NYU Transfers Forum

[mileslibertatis]

I went from processing 6/19 to UR 7/16 today

When I updated last week, I got a lot of movement. Here's hoping for you, as well.

[canesfan1986]

UR 7/16!!! Maybe something good later! lol

[FlanSolo]

UR 7/16!!! Maybe something good later! lol

Fingers crossed...

[canesfan1986]

UR 7/16!!! Maybe something good later! lol

Fingers crossed...

Thanks! Anyone else who was UR before go to 7/16 today?

[bball2089]

UR 7/16!!! Maybe something good later! lol

Fingers crossed...

Thanks! Anyone else who was UR before go to 7/16 today?

Yep, UR 7/6 --> UR 7/16

[canesfan1986]

UR 7/16!!! Maybe something good later! lol

Fingers crossed...

Thanks! Anyone else who was UR before go to 7/16 today?

Yep, UR 7/6 --> UR 7/16

Stats?

[bball2089]

Thanks! Anyone else who was UR before go to 7/16 today?[/quote]

Yep, UR 7/6 --> UR 7/16[/quote]

Stats?[/quote]

NYC 50-60. ~5%.

[canesfan1986]

Thanks! Anyone else who was UR before go to 7/16 today?

Yep, UR 7/6 --> UR 7/16[/quote]

Stats?[/quote]

NYC 50-60. ~5%.[/quote]

Cool! I'm thinking it's good then. Fingers crossed.

[bball2089]

Thanks! Anyone else who was UR before go to 7/16 today?

Yep, UR 7/6 --> UR 7/16

Stats?[/quote]

NYC 50-60. ~5%.[/quote]

Cool! I'm thinking it's good then. Fingers crossed.[/quote]

Thanks! Good luck to you too!

[mels]

U/R 7/6 ----> 7/16 here too. Fingers crossed..

[InSport]

ForestGirl - Congrats on your CLS admit today! Excellent news. Based on what you wrote on page 17, does that mean you are withdrawing from NYU?

EDIT - PBaller makes a good point. Sorry for the question, since I now realize how frequently it is asked (and the circumstances/pressure it is asked under).

[pballer]

.

[forestgirl]

ForestGirl - Congrats on your CLS admit today! Excellent news. Based on what you wrote on page 17, does that mean you are withdrawing from NYU?

I'm ok with the question. =) The short answer is probably, but not until the end of this week. The long answer is that if I get into NYU in the next few days, I would want to visit again and see if my first impression wasn't way off base. I have plans to be in the city anyway this week, so it will be easy for me to stop by. If they keep me hanging on processing and I have to make a decision elsewhere, I'll pull the plug this week.

[InSport]

ForestGirl - Congrats on your CLS admit today! Excellent news. Based on what you wrote on page 17, does that mean you are withdrawing from NYU?

I'm ok with the question. =) The short answer is probably, but not until the end of this week. The long answer is that if I get into NYU in the next few days, I would want to visit again and see if my first impression wasn't way off base. I have plans to be in the city anyway this week, so it will be easy for me to stop by. If they keep me hanging on processing and I have to make a decision elsewhere, I'll pull the plug this week.

Awesome, congrats again and good luck with the NYU decision.

[aeg113]

T80 law review

[InnocuousDiatribe]

Im stuck on U/R 7/6. Anyone have an opinion on whether this is a bad sign?

[jd1969a]

I moved from UR 7/6-->UR 7/16. Top 10% at a NYC Tier 2.

[oscarpic]

still 7/12 UR

no decisions today?

[mileslibertatis]

Just updates to status dates.

[canesfan1986]

I'm hoping the 7/16 people will get the box tomorrow like the 7/10 people did.

[Xferr]

UR 7/6 --> 7/16 as well. T2 80s, prolly #1. Getting really tired of this. I just want to look for an apartment already.

[canesfan1986]

UR 7/6 --> 7/16 as well. T2 80s, prolly #1. Getting really tired of this. I just want to look for an apartment already.

I feel you. We are all tiring out. Hopefully there will be some resolution soon.

[gdizz01]

WARNING: Don't waste your time reading this, unless you want to waste time reading this!!!

