you can find me at www.top-law-schools.com! Forum

[Hikikomorist]

.

[MagillaCutty]

It was rude to phrase it that way-- I wasn't talking about a TLSer in particular. I was just pointing out that we can't get the full picture from two numbers, and that there are plenty of reasons that an applicant could have great numbers and the admissions committee would still be making a good decision to low-ball the offer.

That doesn't necessarily mean that EVERY time stats don't match schollys, there's a reason-- but it's a plenty decent reason to not discount softs.

[hypebeast]

Looking at the limited dataset on LSN, UVA's scholarship approach is impossible to figure out. Just eyeballing the information it does seem like they are placing greater emphasis on GPA with their scholarship offers this year. For a lot of these high GPA, median LSAT candidates that they are giving Dillards to, UVA will clearly be their best offer in the T10 if scholarship offers from other schools are consistent with last year.

However, for the higher LSAT candidates, a bit below median GPA applicants the scholarship money seems to be consistent with what UVA would've offered in prior years and what you would expect other schools to offer this year. So the approach seems to not focus the Dillard money on the applicants that would be competitive for YHS (or even sometimes CCN)... but instead focusing on guaranteeing to bring in the highest GPA people who would be picking among the lower T14. So they're taking some of the highest GPA candidates that would be picking between lower T14s and still making offers that would be competitive to the higher LSAT candidates that would be picking between the lower T14 with money.

This is a really strange, unconventional scholarship approach that appears to be to the detriment of YHS bound applicants, to the great benefit of people with high GPAs but LSATs that don't make them competitive for T3 (or sometimes T6), and relatively no impact on the candidates with high LSAT, but not high enough GPA for T3. There is clearly a method here, it is just very, very unconventional given that they do not have to give out that much in scholarship money to attract high GPA candidates...

[whompwhomp]

It was rude to phrase it that way-- I wasn't talking about a TLSer in particular. I was just pointing out that we can't get the full picture from two numbers, and that there are plenty of reasons that an applicant could have great numbers and the admissions committee would still be making a good decision to low-ball the offer.

That doesn't necessarily mean that EVERY time stats don't match schollys, there's a reason-- but it's a plenty decent reason to not discount softs.

+1

Not to be rude, but can we turn this thread back into a supportive network of people applying to law school and not just people expressing how indignant they are about not getting something they were supposedly entitled to?

Justifying why a school may have offered a Dillard to a "weaker" candidate (based solely off their lower LSAT score????) kinda discounts everything other element of their application. Yeah, one person said they didn't have spectacular softs, but maybe the other folks have academic papers published in a prestigious journals or ridiculous extenuating circumstances they described in their PS? It's just comes off a little arrogant to sit here and explain why they were probably offered X, Y, Z, instead of yourself (not targeting anyone. just mean this generally and it's nothing personal. i'm sure you guys are all wonderful in real life and this is just a very stressful time.)

Like MC mentioned, the process is holistic. They're not giving out scholarships like candy to EVERY high stat candidate, and they're not giving them out to EVERY lowerLSAT/highGPA stat candidate. There's clearly something that they're selecting for that is probably not apparent just by analyzing their numbers and not as simple as "this is the best offer they will get so they'll be fools to turn it down."

[LoganCouture]

It was rude to phrase it that way-- I wasn't talking about a TLSer in particular. I was just pointing out that we can't get the full picture from two numbers, and that there are plenty of reasons that an applicant could have great numbers and the admissions committee would still be making a good decision to low-ball the offer.

That doesn't necessarily mean that EVERY time stats don't match schollys, there's a reason-- but it's a plenty decent reason to not discount softs.

+1

Not to be rude, but can we turn this thread back into a supportive network of people applying to law school and not just people expressing how indignant they are about not getting something they were supposedly entitled to?

Justifying why a school may have offered a Dillard to a supposedly inferior candidate (based solely off their lower LSAT score????) kinda discounts everything other element of their application. Yeah, one person said they didn't have spectacular softs, but maybe the other folks have academic papers published in a prestigious journals or ridiculous extenuating circumstances they described in their PS? It's just kinda silly to sit here and read about all the possible reasons they were offered X, Y, Z, instead of you (not targeting specific people. just mean this generally and it's nothing personal. i'm sure you guys are all wonderful in real life and this is just a very stressful time.)

Like MC mentioned, the process is holistic. They're not giving out scholarships like candy to EVERY high stat candidate, and they're not giving them out to EVERY lowerLSAT/highGPA stat candidate. There's clearly something that they're selecting for that is probably not apparent just by analyzing their numbers and not as simple as "this is the best offer they will get so they'll be fools to turn it down."

