Does reapplying hurt? Forum

[RZ5646]

Say one applies this year and gets acceptances and scholarship offers, but then decides to take a gap year instead of attending in the fall.(Another thread here says that deferring is a bad idea because it usually kills your scholarship offer.) One then reapplies in the fall. Will one's history lead to worse outcomes the second time? Will schools not care / understand, or will they be reluctant to accept and give money to someone who "turned them down" in the past?

[lymenheimer]

Say one applies this year and gets acceptances and scholarship offers, but then decides to take a gap year instead of attending in the fall.(Another thread here says that deferring is a bad idea because it usually kills your scholarship offer.) One then reapplies in the fall. Will one's history lead to worse outcomes the second time?

To answer your question: no.
To clarify what seems to be a misunderstanding: deferring isn't a guaranteed thing, so the chances of even being in that category are essentially undeterminable. You shouldn't go in attempting to defer or assuming it will be approved. My understanding is that it's generally reserved/approved for individuals who have immediate (and unforeseeable) concerns arise during the application process.

[180kickflip]

Say one applies this year and gets acceptances and scholarship offers, but then decides to take a gap year instead of attending in the fall.(Another thread here says that deferring is a bad idea because it usually kills your scholarship offer.) One then reapplies in the fall. Will one's history lead to worse outcomes the second time? Will schools not care / understand, or will they be reluctant to accept and give money to someone who "turned them down" in the past?

I'm a little ways into a reapplication cycle, and it hasn't seemed like a huge issue so far. We'll see once all the acceptances/scholarships come in, but at this point, I'm inclined to say that if you have a legit reason for reapplying and somehow explain it in an addendum, you'll have a similar cycle to the initial application. The big downside is that you'll have to revise your resume, addenda, statements, and probably LORs.

[lymenheimer]

Say one applies this year and gets acceptances and scholarship offers, but then decides to take a gap year instead of attending in the fall.(Another thread here says that deferring is a bad idea because it usually kills your scholarship offer.) One then reapplies in the fall. Will one's history lead to worse outcomes the second time? Will schools not care / understand, or will they be reluctant to accept and give money to someone who "turned them down" in the past?

I'm a little ways into a reapplication cycle, and it hasn't seemed like a huge issue so far. We'll see once all the acceptances/scholarships come in, but at this point, I'm inclined to say that if you have a legit reason for reapplying and somehow explain it in an addendum, you'll have a similar cycle to the initial application. The big downside is that you'll have to revise your resume, addenda, statements, and probably LORs.

You won't have to get new LORs or write a whole new resume. Maybe update your resume...But def need a new PS. You also won't have to write an adenddum. That's just dumb...also ftr (kickflip), idk what school, especially schools drawing from the 170s is trying to raise it's median by 5 pts.

[RZ5646]

Say one applies this year and gets acceptances and scholarship offers, but then decides to take a gap year instead of attending in the fall.(Another thread here says that deferring is a bad idea because it usually kills your scholarship offer.) One then reapplies in the fall. Will one's history lead to worse outcomes the second time? Will schools not care / understand, or will they be reluctant to accept and give money to someone who "turned them down" in the past?

I'm a little ways into a reapplication cycle, and it hasn't seemed like a huge issue so far. We'll see once all the acceptances/scholarships come in, but at this point, I'm inclined to say that if you have a legit reason for reapplying and somehow explain it in an addendum, you'll have a similar cycle to the initial application. The big downside is that you'll have to revise your resume, addenda, statements, and probably LORs.

You won't have to get new LORs or write a whole new resume. Maybe update your resume...But def need a new PS. You also won't have to write an adenddum. That's just dumb...also ftr (kickflip), idk what school, especially schools drawing from the 170s is trying to raise it's median by 5 pts.

Yeah I don't think that updating one's app materials is much of a negative at all; if anything, it's an opportunity to write a better PS and such. A gap year should give a new college grad meaningful experiences to write about, and even if it doesn't, another round of revision couldn't hurt.

