Scholarship Determination Forum

[drawstring]

So, any tips for tying an application into a compelling narrative when your experiences aren't really cohesive or obviously linked in some way?

I don't know that it's terribly complicated. I think people should sit down and ask themselves three major questions:

1. Why do I want to go to law school? (be honest with yourself!)
2. Who am I, and what do I bring to the table?
3. What experiences have shaped me into the person I am today?

If you can answer those three questions well, a common thread should reveal itself. If it doesn't, then that's an indication that your reason for wanting to go to law school is probably fairly muddled and that you might be best served by gaining some life experience.

As for OP's feeling that developing a strong personal narrative is frustratingly wishy-washy ("meaningless," I believe was the term) and that softs are implicitly the BS portion of the app consisting of a list impressive-sounding stuff, this is why I recommended that OP might need some time before law school. One of the most important skills you can develop is the ability to present who you are as a person. Experience certainly counts, but any business in any industry is fundamentally hiring people, not resumes.

Those kind of "softs" come into play over and over. For example:

As a general rule, people overestimate how much grades matter because they over-estimate the degree to which students will nail the soft parts of the job search (applying aggressively, interviewing well, etc). They think that if a school places 65% big law + clerkships, the "cut off" must be around top 70%. In reality, it's more like top 80-90%.

And once you're finally out of school, self-presentation skills only grow in importance.

Thanks for this!

[FuriousDuck]

...

[Lebrarian_Booker]

I currently work in admissions and financial aid, though predominantly with UG institutions. I do work with several law schools however. Scholarships are awarded based on a grid with GPAs along one axis and LSATs along another. They find where you land and, and that's your scholarship. They develop their financial aid policies before the start of the application cycle. Depending on institutional goals, they may have a seperate grid for URMs.

99.9% of the time your softs do not play into your scholarship offer. There are select cases where the school may "override" the scholarship that you qualify for and give you a higher one, but this occurs in under 5% of cases, closer to 1%.

Now, where the above may not hold completely true is at HYS. Why? Because law school admissions and enrollment (like most things) is a game ruled by competition. What drives this competition is that applicants have options. Some applicants have more options than others (better scores) and thus require more money to be incentivized to enroll. An extreme example, just to illustrate the point: what would happen if everyone admitted to Yale received a full ride at Harvard? Harvard would likely underenroll. Even at HYS those schools face competition, because their applicants have options determined by their numbers (moreso than softs), and so they also likely award for thr most part based on numbers, though softs likely play a larger role than at other schools--still handled through "overriding" the award policy.

[SFrost]

I currently work in admissions and financial aid, though predominantly with UG institutions. I do work with several law schools however. Scholarships are awarded based on a grid with GPAs along one axis and LSATs along another. They find where you land and, and that's your scholarship. They develop their financial aid policies before the start of the application cycle. Depending on institutional goals, they may have a seperate grid for URMs.

99.9% of the time your softs do not play into your scholarship offer. There are select cases where the school may "override" the scholarship that you qualify for and give you a higher one, but this occurs in under 5% of cases, closer to 1%.

Now, where the above may not hold completely true is at HYS. Why? Because law school admissions and enrollment (like most things) is a game ruled by competition. What drives this competition is that applicants have options. Some applicants have more options than others (better scores) and thus require more money to be incentivized to enroll. An extreme example, just to illustrate the point: what would happen if everyone admitted to Yale received a full ride at Harvard? Harvard would likely underenroll. Even at HYS those schools face competition, because their applicants have options determined by their numbers (moreso than softs), and so they also likely award for thr most part based on numbers, though softs likely play a larger role than at other schools--still handled through "overriding" the award policy.

Way off. None of the T14 use a LSAT/GPA grid as a strict determinant of aid.

HYS use need only. CCN and most of the rest of T14 use need-aware merit aid which includes softs. I don't know any evidence to the contrary.

[Lebrarian_Booker]

I currently work in admissions and financial aid, though predominantly with UG institutions. I do work with several law schools however. Scholarships are awarded based on a grid with GPAs along one axis and LSATs along another. They find where you land and, and that's your scholarship. They develop their financial aid policies before the start of the application cycle. Depending on institutional goals, they may have a seperate grid for URMs.

99.9% of the time your softs do not play into your scholarship offer. There are select cases where the school may "override" the scholarship that you qualify for and give you a higher one, but this occurs in under 5% of cases, closer to 1%.

Now, where the above may not hold completely true is at HYS. Why? Because law school admissions and enrollment (like most things) is a game ruled by competition. What drives this competition is that applicants have options. Some applicants have more options than others (better scores) and thus require more money to be incentivized to enroll. An extreme example, just to illustrate the point: what would happen if everyone admitted to Yale received a full ride at Harvard? Harvard would likely underenroll. Even at HYS those schools face competition, because their applicants have options determined by their numbers (moreso than softs), and so they also likely award for thr most part based on numbers, though softs likely play a larger role than at other schools--still handled through "overriding" the award policy.