I think if people want to speculate they should be free to do so. Celebration and support happens here, of course, but that's not the exclusive topic and you always have the option of just skipping past the discussion ITT that doesn't interest you. I personally find the explanations/rampant speculation/analysis entertaining and well suited to a thread that is about the experience of applying to UVA.

I agree that we need to keep things polite and respectful of course. I don't really see people being indignant/rude (with the exception of the chewing glass/booze reeking comments), just curious about what UVA is up to.

[whompwhomp]

I mean i love baseless speculation as much as the next TLSer, but if you can bring someone from:

I just won the law school lottery--and I am in shock.

I received a Dillard notification in the mail today with a 168/3.9X. I was accepted back in September.

This is life changing. I may or may not have cried on the phone with my mom. I am in shock and absolutely in love with UVA. I cannot believe how lucky and fortunate I am. I really cannot see a way I dont end up at UVA next year.

Non-URM. Econ major. 2 years of Work experience when I matriculate. Very Strong softs.

to defending why they deserved this life-changing moment:

Nope. But I am enjoying the analysis as to why UVA was crazy enough to offer me (a mere 168!) a Dillard.

My money is on the theory that the dean lost his mind, but his incompetence is up there as a probable reason too.

Seriously, I think it's a mix of everything. I think they expanded the definition of a Dillard. Yes, some Dillard recipients may provide higher lsat or GPAs for the school. Others may provide unique softs and provide opportunities for UVA to brag about their "special" entering class. But I think TLS is very quick to discount softs. I don't mean to be a "special snowflake", but my LSAT is by far the weakest part of my application. I do feel fortunate to receive a Dillard, but I don't feel it's wasted or undeserved. Maybe some of you would scoff and say it's not in the schools best interest to offer a lowly 168 full financial support, but maybe schools care about their original purpose, providing the best education to the best students, and maybe there are ways outside of the lsat to prove scholastic success.

Then again, I know nothing and Martinis are my best friend. Excuse me as I go get another drink....

it's just kinda disheartening.

anyways, you're completely right that this thread isn't just for celebration and support, LC39. Didn't mean to come off that way sorry. just wanted people to be more mindful of how some of this speculation comes off. (sorry to make an example of you smile)

[LoganCouture]

I agree that I don't want my speculation to make others question or feel like they have to justify their outcomes. Hopefully all the Dillards ITT are floating so high above me right now they can't be touched by my musings on the strategy behind UVA's scholly awards.

It's an amazing outcome and I hope everyone with big $$ from UVA feels proud of their accomplishments.

[alleycat2]

Since everyone seems to be getting unnecessarily agitated about school next year I figured I'd add fuel to the fire. Accepted: 1/26/15 email from Grave Cleveland 164/3.87

[mindthegap]

Since everyone seems to be getting unnecessarily agitated about school next year I figured I'd add fuel to the fire. Accepted: 1/26/15 email from Grave Cleveland 164/3.87

Congratulations!

[nickhalden]

However, for the higher LSAT candidates, a bit below median GPA applicants the scholarship money seems to be consistent with what UVA would've offered in prior years and what you would expect other schools to offer this year. So the approach seems to not focus the Dillard money on the applicants that would be competitive for YHS (or even sometimes CCN)... but instead focusing on guaranteeing to bring in the highest GPA people who would be picking among the lower T14. So they're taking some of the highest GPA candidates that would be picking between lower T14s and still making offers that would be competitive to the higher LSAT candidates that would be picking between the lower T14 with money.

I disagree with this. We're focusing on the high GPA because every candidate that has posted has had an impressive GPA, particularly those with median LSATs. But when you look at current Dillards as a group compared to last cycle's Dillards as a group there's not a meaningful difference in GPA. Dillards have always been given to candidates with exceptional GPAs. The striking difference is in the 25th percentile LSAT, a drop of 2 points, and the 75th percentile LSAT, a drop of one. I'll repost the numbers I ran last night:

C/o 2018
174/3.96 75th Percentile
172/3.92 Median
169/3.88 25th Percentile

C/o 2017
173/3.99 75th Percentile
172/3.93 Median
171/3.9 25th Percentile

Not to be rude, but can we turn this thread back into a supportive network of people applying to law school and not just people expressing how indignant they are about not getting something they were supposedly entitled to?

