Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014) Forum

[potterdam]

.

[dreamerchic19]

it's 3:00pm!!!!

[bbkk]

I've forgotten, but when do calls usually start? 3pm?

Usually reports start at around 3PM, but there have been a few waves that started a bit later.

And the converse, what's the latest people have been called? IE if there are calls today, what time can we assume everyone's gone home?

I think around 7ish, iirc.

[jasper09]

Ahhh the anxious feeling in the pit of my stomach that begins around 2:45 each Thursday and Friday and (apparently starting today) Monday...this exercise in patience isn't working out so well for me

[jace8819]

I saw the multiple posts of paranoia about high GPA/LSAT combinations and splitters losing hope, so I thought I would offer my theory. Every law school claims, and indeed seems to live out, a dedication to "diversity." While many think of this as a simple code word for URM/LGBT/hardship applicants, there is also a pretty convincing statistical case that this is too narrow of a view of the admissions process. I believe that admissions offices want to admit applicants from of varying LSAT/GPA combinations to ensure a heterogeneous student body. Now, the lower down the scale you go, you will have more applicants competing for fewer spots, but you have to imagine how boring and uniform a class of all 3.90+/175+ applicants would be. Sure, Harvard probably has enough applicants that it could fill its entire incoming class with candidates with that profile, but that wouldn't be very diverse and their student body would suffer as a result. So, I realize its late March and pretty much all of us on TLS suffer with differing but high degrees of neurosis, but don't lose heart.

[yankihote]

I saw the multiple posts of paranoia about high GPA/LSAT combinations and splitters losing hope, so I thought I would offer my theory. Every law school claims, and indeed seems to live out, a dedication to "diversity." While many think of this as a simple code word for URM/LGBT/hardship applicants, there is also a pretty convincing statistical case that this is too narrow of a view of the admissions process. I believe that admissions offices want to admit applicants from of varying LSAT/GPA combinations to ensure a heterogeneous student body. Now, the lower down the scale you go, you will have more applicants competing for fewer spots, but you have to imagine how boring and uniform a class of all 3.90+/175+ applicants would be. Sure, Harvard probably has enough applicants that it could fill its entire incoming class with candidates with that profile, but that wouldn't be very diverse and their student body would suffer as a result. So, I realize its late March and pretty much all of us on TLS suffer with differing but high degrees of neurosis, but don't lose heart.

I agree with what you said. Still though, it struck me as odd that so many high-combo candidates were left that late in the game. I found myself checking the (apparently) mistaken assumption that they are more likely to wait list candidates with 25th/75th or 75th/25th, etc. combinations. Obviously TLS isn't necessarily a representative sample, but it was definitely surprising to see that many strong candidates still left in the game last year.

Just to add: I think you are probably right that filling their class with only strong numbers candidates would result in a less than ideal level of diversity, but I think we are well-served to accept the fact that it's quite possible, maybe even likely, that candidates with high numbers also have diverse and interesting backgrounds. Around 800 spots seems like a lot sometimes, but its also only around 800, you know?

[a.sleepyhead]

I saw the multiple posts of paranoia about high GPA/LSAT combinations and splitters losing hope, so I thought I would offer my theory. Every law school claims, and indeed seems to live out, a dedication to "diversity." While many think of this as a simple code word for URM/LGBT/hardship applicants, there is also a pretty convincing statistical case that this is too narrow of a view of the admissions process. I believe that admissions offices want to admit applicants from of varying LSAT/GPA combinations to ensure a heterogeneous student body. Now, the lower down the scale you go, you will have more applicants competing for fewer spots, but you have to imagine how boring and uniform a class of all 3.90+/175+ applicants would be. Sure, Harvard probably has enough applicants that it could fill its entire incoming class with candidates with that profile, but that wouldn't be very diverse and their student body would suffer as a result. So, I realize its late March and pretty much all of us on TLS suffer with differing but high degrees of neurosis, but don't lose heart.

What is this convincing statistical case? I somehow don't see Harvard letting in people with 150ish LSATs for "diversity" or to keep things interesting.

[JWP1022]

I saw the multiple posts of paranoia about high GPA/LSAT combinations and splitters losing hope, so I thought I would offer my theory. Every law school claims, and indeed seems to live out, a dedication to "diversity." While many think of this as a simple code word for URM/LGBT/hardship applicants, there is also a pretty convincing statistical case that this is too narrow of a view of the admissions process. I believe that admissions offices want to admit applicants from of varying LSAT/GPA combinations to ensure a heterogeneous student body. Now, the lower down the scale you go, you will have more applicants competing for fewer spots, but you have to imagine how boring and uniform a class of all 3.90+/175+ applicants would be. Sure, Harvard probably has enough applicants that it could fill its entire incoming class with candidates with that profile, but that wouldn't be very diverse and their student body would suffer as a result. So, I realize its late March and pretty much all of us on TLS suffer with differing but high degrees of neurosis, but don't lose heart.