Just curious...we all obsess over status changes, but has anyone reflected on what they actually mean? I've developed a hypothesis where I've come to think that the more times someone comes up for review, the more our chances of acceptance decreases. Here's my theory (don't bother responding with "too long, didn't read" - I know it's long...if you don't care, than don't read it...I'm just hypothesizing to see what other people's thoughts are, since everyone seems really pre-occupied with when they're under review and the fate of those with whom they're under concurrent review...but I'm looking to challenge the significance people (myself included) ascribe to this, spend a few minutes thinking about something other than refreshing my status checker, and suggest that (1) application batching is random and not directly related to admissions prospects, and (2) either being reviewed once and not again for a long time, or being reviewed multiple times without a disposition, are both bad omens. Consider the process:

1) first time your batch is up for review. You're not admitted, so it's clear you're not a stand-out for admission. You're not denied, so it's clear you're competitive, and within their acceptable range. At this point, you can figure you're somewhere in the middle range of competitiveness: maybe a 40% shot, maybe a 60% shot...they just need further review.

2) second time you come up for review. You're with a bunch of first round hold-overs, and a batch of fresh apps. (2a) Assume the new batch is full of applicants that overall, are generally weaker than the prior batch. The stronger hold applicants are admitted, and the weaker hold applications are not rejected because they are, on the whole, better than many from the new batch against which they're currently being compared. This new batch will have a higher number of first time rejects, yet the 2nd round hold-over still can't make the cut. surviving this round as another hold is no great achievement, especially since you weren't admitted when held against a weaker cohort. (2b) Assume the new batch is strong. Congratulations- you weren't eliminated despite the stiffer competition. However, a higher proportion of offers were just given out because this is a stronger batch. You're still in the fight, yet worse off because you now know there are fewer seats to be offered, and it's also been confirmed that of the better applications, you rank among the worse.

The process continues. On the whole then, under this theory, each subsequent review can only be a bad thing - While it beats a ding, the reality is that you just had yet another opportunity to distinguish yourself, and have again proved unremarkable relative to the comparison batch. Add up enough determinations that you're unexceptional, and I think that at a point, after say 3 reviews with no action either way (which is where I'm at) you're effectively on an unofficial waitlist. Your profile is this: it's clear you're qualified for admission, but you've presented nothing to attract special attention to yourself. I think that this group, the acceptable yet not truly desirable, becomes the go-to stack after the first round of admits don't submit their deposits...the school would have no problem admitting us so they keep us around, but only because they ran out of other people they're more interested in, and at this point our future is determined by the yield, not the adcomm. After the first wave of seat deposits don't come in, at a time when most apps have been reviewed already, this is the stack they go to to fill up the transfer class once they see how many of their first picks decline and leave them with spots open...this is where the 3rd, 4th, etc. review updates come in - the stack of maybe's are taken out to fill the spots that the definate's left open.

This is just a hypothesis, but if true it has implications for what would be some commonly accepted fallacies. E.g. that being in a particular review pile would mean you've been sorted into a group that correlates in some way with your admissions prospects. Credence is lent to the theory that apps aren't batched based on competitiveness- otherwise both acceptances and dings would generally come in groups together, to the exclusion of others (a strong batch under review would yield almost entirely admits and strong hold-overs for later rounds, and a weak batch under review would yield almost entirely denials and further weak hold-overs for later rounds). I don't think we've seen such patterns, but then again our data set is sparse. Consequently, however, my conclusion is that the only inference that can fairly be deduced from a review update with no corresponding decision is that you can assume you're one step closer to a rejection (rather than one step closer to a delayed acceptance).

Under this theory, I think that ultimately, those of us who have really old review statuses with no changes (weren't too bad to be rejected, but weren't interesting enough to take back out for a while), or who have had multiple reviews over the past few weeks, comprise a de facto waitlist...we are acceptable, but not desirable, and consequently we'll be used to fill out the transfer class after NYU sees how many of their first round picks pay their deposits. I think that this theory would be confirmed if most of us multi-x UR folks are strung along until late in the process, and then a group are admitted in a wave after deposits are due, and an even larger group are rejected in a wave...but what the hell, I'm bored and purely speculating...here's to hoping that I'm wrong and we're all in tomorrow!!! **Cheers**

[canesfan1986]

WARNING: Don't waste your time reading this, unless you want to waste time reading this!!!