[180kickflip]

Say one applies this year and gets acceptances and scholarship offers, but then decides to take a gap year instead of attending in the fall.(Another thread here says that deferring is a bad idea because it usually kills your scholarship offer.) One then reapplies in the fall. Will one's history lead to worse outcomes the second time? Will schools not care / understand, or will they be reluctant to accept and give money to someone who "turned them down" in the past?

I'm a little ways into a reapplication cycle, and it hasn't seemed like a huge issue so far. We'll see once all the acceptances/scholarships come in, but at this point, I'm inclined to say that if you have a legit reason for reapplying and somehow explain it in an addendum, you'll have a similar cycle to the initial application. The big downside is that you'll have to revise your resume, addenda, statements, and probably LORs.

You won't have to get new LORs or write a whole new resume. Maybe update your resume...But def need a new PS. You also won't have to write an adenddum. That's just dumb...also ftr (kickflip), idk what school, especially schools drawing from the 170s is trying to raise it's median by 5 pts.

1. I'm pretty sure Harvard and Stanford state in their applications that they expect new LORs from reapplicants.
2. I only discussed resume revisions
3. I don't think any schools require anything more than a revised/updated PS
4. Addenda weren't mentioned as things a reapplicant would have to do...just something my experience has inclined me to suggest for reapplicants with legit reasons for not enrolling the first time. It could definitely all be B.S., but in the t14 interviews I've done (and the acceptances I've received), the reasons I outlined in my addendum were recognized and well received. I'm sure I could've gotten the message across another way, but an addendum makes it easy.
5. The median increase hypo you're addressing isn't even from this thread (which is a little weird). That aside, it was an example to show the difference between manipulating numbers for median versus mean (which doesn't require a real-life example).

[lymenheimer]

1. I'm pretty sure Harvard and Stanford state in their applications that they expect new LORs from reapplicants.
2. I only discussed resume revisions
3. I don't think any schools require anything more than a revised/updated PS
4. Addenda weren't mentioned as things a reapplicant would have to do...just something my experience has inclined me to suggest for reapplicants with legit reasons for not enrolling the first time. It could definitely all be B.S., but in the t14 interviews I've done (and the acceptances I've received), the reasons I outlined in my addendum were recognized and well received. I'm sure I could've gotten the message across another way, but an addendum makes it easy.
5. The median increase hypo you're addressing isn't even from this thread (which is a little weird). That aside, it was an example to show the difference between manipulating numbers for median versus mean (which doesn't require a real-life example).

1) 2 out of how many law schools?
2) fair point. it came off as "brand new"
3) they dont really require anything but your application fee (they heavily suggest a new PS at least)
4) fair point. just came off as "needed to do"
5) didn't want you to feel like I was chasing you around. felt like you were trying to make a legit hypo, but it's a bit more nuanced than how you put it. but i see what you're saying and we can leave it there.
gl with your cycle

[180kickflip]

1. I'm pretty sure Harvard and Stanford state in their applications that they expect new LORs from reapplicants.
2. I only discussed resume revisions
3. I don't think any schools require anything more than a revised/updated PS
4. Addenda weren't mentioned as things a reapplicant would have to do...just something my experience has inclined me to suggest for reapplicants with legit reasons for not enrolling the first time. It could definitely all be B.S., but in the t14 interviews I've done (and the acceptances I've received), the reasons I outlined in my addendum were recognized and well received. I'm sure I could've gotten the message across another way, but an addendum makes it easy.
5. The median increase hypo you're addressing isn't even from this thread (which is a little weird). That aside, it was an example to show the difference between manipulating numbers for median versus mean (which doesn't require a real-life example).

1) 2 out of how many law schools?
2) fair point. it came off as "brand new"
3) they dont really require anything but your application fee (they heavily suggest a new PS at least)
4) fair point. just came off as "needed to do"
5) didn't want you to feel like I was chasing you around. felt like you were trying to make a legit hypo, but it's a bit more nuanced than how you put it. but i see what you're saying and we can leave it there.
gl with your cycle

You're totally right about only the two schools requiring the new LORs, but those 2 are the dream schools for a lot of people (me included), and I'd hate for someone to not be prepared for that requirement (like I wasn't) and end up worrying about a late app at their dream school (like me) =/

Also...Sincere thanks for the luck.