What is this convincing statistical case? I somehow don't see Harvard letting in people with 150ish LSATs for "diversity" or to keep things interesting.

No, but given their class size, it's not unreasonable to assume that they have more room to let in people on the margins (hopefully candidates like me!) than Stanford or Yale do.

[a.sleepyhead]

I saw the multiple posts of paranoia about high GPA/LSAT combinations and splitters losing hope, so I thought I would offer my theory. Every law school claims, and indeed seems to live out, a dedication to "diversity." While many think of this as a simple code word for URM/LGBT/hardship applicants, there is also a pretty convincing statistical case that this is too narrow of a view of the admissions process. I believe that admissions offices want to admit applicants from of varying LSAT/GPA combinations to ensure a heterogeneous student body. Now, the lower down the scale you go, you will have more applicants competing for fewer spots, but you have to imagine how boring and uniform a class of all 3.90+/175+ applicants would be. Sure, Harvard probably has enough applicants that it could fill its entire incoming class with candidates with that profile, but that wouldn't be very diverse and their student body would suffer as a result. So, I realize its late March and pretty much all of us on TLS suffer with differing but high degrees of neurosis, but don't lose heart.

What is this convincing statistical case? I somehow don't see Harvard letting in people with 150ish LSATs for "diversity" or to keep things interesting.

No, but given their class size, it's not unreasonable to assume that they have more room to let in people on the margins (hopefully candidates like me!) than Stanford or Yale do.

Oh I totally agree, and I hope you're right for my own sake as well, but I definitely think that's more of a function of having room at the margins (as you said) than doing it for "diversity".

[yankihote]

I saw the multiple posts of paranoia about high GPA/LSAT combinations and splitters losing hope, so I thought I would offer my theory. Every law school claims, and indeed seems to live out, a dedication to "diversity." While many think of this as a simple code word for URM/LGBT/hardship applicants, there is also a pretty convincing statistical case that this is too narrow of a view of the admissions process. I believe that admissions offices want to admit applicants from of varying LSAT/GPA combinations to ensure a heterogeneous student body. Now, the lower down the scale you go, you will have more applicants competing for fewer spots, but you have to imagine how boring and uniform a class of all 3.90+/175+ applicants would be. Sure, Harvard probably has enough applicants that it could fill its entire incoming class with candidates with that profile, but that wouldn't be very diverse and their student body would suffer as a result. So, I realize its late March and pretty much all of us on TLS suffer with differing but high degrees of neurosis, but don't lose heart.

What is this convincing statistical case? I somehow don't see Harvard letting in people with 150ish LSATs for "diversity" or to keep things interesting.

No, but given their class size, it's not unreasonable to assume that they have more room to let in people on the margins (hopefully candidates like me!) than Stanford or Yale do.

Around the margins yes, but much less range across those margins than I was expecting (hoping for) as a splitter.

[JWP1022]

Oh I totally agree, and I hope you're right for my own sake as well, but I definitely think that's more of a function of having room at the margins (as you said) than doing it for "diversity".

I think having room on the margins gives them more leeway to build a class around a diversity of experiences versus basing it purely on numbers, so they aren't mutually exclusive.

I generally think admissions decisions are much more complicated than folks around here think. Numbers obviously play a huge role, but having unique, substantive experiences outside of your stats helps a lot more than I think many of us think it does.

[sup_stan]

I saw the multiple posts of paranoia about high GPA/LSAT combinations and splitters losing hope, so I thought I would offer my theory. Every law school claims, and indeed seems to live out, a dedication to "diversity." While many think of this as a simple code word for URM/LGBT/hardship applicants, there is also a pretty convincing statistical case that this is too narrow of a view of the admissions process. I believe that admissions offices want to admit applicants from of varying LSAT/GPA combinations to ensure a heterogeneous student body. Now, the lower down the scale you go, you will have more applicants competing for fewer spots, but you have to imagine how boring and uniform a class of all 3.90+/175+ applicants would be. Sure, Harvard probably has enough applicants that it could fill its entire incoming class with candidates with that profile, but that wouldn't be very diverse and their student body would suffer as a result. So, I realize its late March and pretty much all of us on TLS suffer with differing but high degrees of neurosis, but don't lose heart.