Just curious...we all obsess over status changes, but has anyone reflected on what they actually mean? I've developed a hypothesis where I've come to think that the more times someone comes up for review, the more our chances of acceptance decreases. Here's my theory (don't bother responding with "too long, didn't read" - I know it's long...if you don't care, than don't read it...I'm just hypothesizing to see what other people's thoughts are, since everyone seems really pre-occupied with when they're under review and the fate of those with whom they're under concurrent review...but I'm looking to challenge the significance people (myself included) ascribe to this, spend a few minutes thinking about something other than refreshing my status checker, and suggest that (1) application batching is random and not directly related to admissions prospects, and (2) either being reviewed once and not again for a long time, or being reviewed multiple times without a disposition, are both bad omens. Consider the process:

1) first time your batch is up for review. You're not admitted, so it's clear you're not a stand-out for admission. You're not denied, so it's clear you're competitive, and within their acceptable range. At this point, you can figure you're somewhere in the middle range of competitiveness: maybe a 40% shot, maybe a 60% shot...they just need further review.

2) second time you come up for review. You're with a bunch of first round hold-overs, and a batch of fresh apps. (2a) Assume the new batch is full of applicants that overall, are generally weaker than the prior batch. The stronger hold applicants are admitted, and the weaker hold applications are not rejected because they are, on the whole, better than many from the new batch against which they're currently being compared. This new batch will have a higher number of first time rejects, yet the 2nd round hold-over still can't make the cut. surviving this round as another hold is no great achievement, especially since you weren't admitted when held against a weaker cohort. (2b) Assume the new batch is strong. Congratulations- you weren't eliminated despite the stiffer competition. However, a higher proportion of offers were just given out because this is a stronger batch. You're still in the fight, yet worse off because you now know there are fewer seats to be offered, and it's also been confirmed that of the better applications, you rank among the worse.

The process continues. On the whole then, under this theory, each subsequent review can only be a bad thing - While it beats a ding, the reality is that you just had yet another opportunity to distinguish yourself, and have again proved unremarkable relative to the comparison batch. Add up enough determinations that you're unexceptional, and I think that at a point, after say 3 reviews with no action either way (which is where I'm at) you're effectively on an unofficial waitlist. Your profile is this: it's clear you're qualified for admission, but you've presented nothing to attract special attention to yourself. I think that this group, the acceptable yet not truly desirable, becomes the go-to stack after the first round of admits don't submit their deposits...the school would have no problem admitting us so they keep us around, but only because they ran out of other people they're more interested in, and at this point our future is determined by the yield, not the adcomm. After the first wave of seat deposits don't come in, at a time when most apps have been reviewed already, this is the stack they go to to fill up the transfer class once they see how many of their first picks decline and leave them with spots open...this is where the 3rd, 4th, etc. review updates come in - the stack of maybe's are taken out to fill the spots that the definate's left open.

This is just a hypothesis, but if true it has implications for what would be some commonly accepted fallacies. E.g. that being in a particular review pile would mean you've been sorted into a group that correlates in some way with your admissions prospects. Credence is lent to the theory that apps aren't batched based on competitiveness- otherwise both acceptances and dings would generally come in groups together, to the exclusion of others (a strong batch under review would yield almost entirely admits and strong hold-overs for later rounds, and a weak batch under review would yield almost entirely denials and further weak hold-overs for later rounds). I don't think we've seen such patterns, but then again our data set is sparse. Consequently, however, my conclusion is that the only inference that can fairly be deduced from a review update with no corresponding decision is that you can assume you're one step closer to a rejection (rather than one step closer to a delayed acceptance).

Under this theory, I think that ultimately, those of us who have really old review statuses with no changes (weren't too bad to be rejected, but weren't interesting enough to take back out for a while), or who have had multiple reviews over the past few weeks, comprise a de facto waitlist...we are acceptable, but not desirable, and consequently we'll be used to fill out the transfer class after NYU sees how many of their first round picks pay their deposits. I think that this theory would be confirmed if most of us multi-x UR folks are strung along until late in the process, and then a group are admitted in a wave after deposits are due, and an even larger group are rejected in a wave...but what the hell, I'm bored and purely speculating...here's to hoping that I'm wrong and we're all in tomorrow!!! **Cheers**

Only thing is everyone who got in went UR multiple times....I can't think of one who didn't.

[oscarpic]

WARNING: Don't waste your time reading this, unless you want to waste time reading this!!!