Way off. None of the T14 use a LSAT/GPA grid as a strict determinant of aid.

HYS use need only. CCN and most of the rest of T14 use need-aware merit aid which includes softs. I don't know any evidence to the contrary.

I'm not claiming you're wrong straight out, as I don't work with any T14s, but why do you claim they don't use a grid (with perhaps more "overrides" than other scbools)? Are you suggesting they walk into the cycle blind and then just hand out money however they want? I don't think any responsible director of admissions or financial aid would allow that. Schools draft their budgets a year in advance with an anticipated number of enrolled students, and need a quantifiable way of estimating enrolment and net revenue. It's difficult to come up with a quantifiable "grid" of softs on which to award.

Edit: Need based aid amounts also vary based on qualification. They don't meet 100% of need for all admits. The percentage of need met is still determined by LSAT/GPA and therefore doesn't differ in principle from the manner in which merit is awarded.

Sorry for shitty spelling, am on mobile.

[SFrost]

I currently work in admissions and financial aid, though predominantly with UG institutions. I do work with several law schools however. Scholarships are awarded based on a grid with GPAs along one axis and LSATs along another. They find where you land and, and that's your scholarship. They develop their financial aid policies before the start of the application cycle. Depending on institutional goals, they may have a seperate grid for URMs.

99.9% of the time your softs do not play into your scholarship offer. There are select cases where the school may "override" the scholarship that you qualify for and give you a higher one, but this occurs in under 5% of cases, closer to 1%.

Now, where the above may not hold completely true is at HYS. Why? Because law school admissions and enrollment (like most things) is a game ruled by competition. What drives this competition is that applicants have options. Some applicants have more options than others (better scores) and thus require more money to be incentivized to enroll. An extreme example, just to illustrate the point: what would happen if everyone admitted to Yale received a full ride at Harvard? Harvard would likely underenroll. Even at HYS those schools face competition, because their applicants have options determined by their numbers (moreso than softs), and so they also likely award for thr most part based on numbers, though softs likely play a larger role than at other schools--still handled through "overriding" the award policy.

Way off. None of the T14 use a LSAT/GPA grid as a strict determinant of aid.

HYS use need only. CCN and most of the rest of T14 use need-aware merit aid which includes softs. I don't know any evidence to the contrary.

I'm not claiming you're wrong straight out, as I don't work with any T14s, but why do you claim they don't use a grid (with perhaps more "overrides" than other scbools)? Are you suggesting they walk into the cycle blind and then just hand out money however they want? I don't think any responsible director of admissions or financial aid would allow that. Schools draft their budgets a year in advance with an anticipated number of enrolled students, and need a quantifiable way of estimating enrolment and net revenue. It's difficult to come up with a quantifiable "grid" of softs on which to award.

Edit: Need based aid amounts also vary based on qualification. They don't meet 100% of need for all admits. The percentage of need met is still determined by LSAT/GPA and therefore doesn't differ in principle from the manner in which merit is awarded.

I mean I understand what you're saying and I really have no idea how they award scholarship money considering they must have a budget at the beginning of the cycle. However, head over to LSN. Many of the awards make no sense. People below 50%s getting big awards, people with >75/75 getting $0. Of course there's a positive correlation, but that correlation has a low r value.

[MoMettaMonk]

.

[Lebrarian_Booker]

I currently work in admissions and financial aid, though predominantly with UG institutions. I do work with several law schools however. Scholarships are awarded based on a grid with GPAs along one axis and LSATs along another. They find where you land and, and that's your scholarship. They develop their financial aid policies before the start of the application cycle. Depending on institutional goals, they may have a seperate grid for URMs.

99.9% of the time your softs do not play into your scholarship offer. There are select cases where the school may "override" the scholarship that you qualify for and give you a higher one, but this occurs in under 5% of cases, closer to 1%.

Now, where the above may not hold completely true is at HYS. Why? Because law school admissions and enrollment (like most things) is a game ruled by competition. What drives this competition is that applicants have options. Some applicants have more options than others (better scores) and thus require more money to be incentivized to enroll. An extreme example, just to illustrate the point: what would happen if everyone admitted to Yale received a full ride at Harvard? Harvard would likely underenroll. Even at HYS those schools face competition, because their applicants have options determined by their numbers (moreso than softs), and so they also likely award for thr most part based on numbers, though softs likely play a larger role than at other schools--still handled through "overriding" the award policy.