I believe the "diversity" you referred to was not based on LSAT/GPA combos, but on softs, such as a wide range of work experiences, making sure to include more undergrad institutions than just the ivies, making sure the class does not have too many people focused in one area (PI vs. patent vs. business, etc), etc.

There was a wave on March 29 last year as well, which included some long waiters. If today sees no action, then Friday/Thursday would be more likely.

[a.sleepyhead]

I believe the "diversity" you referred was not based on LSAT/GPA combos, but on softs, such as a wide range of work experiences, making sure to include more undergrad institutions than just the ivies, making sure the class does not have too many people focused in one area (PI vs. patent vs. business, etc), etc.

+1, exactly what I was trying to get at

[Mack.Hambleton]

They do admit people below median who are diverse - URMs, who show up on LSN and in the data. I would guess the only non URM diverse/interesting applicants who get accepted are those still very close to median but not a given, like say a 3.90 170.

[AFP]

They do admit people below median who are diverse - URMs, who show up on LSN and in the data. I would guess the only non URM diverse/interesting applicants who get accepted are those still very close to median but not a given, like say a 3.90 170.

Mort and Chneyo got accepted this cycle, and they're both non-URMs significantly below at least one median. Harvard has room for nontraditional non-URM applicants.

[drawstring]

Still time for today, but if not today then maybe Friday will be the day. There was a big wave then last year and if they really do want to get decisions out by April (although I'm not sure how much truth there is to that) that would be the second to last weekday to do so.

[a.sleepyhead]

Still time for today, but if not today then maybe Friday will be the day. There was a big wave then last year and if they really do want to get decisions out by April (although I'm not sure how much truth there is to that) that would be the second to last weekday to do so.

Argh, the idea of waiting this whole week is so painful.

[fleurdelis2]

.

[kkdk]

AHHH. So much waiting. In one week, it will be day 100 since my JS1...

Day 61 for me

109 here

lol'd.

It's been 84 years, and I can still smell the fresh ink on my statement. The resume had never been read. The scores had never been averaged. Harvard was called the School of Dreams, and it was. It really was.

[jasper09]

Also lol'd. I'm at 39 days so this puts things in perspective and I suppose I can't actually complain.

[jace8819]

My strong statistical case would be rooted primarily in the fact that you can look at any LSN applicant year and there is a distinctive curve showing a statistically significant number of admits at or below one median or both. LSN numbers don't come anywhere close to encompassing the entirety of the incoming class, but, based on the number of data points over the years and eschewing the obvious problem of self-reporting, we can assume this curve accurately represents the overall ratio of acceptances and extrapolate the probable percentages of at/below median applicants who will be admitted, and in so doing it becomes clear there is a minority, but still significant, number of spots reserved for incoming students without strong numerical profiles.

What I am saying is it would be overly jaded, and likely foolish, for people to write off all of these admits as URMs, engineering students, student body presidents, and ivy undergrads while then looking at the number of numerically strong candidates without decisions / on wait lists and spiral into ice-cream and chocolate-coated depressions (if their depression expresses itself as mine does at least...). Expressed potential and latent potential are not as numerically measurable as many on TLS think, nor can you capture everything you need to know about a person in a 1-2 page résumé, which is why there is an exhaustive applicant review process in place that includes interviews. That is why I am saying people shouldn't be despondent and people with strong numerical profiles shouldn't be overly confident, at institutions like Harvard Law School strong numerical applicants aren't rare and, as a result, aren't going to be valued quite as highly as they would be at lesser schools -- not that they will not still enjoy much stronger consideration, as they should by virtue of their hard work. With an acceptance rate hovering around 17%, almost no one has an absolute probability of admission, we just have relative strengths and weaknesses -- assuming they haven't already admitted 30 applicants who have accepted their seats that are just like you.

[lawschool22]

past 4pm now.

I'm so glad that I have this thread to keep me apprised of what time it is. There aren't really any other devices on my computer, wrist, wall, or phone that do such a good job at this task.

FYI just having some fun. It's Monday

[MT Cicero]

past 4pm now.

I'm so glad that I have this thread to keep me apprised of what time it is. There aren't really any other devices on my computer, wrist, wall, or phone that do such a good job at this task.

FYI just having some fun. It's Monday

Fleur's just hooking up we weird time zone folks who don't want to convert and sometimes feel that the time on our watch permeates throughout the world!

[PotenC]

.......................

[dreamerchic19]

.......................

hopefully NEWS will come sometime this week!