Just curious...we all obsess over status changes, but has anyone reflected on what they actually mean? I've developed a hypothesis where I've come to think that the more times someone comes up for review, the more our chances of acceptance decreases. Here's my theory (don't bother responding with "too long, didn't read" - I know it's long...if you don't care, than don't read it...I'm just hypothesizing to see what other people's thoughts are, since everyone seems really pre-occupied with when they're under review and the fate of those with whom they're under concurrent review...but I'm looking to challenge the significance people (myself included) ascribe to this, spend a few minutes thinking about something other than refreshing my status checker, and suggest that (1) application batching is random and not directly related to admissions prospects, and (2) either being reviewed once and not again for a long time, or being reviewed multiple times without a disposition, are both bad omens. Consider the process:

1) first time your batch is up for review. You're not admitted, so it's clear you're not a stand-out for admission. You're not denied, so it's clear you're competitive, and within their acceptable range. At this point, you can figure you're somewhere in the middle range of competitiveness: maybe a 40% shot, maybe a 60% shot...they just need further review.

2) second time you come up for review. You're with a bunch of first round hold-overs, and a batch of fresh apps. (2a) Assume the new batch is full of applicants that overall, are generally weaker than the prior batch. The stronger hold applicants are admitted, and the weaker hold applications are not rejected because they are, on the whole, better than many from the new batch against which they're currently being compared. This new batch will have a higher number of first time rejects, yet the 2nd round hold-over still can't make the cut. surviving this round as another hold is no great achievement, especially since you weren't admitted when held against a weaker cohort. (2b) Assume the new batch is strong. Congratulations- you weren't eliminated despite the stiffer competition. However, a higher proportion of offers were just given out because this is a stronger batch. You're still in the fight, yet worse off because you now know there are fewer seats to be offered, and it's also been confirmed that of the better applications, you rank among the worse.

The process continues. On the whole then, under this theory, each subsequent review can only be a bad thing - While it beats a ding, the reality is that you just had yet another opportunity to distinguish yourself, and have again proved unremarkable relative to the comparison batch. Add up enough determinations that you're unexceptional, and I think that at a point, after say 3 reviews with no action either way (which is where I'm at) you're effectively on an unofficial waitlist. Your profile is this: it's clear you're qualified for admission, but you've presented nothing to attract special attention to yourself. I think that this group, the acceptable yet not truly desirable, becomes the go-to stack after the first round of admits don't submit their deposits...the school would have no problem admitting us so they keep us around, but only because they ran out of other people they're more interested in, and at this point our future is determined by the yield, not the adcomm. After the first wave of seat deposits don't come in, at a time when most apps have been reviewed already, this is the stack they go to to fill up the transfer class once they see how many of their first picks decline and leave them with spots open...this is where the 3rd, 4th, etc. review updates come in - the stack of maybe's are taken out to fill the spots that the definate's left open.

This is just a hypothesis, but if true it has implications for what would be some commonly accepted fallacies. E.g. that being in a particular review pile would mean you've been sorted into a group that correlates in some way with your admissions prospects. Credence is lent to the theory that apps aren't batched based on competitiveness- otherwise both acceptances and dings would generally come in groups together, to the exclusion of others (a strong batch under review would yield almost entirely admits and strong hold-overs for later rounds, and a weak batch under review would yield almost entirely denials and further weak hold-overs for later rounds). I don't think we've seen such patterns, but then again our data set is sparse. Consequently, however, my conclusion is that the only inference that can fairly be deduced from a review update with no corresponding decision is that you can assume you're one step closer to a rejection (rather than one step closer to a delayed acceptance).

Under this theory, I think that ultimately, those of us who have really old review statuses with no changes (weren't too bad to be rejected, but weren't interesting enough to take back out for a while), or who have had multiple reviews over the past few weeks, comprise a de facto waitlist...we are acceptable, but not desirable, and consequently we'll be used to fill out the transfer class after NYU sees how many of their first round picks pay their deposits. I think that this theory would be confirmed if most of us multi-x UR folks are strung along until late in the process, and then a group are admitted in a wave after deposits are due, and an even larger group are rejected in a wave...but what the hell, I'm bored and purely speculating...here's to hoping that I'm wrong and we're all in tomorrow!!! **Cheers**

Only thing is everyone who got in went UR multiple times....I can't think of one who didn't.

Maybe it's wishful, but that's my thinking too, canes.