Top Law Schools

According to LSN, people with my same numbers (3.54/163/URM) are getting acceptances at places I've applied to (BU and Cornell). But I applied in December/January and they applied back in October. Can I expect to see different results because of this?

latinolaw wrote:According to LSN, people with my same numbers (3.54/163/URM) are getting acceptances at places I've applied to (BU and Cornell). But I applied in December/January and they applied back in October. Can I expect to see different results because of this?

yes. admission is rolling at those places as far I know and after offers have been extended and accepted there are less spots to be filled so it gets more difficult to get in.

Do the schools perhaps accept several people with similar numbers knowing that not all will attend?

latinolaw wrote:Do the schools perhaps accept several people with similar numbers knowing that not all will attend?

Probably

I question a lot of the assumptions people make about rolling admissions.

There are a few sensible assumptions you can make against the common assertion that "applying later hurts your chances".

1. Extremely well-organized and well-prepared candidates apply early. Sloppier candidates making last minute decisions, procrastinating on apps, etc... will naturally apply later. This is of course a generalization, not the rule, but I would think it would be enough to influence the quality of the "average" candidate over time.

Furthermore, I can't cite this, but one law school said in a panel they get a HUGE number of applications on the final day, I think it was at least 25%. Naturally most of the academic/LSAT superstars are not going to be sending in apps on the final day.

2. Schools have been doing this for decades without any major fluctuations in their candidate pools. They have tailored their admission process so that they can admit students on a routine basis throughout the cycle. Schools are always looking to increase their median GPA/LSAT of their class and they have MANY TOOLS for taking high-number candidates who applied early in the cycle and holding on to them (waitlisting/holding). So naturally, as the trend has always been for the median GPA/LSAT to rise slowly over time at top schools they have no reason to fill more seats earlier if they can hold some of the borderline candidates, wait and see what happens later in the cycle, and then choose their admits based on the quality of latter applicants. If the "Jan. Crowd" has a a higher number of "admit" candidates then the school just lets the waitlist/hold guys die a slow death, if the Jan. Crowd is weaker then admissions can always cherrypick some of those waitlist/hold guys.

The point here is schools have their admission process so they don't "blow their proverbial load" by filling a bunch of seats early on, they pick the "benchmarks" that they know will allow them to eventually fill all their seats, it would make no sense for them to admit tons of candidates early on and then miss out on candidates that will boost their numbers but applied later in the cycle. Those candidates would also end up at another law school, meaning any school with an inefficient admissions procedure would see themselves dropping in ranking over time as they lost great "later application" candidates to other schools, while continuing to admit more borderline candidates early on.

3. I'm sure I have some other points to make, but I'm lazy. You get the picture.

latinolaw wrote:According to LSN, people with my same numbers (3.54/163/URM) are getting acceptances at places I've applied to (BU and Cornell). But I applied in December/January and they applied back in October. Can I expect to see different results because of this?

according to your LSN, this is possibly the product of you being the type of URM that doesn't typically get much leeway for below-median stats.

superserial wrote:

latinolaw wrote:According to LSN, people with my same numbers (3.54/163/URM) are getting acceptances at places I've applied to (BU and Cornell). But I applied in December/January and they applied back in October. Can I expect to see different results because of this?

according to your LSN, this is possibly the product of you being the type of URM that doesn't typically get much leeway for below-median stats.

You are saying that I might see different results because I am latino, and not black?

Sogui wrote: 2. Schools have been doing this for decades without any major fluctuations in their candidate pools. They have tailored their admission process so that they can admit students on a routine basis throughout the cycle. Schools are always looking to increase their median GPA/LSAT of their class and they have MANY TOOLS for taking high-number candidates who applied early in the cycle and holding on to them (waitlisting/holding). So naturally, as the trend has always been for the median GPA/LSAT to rise slowly over time at top schools they have no reason to fill more seats earlier if they can hold some of the borderline candidates, wait and see what happens later in the cycle, and then choose their admits based on the quality of latter applicants. If the "Jan. Crowd" has a a higher number of "admit" candidates then the school just lets the waitlist/hold guys die a slow death, if the Jan. Crowd is weaker then admissions can always cherrypick some of those waitlist/hold guys.

The point here is schools have their admission process so they don't "blow their proverbial load" by filling a bunch of seats early on, they pick the "benchmarks" that they know will allow them to eventually fill all their seats, it would make no sense for them to admit tons of candidates early on and then miss out on candidates that will boost their numbers but applied later in the cycle. Those candidates would also end up at another law school, meaning any school with an inefficient admissions procedure would see themselves dropping in ranking over time as they lost great "later application" candidates to other schools, while continuing to admit more borderline candidates early on.

This makes sense and is encouraging.

latinolaw wrote:

superserial wrote:

latinolaw wrote:According to LSN, people with my same numbers (3.54/163/URM) are getting acceptances at places I've applied to (BU and Cornell). But I applied in December/January and they applied back in October. Can I expect to see different results because of this?

according to your LSN, this is possibly the product of you being the type of URM that doesn't typically get much leeway for below-median stats.

You are saying that I might see different results because I am latino, and not black?

TITCR

im_blue wrote:

latinolaw wrote:

superserial wrote:

latinolaw wrote:According to LSN, people with my same numbers (3.54/163/URM) are getting acceptances at places I've applied to (BU and Cornell). But I applied in December/January and they applied back in October. Can I expect to see different results because of this?

according to your LSN, this is possibly the product of you being the type of URM that doesn't typically get much leeway for below-median stats.

You are saying that I might see different results because I am latino, and not black?

TITCR

No bump at all??

latinolaw wrote:According to LSN, people with my same numbers (3.54/163/URM) are getting acceptances at places I've applied to (BU and Cornell). But I applied in December/January and they applied back in October. Can I expect to see different results because of this?

you'll still get into those two schools if you're mexican or puerto rican.

According to LSN, you are South American/Latino. URM bump applies to Mexican/Puerto Rican, not all Latinos. Consensus is you will get slight diversity bonus if anything, not the big URM bump. Look to non-URM applicants as a better indication of how you will fare.

Woozy wrote:According to LSN, you are South American/Latino. URM bump applies to Mexican/Puerto Rican, not all Latinos. Consensus is you will get slight diversity bonus if anything, not the big URM bump. Look to non-URM applicants as a better indication of how you will fare.

My mother is Mexican. I indicate Chicano as well as Latin American on my apps. Is this better than just being latino?

latinolaw wrote:

Woozy wrote:According to LSN, you are South American/Latino. URM bump applies to Mexican/Puerto Rican, not all Latinos. Consensus is you will get slight diversity bonus if anything, not the big URM bump. Look to non-URM applicants as a better indication of how you will fare.

My mother is Mexican. I indicate Chicano as well as Latin American on my apps. Is this better than just being latino?

You might want to head over to the under represented student forum and get clarification from some more knowledgeable people, but my understanding is that if you have checked neither Mexican nor Puerto Rican, there will be little to no boost.