Justifying why a school may have offered a Dillard to a "weaker" candidate (based solely off their lower LSAT score????) kinda discounts everything other element of their application. Yeah, one person said they didn't have spectacular softs, but maybe the other folks have academic papers published in a prestigious journals or ridiculous extenuating circumstances they described in their PS? It's just comes off a little arrogant to sit here and explain why they were probably offered X, Y, Z, instead of yourself (not targeting anyone. just mean this generally and it's nothing personal. i'm sure you guys are all wonderful in real life and this is just a very stressful time.)

I definitely wouldn't care as much about this if I had already received a Dillard. But above all, congratulations to everyone receiving a Dillard. It's a life-changing moment and you earned this.

That being said, a typical 168/3.9 is statistically weaker than a 174/3.98 and I can't apologize for making that distinction. We are discounting the other elements of the application because they don't have much influence on law school admissions. Numbers are hugely important, and people notoriously overrate their softs anyway. The goal of looking at the quartiles (above) is to reduce the impact of individual variances, such as softs. And when we do this, the decline in 25th percentile LSAT is irrefutable.

Again, a genuine and deep congratulations to every person ITT offered a Dillard. I'm admittedly jealous - and hope to join you soon. I hope everyone can appreciate the discussions we're having about the UVA admissions strategy as just that - discussions. This is a great environment for us to work through anxieties and intellectual considerations with likeminded people. I know that those of us who end up at UVA will be able to share a beer and laugh about this thread!

[Hikikomorist]

.

[MagillaCutty]

It was rude to phrase it that way-- I wasn't talking about a TLSer in particular. I was just pointing out that we can't get the full picture from two numbers, and that there are plenty of reasons that an applicant could have great numbers and the admissions committee would still be making a good decision to low-ball the offer.

That doesn't necessarily mean that EVERY time stats don't match schollys, there's a reason-- but it's a plenty decent reason to not discount softs.

I'm not sure if this was in response to my post or a more general disclaimer, but I wasn't offended. They aren't my numbers (sadly). I was just trying to clarify to provide more context for that speculation I love so much.

I was apologizing for phrasing my initial post in a way that sounded like I was targeting a specific person, who I believe I did (accidentally) offend. I was joking about a particular kind of candidate that may or may not even exist.

By all means, continue the speculation, and I shall admire from my armchair.

[xylocarp]

on the question of whether or not we should be discussing/speculating about this -

full scholarships to at/below median LSAT applicants are pretty much unprecedented. it IS extremely unusual. I don't doubt that the people getting them have awesome softs and put together great applications and really deserved this scholarship, but it's just objectively true that up until this point, UVA (along with every other school) hasn't cared about those things, at least not without the prerequisite of above median and often above 75th numbers.

so that's why I think it's totally fair to try to figure out what they're doing and why - maybe YP, maybe something else - while not discounting the fact that the below median Dillards were undoubtedly awesome applicants. it's just that that hasn't mattered in the past. it's an admissions strategy that we have never seen before, at any school (or at least any T14), and it's happening in large numbers. that's big - it would be crazy NOT to talk about it and try to figure it out.

[winterorange]

Could it be to increase volume of applications next cycle? People see that if they're at the median, they still have a shot at getting the Dillard. Someone who had previously discounted UVA would complete the application just for that possibility. A higher volume of applications could then boost their selectivity.

This is just wild speculation, of course, and I don't even know if this would make sense, since I'm not very familiar with how USNWR does their rankings.

[smile0751]

Again, a genuine and deep congratulations to every person ITT offered a Dillard. I'm admittedly jealous - and hope to join you soon. I hope everyone can appreciate the discussions we're having about the UVA admissions strategy as just that - discussions. This is a great environment for us to work through anxieties and intellectual considerations with likeminded people. I know that those of us who end up at UVA will be able to share a beer and laugh about this thread!

The above is absolutely correct! I'm enjoying the speculation as much as the next person and do not take any of this personally. Assuming the UVA is a rational actor (which I do), then understanding their motives may give insight into future trends in admissions and even the actions of other law schools.

My previous post's purpose was to do two things 1) provide a counter-example to the person who said they received the scholarship with weak softs 2) provide additional context as to what could be driving the decision by identifying what I think resulted in me being offered the scholarship.

Additionally, I thought maybe there had been some change to the USNews rating methodology which might justify the change (assuming the US News rating is the primary concern of a university). However, nothing jumped out at me when I reviewed the criteria. The methodology can be found at: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-gr ... s-rankings

This could be a move to further align law school admissions with MBA admissions—the first move was to value work experience and the second move could be to devalue numbers in admission (by this I mean move from 98% of the driving criteria to 85%).

