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

[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

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!

Ah yes - fair point indeed!

[corporatebarbarian]

This wait is just brutal.

[Arrow4Christ]

Well...that was a disappointing day I move my prediction to Thursday or Friday.

[a.sleepyhead]

They're so overdue for action, I hope maybe we'll see something earlier in the week.

[KatyMarie]

Disappointing Keep hanging in there guys! Guessing we'll see a wave Friday instead...

[drawstring]

This was me predicting JS2s today:

[esrom55]

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.

i'm just going to say I'm not sure you understand how statistics work. And just claiming something is statistically significant is not the same as something being statistically significant. Furthermore, it's probably something that should be avoided.



Regardless, come on JS1's (for me and other JSNulls) and JS2's (for all you JS1.5s)!

[PotenC]

[Nonconsecutive]

This was me predicting JS2s today:

catfail.gif

That gif could almost be theme of this entire thread.

[Quest4Knowledge]

This was me predicting JS2s today:
catfail.gif

That gif could almost be theme of this entire thread.

I especially love the part where the cat looks so royal before jumping.

That's me every morning. Wake up: Today will be the day!

[Typhoon24]

ya for real

[drawstring]

Per LSN:

this cycle
136 acceptances
144 rejections

last cycle up to the 24th
124 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 25th
130 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 29th
139 acceptances
145 rejections

Looking at LSN, Friday the 29th was a massive day last cycle with JS2s and dings, but then again we're already in line with the March 29th numbers. This may suggest that they're slightly ahead of schedule, and IF they wanted to get our decisions out by April 1st they could do so.

Pre-waitlist, long-waiter JS2s were also more consistently reported last cycle, and hopefully those of us in that boat see some positive action soon along with our JS0 people.

[a.sleepyhead]

Pre-waitlist, long-waiter JS2s were also more consistently reported last cycle, and hopefully those of us in that boat see some positive action soon along with our JS0 people.

So much +1

[yankihote]

Per LSN:

this cycle
136 acceptances
144 rejections

last cycle up to the 24th
124 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 25th
130 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 29th
139 acceptances
145 rejections

Looking at LSN, Friday the 29th was a massive day last cycle with JS2s and dings, but then again we're already in line with the March 29th numbers. This may suggest that they're slightly ahead of schedule, and IF they wanted to get our decisions out by April 1st they could do so.

Pre-waitlist, long-waiter JS2s were also more consistently reported last cycle, and hopefully those of us in that boat see some positive action soon along with our JS0 people.

I wonder if some of this has to do with the fact that they knew from the get-go this year that applicants would be down and that, to some extent, 170 plus scorers would also decline, so they decided to move more quickly with making decisions on who would be close but not exactly shoe-in acceptances in previous cycles.

Still, although it would mirror what happened last year fairly closely, I'm surprised to see that there is still about a 200 accepted candidate discrepancy from last year's FB group's end total. We don't know exactly how many accepted candidates end up joining the FB group, but I would assume that it would at the very least be half, and that leaves 100 people that are left in limbo a week before many schools' deposit deadlines.

[Arrow4Christ]

Per LSN:

this cycle
136 acceptances
144 rejections

last cycle up to the 24th
124 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 25th
130 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 29th
139 acceptances
145 rejections

Seriously not a fan of those numbers I wish more and more that I could have applied earlier...

[Quest4Knowledge]

Per LSN:

this cycle
136 acceptances
144 rejections

last cycle up to the 24th
124 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 25th
130 acceptances
129 rejections

last cycle up to the 29th
139 acceptances
145 rejections

Seriously not a fan of those numbers I wish more and more that I could have applied earlier...

Agreed. Although I vaguely remember KB in the Spivey thread saying she doesn't know if she believes in the 'early application advantage,' which makes me feel less bad for applying so late. I'll try looking for the quote.

ETA: Never mind. I think KB's response was in reference to applying later with a stronger application (LSAT, GPA) than if you were to apply earlier without the addition. Which makes sense.

[wealtheow]

pretty surprised there wasn't SOME action yesterday (or Fri... or Thurs...). Guh. I'm so on edge now.

[dreamerchic19]

pretty surprised there wasn't SOME action yesterday (or Fri... or Thurs...). Guh. I'm so on edge now.

+1 but something will come soon

[wealtheow]

pretty surprised there wasn't SOME action yesterday (or Fri... or Thurs...). Guh. I'm so on edge now.

+1 but something will come soon

yes! it's very exciting/nervewracking

[muzzy]

.

[MrMileyCyrus]

Does anyone feel like they gave out more JS1s this year than previous years?

[dreamerchic19]

nothing on HLS's Admissions Twitter and no Facebook activity...

[barrelofmonkeys]

nothing on HLS's Admissions Twitter and no Facebook activity...

is there ever?

[dreamerchic19]

nothing on HLS's Admissions Twitter and no Facebook activity...

is there ever?

there has been

[fleurdelis2]

.