Someone had used a January 2013 date as the decision date, which made a negative number, and forced the average way down. I fixed this, and the correct average is now 73.4 days.kershka wrote:No, that's definitely not right. Someone probably just filtered the spreadsheet again and killed a kitten.nothingtosee wrote:Sorry y'all, but not looking to go through 55 pages...
If I'm reading the spreadsheet right, submit to decision takes two weeks? That doesn't seem possible?
Most people had to wait at least a month though SLS has been a bit random in this last batch in regards to complete date. Most of the January admits thus far have been Oct/Nov submits, I believe.
Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants) Forum
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
- nothingtosee

- Posts: 958
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
le sighlawschool22 wrote:Someone had used a January 2013 date as the decision date, which made a negative number, and forced the average way down. I fixed this, and the correct average is now 73.4 days.kershka wrote:No, that's definitely not right. Someone probably just filtered the spreadsheet again and killed a kitten.nothingtosee wrote:Sorry y'all, but not looking to go through 55 pages...
If I'm reading the spreadsheet right, submit to decision takes two weeks? That doesn't seem possible?
Most people had to wait at least a month though SLS has been a bit random in this last batch in regards to complete date. Most of the January admits thus far have been Oct/Nov submits, I believe.
- DonnaPaulsen

- Posts: 13
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:09 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Stanfordkershka wrote:lol, as far as trolls go, this one was fairly tame. It was a diverting distraction and helps us up the page count ITT. We're at the bottom of the T14 for # of pages; clearly we need more polls! Or poetry; that was popular over in the Harvard thread...lawschool22 wrote:Ask Donna, she knows everything apparently.kershka wrote: Also, is anyone else being continually logged out for no apparent reason tonight? This is driving me insane.
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
- koalacity

- Posts: 1162
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:56 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.DonnaPaulsen wrote:
Stanford
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
-
Kimikho

- Posts: 3971
- Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
I can confirm with a 95% confidence interval that this is not accurate.koalacity wrote:Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.DonnaPaulsen wrote:
Stanford
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
- DonnaPaulsen

- Posts: 13
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:09 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Of course; I only went through about 60 people! I need a Mike to do things like this for me.scoobers wrote:I can confirm with a 95% confidence interval that this is not accurate.koalacity wrote:Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.DonnaPaulsen wrote:
Stanford
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
- Vincent

- Posts: 256
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 6:57 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
For science?DonnaPaulsen wrote:Of course; I only went through about 60 people! I need a Mike to do things like this for me.scoobers wrote:I can confirm with a 95% confidence interval that this is not accurate.koalacity wrote:Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.DonnaPaulsen wrote:
Stanford
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
-
Joe Christmas

- Posts: 28
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:06 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
My UG is definitely not on this list and I was accepted back in November.koalacity wrote:Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.DonnaPaulsen wrote:
Stanford
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Wait, does this mean if your UG isn't on this list you aren't getting in? Oh darn, what a waste of an app fee. Well, have fun at SLS, people. Thanks for the list, Donna.DonnaPaulsen wrote:Stanfordkershka wrote:lol, as far as trolls go, this one was fairly tame. It was a diverting distraction and helps us up the page count ITT. We're at the bottom of the T14 for # of pages; clearly we need more polls! Or poetry; that was popular over in the Harvard thread...lawschool22 wrote:Ask Donna, she knows everything apparently.kershka wrote: Also, is anyone else being continually logged out for no apparent reason tonight? This is driving me insane.
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
- applelover

- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:43 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
lol it iskoalacity wrote:Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.DonnaPaulsen wrote:
Stanford
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
- applelover

- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:43 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
where'd you get the list of people from?DonnaPaulsen wrote:Of course; I only went through about 60 people! I need a Mike to do things like this for me.scoobers wrote:I can confirm with a 95% confidence interval that this is not accurate.koalacity wrote:Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.DonnaPaulsen wrote:
Stanford
WUSTL
Yale
Berkeley
Penn
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
Amherst
Chicago
Hamilton
Michigan
Occidental
Bates
BC
Case Western
Colorado
Colorado College
Dartmouth
DePauw
George Washington
Haverford
LMU
Nevada
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Pitt
Pitzer
Pomona
SMU
Texas
Tufts
UC Davis
UCLA
Utah
Washington
Wesleyan
Williams
Wisconsin
- crazyrobin

- Posts: 442
- Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:52 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
My UG is on the list
But serious, where do you get this list?
I know you-know-everything Donna, but hey, just tell me your source.
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
It isn't real.crazyrobin wrote:![]()
My UG is on the list
But serious, where do you get this list?
I know you-know-everything Donna, but hey, just tell me your source.
-
liammial

- Posts: 86
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:52 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Am I in bad shape for having submitted late in the cycle? (Just went complete a few days ago.)
-
FluffMonster

- Posts: 2205
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 4:34 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
It's my understanding that Stanford doesn't have rolling admissions, but applying this late will most definitely hurt your other applications.liammial wrote:Am I in bad shape for having submitted late in the cycle? (Just went complete a few days ago.)
-
OnaFets

