They really like people who bring something to the table.
- JamMasterJ
- Posts: 6649
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
my entire point revolves around the fact that slightly less than median is not going to be looked at the same as slightly above or at median b/c of stuff like UG institutionsoj wrote:Not necessarily rejecting the bold, but someone who's at the median GPA is helping Chicago secure that median, so Chicago certainly could have accepted that person for numbers-related reasons only. Without the median/168 and median/169 students, Chicago's GPA median might have fallen by .01, while its LSAT median might have stayed the same.TaipeiMort wrote:Another actual Chicago student rejecting what you say. I know people with median GPA and 168, as well as 169. I would at least give it a try. Chicago is holistic and not about just the numbers. They really like people who bring something to the table.
-
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 2:21 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
I've heard administrators at UChicago explicitly say that they understand that going to a top undergrad is meaningful, and that a lower GPA from there is more meaningful than a slightly higher GPA from a state school, and they like to accept people like that when they can. But, like every other school (except Illinois), they have to reject applicants with lower GPAs to keep their medians high for ranking purposes.
I would say ED would be far and away your best shot, and I don't think it would make much of an impact on how much money you get. If you want Chicago, go for it. No reason not to.
I would say ED would be far and away your best shot, and I don't think it would make much of an impact on how much money you get. If you want Chicago, go for it. No reason not to.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- djwjddl
- Posts: 478
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
Am I completely delusional if I think about EDing to Columbia? 50/50?
- JamMasterJ
- Posts: 6649
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
I searched non-URMs with 3.8-3.9 and 168-170. Almost certainly looks like a waitlistdjwjddl wrote:Am I completely delusional if I think about EDing to Columbia? 50/50?
- djwjddl
- Posts: 478
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
would/do multiple scores matter in columbia's case assuming there is ~6 point discrepancy between 1st and 3rd and ~9 between 2nd and 3rd?
- Tiago Splitter
- Posts: 17148
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am
Re: ED to Chicago
Generally the consensus is that retakes aren't a problem, but 155, 160, 169 seems like it would hurt at Columbia.djwjddl wrote:would/do multiple scores matter in columbia's case assuming there is ~6 point discrepancy between 1st and 3rd and ~9 between 2nd and 3rd?
- JamMasterJ
- Posts: 6649
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
any 169 is just generally trouble at ColumbiaTiago Splitter wrote:Generally the consensus is that retakes aren't a problem, but 155, 160, 169 seems like it would hurt at Columbia.djwjddl wrote:would/do multiple scores matter in columbia's case assuming there is ~6 point discrepancy between 1st and 3rd and ~9 between 2nd and 3rd?
- Tiago Splitter
- Posts: 17148
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am
Re: ED to Chicago
Yeah that's the point. If it was just the single 169 there might be a tiny chance, but the previous two takes at much lower numbers wipe out any hope. Conversely if the takes went 155, 160, 175 he'd probably have no trouble.JamMasterJ wrote:any 169 is just generally trouble at ColumbiaTiago Splitter wrote:Generally the consensus is that retakes aren't a problem, but 155, 160, 169 seems like it would hurt at Columbia.djwjddl wrote:would/do multiple scores matter in columbia's case assuming there is ~6 point discrepancy between 1st and 3rd and ~9 between 2nd and 3rd?
- djwjddl
- Posts: 478
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
I said a 6 point discrepancy between the first and 3rd which comes out to 163, 160, and 169--idk how much of a difference there is between 163 vs 155 but is the general consensus that they will ding me even though there is a large discrepancy?
- Tiago Splitter
- Posts: 17148
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am
Re: ED to Chicago
RC fail. My bad. It's still unlikely in any case, and even less likely with three sub-170s.djwjddl wrote:I said a 6 point discrepancy between the first and 3rd which comes out to 163, 160, and 169--idk how much of a difference there is between 163 vs 155 but is the general consensus that they will ding me even though there is a large discrepancy?
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- djwjddl
- Posts: 478
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
what about to chicago? Would they care about multiple scores?
-
- Posts: 182
- Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:41 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
At the end of the day, theorizing is only going to get you so far. I don't believe anyone that has posted in this thread so far is on an admissions committee anywhere (and if they are, listen to them). I would say do your research and apply ED where you really want to be. Tailor your personal statement and/or write a "why X" to whichever you school you decide to ED to and follow up if you get waitlisted and know you did your best. Outliers exist - I have a friend that got into Columbia last cycle with a 3.65 and a 162 (yes serious). But, the more important point here should be you still have a great application. For us to sit around and dog on your application is like a bunch of bodybuilders critiquing brad pitt's physique - we get an unrealistic standard in our heads sometimes. Good luck!
Last edited by theduffman on Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 12612
- Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am
Re: ED to Chicago
Ouch bro. This happened to me today by someone who already posted in this thread so Im just keeping it real.theduffman wrote:Taylor your personal statement
Oh and just because people don't sit on admissions committees does not mean they don't have a lot of meaningful advice.
- JamMasterJ
- Posts: 6649
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
No one is dogging him, they're trying to provide that "research."theduffman wrote:At the end of the day, theorizing is only going to get you so far. I don't believe anyone that has posted in this thread so far is on an admissions committee anywhere (and if they are, listen to them). I would say do your research and apply ED where you really want to be. Taylor your personal statement and/or write a "why X" to whichever you school you decide to ED to and follow up if you get waitlisted and know you did your best. Outliers exist - I have a friend that got into Columbia last cycle with a 3.65 and a 162 (yes serious). But, the more important point here should be you still have a great application. For us to sit around and dog on your application is like a bunch of bodybuilders critiquing brad pitt's physique - we get an unrealistic standard in our heads sometimes. Good luck!
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 182
- Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:41 pm
Re: ED to Chicago
I'm not saying to ignore those of us not on committees or that everyone IS dogging on this app - my point is just to remind the OP that while most of us (this is at least true of me) are on these boards because we have built up anxiety and find obsessing over whether we'll get in somewhere or not to temporarily give us the illusion of more control than we have, empirical trends and a well thought out application are the only things that are relevant. By "research" I simply meant hard data more than speculation (not saying your speculation isn't based on observed data patterns - just trying to create some sort of bottom line lest these threads become endless.Mal Reynolds wrote:Ouch bro. This happened to me today by someone who already posted in this thread so Im just keeping it real.theduffman wrote:Taylor your personal statement
Oh and just because people don't sit on admissions committees does not mean they don't have a lot of meaningful advice.
also lol @ me saying taylor wow
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login