I guess the ultimate answer will come next year when we can see if any of UVA’s numbers dropped. The differences nickhalden noted could just be a statistical anomaly of the sample which is self-reporting.

[santoki]

Post removed.

[nickhalden]

My biggest concern re: Dillard is that UVA is likely running out of Dillards to give. The Class of 2017 had twenty-six matriculated Dillards. There are twenty-two offered Dillards on LSN currently - not likely even the total amount currently offered. While some will not attend, the general consensus on TLS seems to be that most Dillards do matriculate. How many more Dillards can UVA afford to offer?

[xylocarp]

My biggest concern re: Dillard is that UVA is likely running out of Dillards to give. The Class of 2017 had twenty-six matriculated Dillards. There are twenty-two offered Dillards on LSN currently - not likely even the total amount currently offered. While some will not attend, the general consensus on TLS seems to be that most Dillards do matriculate. How many more Dillards can UVA afford to offer?

UVA had a new admissions dean this year, so I don't think we should rely too much on precedent. Timing-wise, this cycle has been very different from last, and obviously it's been different in other ways too

[Oskosh]

I messed up on my application, and submitted nonresident without my having noticed.... Is this going to impact my admission decision, and how should I go about contacting somebody so that this is resolved?

[daedalus2309]

I messed up on my application, and submitted nonresident without my having noticed.... Is this going to impact my admission decision, and how should I go about contacting somebody so that this is resolved?

email admissions asap. Much easier to get in as resident.

[altf4]

My biggest concern re: Dillard is that UVA is likely running out of Dillards to give. The Class of 2017 had twenty-six matriculated Dillards. There are twenty-two offered Dillards on LSN currently - not likely even the total amount currently offered. While some will not attend, the general consensus on TLS seems to be that most Dillards do matriculate. How many more Dillards can UVA afford to offer?

I'm curious how many people might turn down endowed scholarships at various schools in the T14. I had heard of one person who seriously considered turning down a Hamilton for better options. Dunno what that person ended up doing but my only thought was, 'How could anyone consider turning down a hamilton?'

[nickhalden]

My biggest concern re: Dillard is that UVA is likely running out of Dillards to give. The Class of 2017 had twenty-six matriculated Dillards. There are twenty-two offered Dillards on LSN currently - not likely even the total amount currently offered. While some will not attend, the general consensus on TLS seems to be that most Dillards do matriculate. How many more Dillards can UVA afford to offer?

UVA had a new admissions dean this year, so I don't think we should rely too much on precedent. Timing-wise, this cycle has been very different from last, and obviously it's been different in other ways too

Gotcha. I'll trust you on this! What's crazy is that in the C/o 2011 there were only six Dillards. I wonder if the university is devoting more resources, if UVA Law is devoting more resources, or if there are new donors involved. Regardless, I love the aggressive approach.

[Hand]

My biggest concern re: Dillard is that UVA is likely running out of Dillards to give. The Class of 2017 had twenty-six matriculated Dillards. There are twenty-two offered Dillards on LSN currently - not likely even the total amount currently offered. While some will not attend, the general consensus on TLS seems to be that most Dillards do matriculate. How many more Dillards can UVA afford to offer?

I'm curious how many people might turn down endowed scholarships at various schools in the T14. I had heard of one person who seriously considered turning down a Hamilton for better options. Dunno what that person ended up doing but my only thought was, 'How could anyone consider turning down a hamilton?'

Well, if you are rich and have gotten into yale, that'd be a decent reason. I'd still take the money personally, but I don't find it crazy to choose differently.

[Hand]

Also, why haven't I heard anything from UVA after going complete early November?

[hillz]

My biggest concern re: Dillard is that UVA is likely running out of Dillards to give. The Class of 2017 had twenty-six matriculated Dillards. There are twenty-two offered Dillards on LSN currently - not likely even the total amount currently offered. While some will not attend, the general consensus on TLS seems to be that most Dillards do matriculate. How many more Dillards can UVA afford to offer?

I'm curious how many people might turn down endowed scholarships at various schools in the T14. I had heard of one person who seriously considered turning down a Hamilton for better options. Dunno what that person ended up doing but my only thought was, 'How could anyone consider turning down a hamilton?'

I think it really depends on the specific scholarship/school and person (how debt averse they are, how prestige-driven, etc). I imagine that more people turn down named scholarships at lower T14 schools than at higher ranked schools. I can see why people would take Yale no matter what.