- Posts: 19
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 4:13 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
They do have rolling admissions, Yale doesn't.Jules239 wrote:It's my understanding that Stanford doesn't have rolling admissions, but applying this late will most definitely hurt your other applications.liammial wrote:Am I in bad shape for having submitted late in the cycle? (Just went complete a few days ago.)
- teampeeta

- Posts: 422
- Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:36 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
I don't think so. Stanford does have rolling admissions, but they traditionally hold a lot of applications until late in the cycle. Many people don't get decisions until March/April. So, as long as you aren't an auto-ding or an auto-admit, I don't know what the advantage of applying early would be. You're probably just going to sit in silence while they evaluate your application against the rest of the applicant pool's anyway.liammial wrote:Am I in bad shape for having submitted late in the cycle? (Just went complete a few days ago.)
I applied this month. That's my rationale for procrastinating and I'm sticking to it.
- The-Specs

- Posts: 1039
- Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:55 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
They both do. Rolling admission by definition just means that you accept applicants over time and in some proportion to when they apply. This definitely happens at both schools but both do a good job (though Yale does a much better job of it than Stanford) of not letting that fact affect the chances of late applicants.OnaFets wrote:They do have rolling admissions, Yale doesn't.Jules239 wrote:It's my understanding that Stanford doesn't have rolling admissions, but applying this late will most definitely hurt your other applications.liammial wrote:Am I in bad shape for having submitted late in the cycle? (Just went complete a few days ago.)
If they didn't have rolling admissions they would have one date after the deadline when all admissions decisions were released and every applicant would be considered only once all of the applications had come in.
Last edited by The-Specs on Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
liammial

- Posts: 86
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:52 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Awesome, thanks guys. I'm not an auto-ding or an auto-admit, but my stats are competitive.
- DonnaPaulsen

- Posts: 13
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:09 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
I spent some time in archivesapplelover wrote:where'd you get the list of people from?DonnaPaulsen wrote:Of course; I only went through about 60 people! I need a Mike to do things like this for me.scoobers wrote:I can confirm with a 95% confidence interval that this is not accurate.koalacity wrote: Paging Stanford admits: can you confirm or deny if your UG is on this list. TYIA. It's for science.
Last edited by DonnaPaulsen on Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
- DonnaPaulsen

- Posts: 13
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:09 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Also, there's been a half-eaten box of chocolate-covered Macademia nuts from Hawaii in the admissions office. I wonder when they'll be gone?
- FuriousDuck

- Posts: 507
- Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 7:33 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
...
Last edited by FuriousDuck on Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- DonnaPaulsen

- Posts: 13
- Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:09 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
That depends; do you want to ban one of your few sources of good information? Who else could tell you that among other people, SLS's admitted an Austrian Fulbright-er and a Berkeley Bear who now coaches debate in the SF Bay Area?FuriousDuck wrote:Are we still sufficiently amused by this, or are we going to have to ask someone with the appropriate powers to make use of their banhammer?DonnaPaulsen wrote:Also, there's been a half-eaten box of chocolate-covered Macademia nuts from Hawaii in the admissions office. I wonder when they'll be gone?
-
EquallyWrong

- Posts: 4475
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:19 pm
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
I mean, this person does have some pretty specific information that one could only get if they actually worked in the Stanford admissions office…things like a random list of schools, those macadamia nuts lying around, and two candidates who sound like they could be admits due to their prestigious Fulbright scholarship and debate skills so good they coach other people. Not to mention the random use of the first names Harvey and Mike who, one can only assume, add credibility to her story because who could make that stuff up and then have the guile to be so vague and offhand about it? Of course, this still wouldn't excuse how obnoxious and unprofessional they are being…or how totally worthless this information actually is.DonnaPaulsen wrote:That depends; do you want to ban one of your few sources of good information? Who else could tell you that among other people, SLS's admitted an Austrian Fulbright-er and a Berkeley Bear who now coaches debate in the SF Bay Area?FuriousDuck wrote:Are we still sufficiently amused by this, or are we going to have to ask someone with the appropriate powers to make use of their banhammer?DonnaPaulsen wrote:Also, there's been a half-eaten box of chocolate-covered Macademia nuts from Hawaii in the admissions office. I wonder when they'll be gone?
-
OnaFets

- Posts: 19
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 4:13 am
Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)
Yes this is the right answer. Yale has it but to a lesser degree and it doesn't really affect your chances according to them. While I'm pretty sure Stanford has said there is an advantage to applying early. In the long run though, it probably isn't too big of an advantage.The-Specs wrote:They both do. Rolling admission by definition just means that you accept applicants over time and in some proportion to when they apply. This definitely happens at both schools but both do a good job (though Yale does a much better job of it than Stanford) of not letting that fact affect the chances of late applicants.OnaFets wrote:They do have rolling admissions, Yale doesn't.Jules239 wrote:It's my understanding that Stanford doesn't have rolling admissions, but applying this late will most definitely hurt your other applications.liammial wrote:Am I in bad shape for having submitted late in the cycle? (Just went complete a few days ago.)
If they didn't have rolling admissions they would have one date after the deadline when all admissions decisions were released and every applicant would be considered only once all of the applications had come in.