Way off. None of the T14 use a LSAT/GPA grid as a strict determinant of aid.

HYS use need only. CCN and most of the rest of T14 use need-aware merit aid which includes softs. I don't know any evidence to the contrary.

I'm not claiming you're wrong straight out, as I don't work with any T14s, but why do you claim they don't use a grid (with perhaps more "overrides" than other scbools)? Are you suggesting they walk into the cycle blind and then just hand out money however they want? I don't think any responsible director of admissions or financial aid would allow that. Schools draft their budgets a year in advance with an anticipated number of enrolled students, and need a quantifiable way of estimating enrolment and net revenue. It's difficult to come up with a quantifiable "grid" of softs on which to award.

Edit: Need based aid amounts also vary based on qualification. They don't meet 100% of need for all admits. The percentage of need met is still determined by LSAT/GPA and therefore doesn't differ in principle from the manner in which merit is awarded.

I mean I understand what you're saying and I really have no idea how they award scholarship money considering they must have a budget at the beginning of the cycle. However, head over to LSN. Many of the awards make no sense. People below 50%s getting big awards, people with >75/75 getting $0. Of course there's a positive correlation, but that correlation has a low r value.

On this logic, which I don't necessarily disagree with, the low R value could be explained by the fact that you don't see Need values on LSN.

Edit: momettamonk: even if only need based aid is awarded, that doesn't mean they don't modulate the percentage of need they meet based on academic qualifications. That's just what my insight leads me to believe. Of course, I don't know in any certain terms, I don't work with them.

[xylocarp]

even if only need based aid is awarded, that doesn't mean they don't modulate the percentage of need they meet based on academic qualifications. That's just what my insight leads me to believe. Of course, I don't know in any certain terms, I don't work with them.

Yeah HYS don't. It's 100% need-based, 0% merit-based, and we do know this in certain terms.

[Lebrarian_Booker]

even if only need based aid is awarded, that doesn't mean they don't modulate the percentage of need they meet based on academic qualifications. That's just what my insight leads me to believe. Of course, I don't know in any certain terms, I don't work with them.

Yeah HYS don't. It's 100% need-based, 0% merit-based, and we do know this in certain terms.

Is it that 100% of their aid is need based aid, or that they meet 100% of need with aid? Just curious.

[Pneumonia]

even if only need based aid is awarded, that doesn't mean they don't modulate the percentage of need they meet based on academic qualifications. That's just what my insight leads me to believe. Of course, I don't know in any certain terms, I don't work with them.

Yeah HYS don't. It's 100% need-based, 0% merit-based, and we do know this in certain terms.

Is it that 100% of their aid is need based aid, or that they meet 100% of need with aid? Just curious.

the former

[Lebrarian_Booker]

even if only need based aid is awarded, that doesn't mean they don't modulate the percentage of need they meet based on academic qualifications. That's just what my insight leads me to believe. Of course, I don't know in any certain terms, I don't work with them.

Yeah HYS don't. It's 100% need-based, 0% merit-based, and we do know this in certain terms.

Is it that 100% of their aid is need based aid, or that they meet 100% of need with aid? Just curious.

the former

Thanks. That leaves open the possibility that they modulate percentage of need met based on academic qualifications.

Edit: just to reiterate, I don't know this for sure, but would expect it to be the case. Just trying to use my knowledge to help this discussion

[Pneumonia]

no it doesn't, not for HYS.

[xylocarp]

no it doesn't, not for HYS.

Yeah, that. HYS are very transparent about it. Once you're in, the amount of aid you get is entirely based on your need and not at all based on merit/academic qualifications. I understand what you're trying to say, Lebrarian_Booker, but you are mistaken.

[bnssweeney]

So would a minor C&F issue (like underage drinking) be a soft that would totally turn off adcomms from giving a scholarship? (assuming that you still have a median-slightly above average-above average GPA/LSAT for that school)

[Pneumonia]

So would a minor C&F issue (like underage drinking) be a soft that would totally turn off adcomms from giving a scholarship? (assuming that you still have a median-slightly above average-above average GPA/LSAT for that school)

No

[bnssweeney]

So would a minor C&F issue (like underage drinking) be a soft that would totally turn off adcomms from giving a scholarship? (assuming that you still have a median-slightly above average-above average GPA/LSAT for that school)

No

Thanks

[Lebrarian_Booker]

no it doesn't, not for HYS.

Yeah, that. HYS are very transparent about it. Once you're in, the amount of aid you get is entirely based on your need and not at all based on merit/academic qualifications. I understand what you're trying to say, Lebrarian_Booker, but you are mistaken.

So does that mean they met 100% of need for all admits, or a certain set percentage of need for all admits regardless of academic qualifications? (links would be helpful)