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

[DetroitRed]

In light of LSACs release of applications for this cycle, here are HLS numbers for the past few years:

• 2014: 5943 applications
  2013: 5485 applications
  2012: 5388 applications
  2011: 6335 applications

Updated with the most recent year, as 2014: 5943 applications.

Applications were up from 2013 and 2012, but still lower than 2011.

numbers will be even higher for 2014 once the dec scores are released.
I believe that many applicants with high credentials ended up on the waitlist last cycle because hls gave out speedy decisions. May be they are waiting to have a better knowledge of the pool.

I'm pretty sure '2014' refers to the fall following the application cycle, so '2014' would be the 2013-2014 application cycle. The 2014 number above is set.

I think there's a good chance HLS will see declining applications this year. IIRC, last year there was a 10-15% increase in high-scoring applicants vs. the year prior. If Spivey's data is reliable, high-scoring applicants are down this year, especially for those in the 175-180 range. Unless as larger proportion of lower-scoring applicants choose to apply this year, the total number of applications will likely be down.

[w0w]

Yeah, and kind of going off the above post- # off applicants doesn't matter at all. What matters is the # of high scoring applicants.

[Harvette]

Are there gonna be new JS1 today??

Well, there's plenty of spots on 16, 17 and 18, so it's definitely possible..........

I predict JS1 for those days and acceptances before Christmas

[LSATneurotic]

Yeah, and kind of going off the above post- # off applicants doesn't matter at all. What matters is the # of high scoring applicants.

Wow, you are such an elitist. Clearly you haven't realized that law schools employ a HOLISTIC approach to admissions.

[xylocarp]

you're being too obvious, neurotic. you need to tone it down a bit if you want anyone to buy your schtick.

[hillz]

you're being too obvious, neurotic. you need to tone it down a bit if you want anyone to buy your schtick.

[LSATneurotic]

you're being too obvious, neurotic. you need to tone it down a bit if you want anyone to buy your schtick.

I didn't expect wow to bite. Also, it's more entertaining being obvious, because the few genuine reactions are so dramatic. When people buy into subtlety inflammatory rhetoric, it's understandable and thus not funny.

[sneakyleo]

---

[xylocarp]

yeah it's messed up. don't bother voting, I'm waiting for the mods to reset it

[sneakyleo]

---

[xylocarp]

yeah it's messed up. don't bother voting, I'm waiting for the mods to reset it

Okay cool, just wanted to make sure my computer wasn't being wonky. Also I appreciate the "Literally never" option haha

haha that one's winning right now. we're a hopeful bunch, clearly.

[pylon]

Yeah, and kind of going off the above post- # off applicants doesn't matter at all. What matters is the # of high scoring applicants.

Definitely the # of high scoring applicants is more important, but saying # of applicants doesn't matter at all is an overstatement. Especially when the conversation is about delays in admissions process, applications they're reading, who they're interviewing, applicant pool, etc.

[xylocarp]

okay the poll is fixed. time to re-vote!

[irontryad]

Can Harvard just not interview 175s+ even if they are k-jd (barring any glaring app errors/issues)? If Spivey's numbers are accurate and there are less than 300 applying, I'd think Harvard would need as many of them as possible to preserve its medians.

[pylon]

Can Harvard just not interview 175s+ even if they are k-jd (barring any glaring app errors/issues)? If Spivey's numbers are accurate and there are less than 300 applying, I'd think Harvard would need as many of them as possible to preserve its medians.

Keep in mind it's less than 300 so far. They could be waiting to see how the rest of the applicant pool looks before offering interviews to splitters/other 175+ applicants still waiting.

Also, this is less important but they only need 25% of their class to have 175+, and so that's ~150 required (of course not all 175+ will choose HLS over YS, or $$ at other schools but it's something to keep in mind).

[pylon]

okay the poll is fixed. time to re-vote!

Ahaha, seems like we will either see JS2s on Monday, December 15th or Literally never.

[nyanyanya]

Can Harvard just not interview 175s+ even if they are k-jd (barring any glaring app errors/issues)? If Spivey's numbers are accurate and there are less than 300 applying, I'd think Harvard would need as many of them as possible to preserve its medians.

If we look at Harvard's data last year, their lsat 75th is 175, which means they have over 142 students with 175+ lsat score. Yale have over 50, Standard have less than 44.

According to this recent post (http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/full-2 ... ojections/) from spivey's blog, 592 applicants with 175+ applied last cycle. Assuming spivey's projection is right, there will still be 475 applicants with 175+ this year. I don't think it would be hard for harvard to keep their 75th while rejecting a bunch of 175+s.

[Hand]

Can Harvard just not interview 175s+ even if they are k-jd (barring any glaring app errors/issues)? If Spivey's numbers are accurate and there are less than 300 applying, I'd think Harvard would need as many of them as possible to preserve its medians.

If we look at Harvard's data last year, their lsat 75th is 175, which means they have over 142 students with 175+ lsat score. Yale have over 50, Standard have less than 44.

According to this recent post (http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/full-2 ... ojections/) from spivey's blog, 592 applicants with 175+ applied last cycle. Assuming spivey's projection is right, there will still be 475 applicants with 175+ this year. I don't think it would be hard for harvard to keep their 75th while rejecting a bunch of 175+s.

Sure, but with a yield of approximately 50%, Harvard still needs to admit close to 300 175+ students in order to maintain their 75th. If we take into account that presumably these applicants are likely to be the ones who also have the most attractive alternative options (Yale, Stanford, big $$$ at CCN, etc.), it seems reasonable that the yield for this category is lower than average - as the below median admits are probably more like than average to enroll at H, so the number of 175+s they need to admit may well be significantly higher than merely double the number that needs to enroll.

[irontryad]

Can Harvard just not interview 175s+ even if they are k-jd (barring any glaring app errors/issues)? If Spivey's numbers are accurate and there are less than 300 applying, I'd think Harvard would need as many of them as possible to preserve its medians.

If we look at Harvard's data last year, their lsat 75th is 175, which means they have over 142 students with 175+ lsat score. Yale have over 50, Standard have less than 44.

According to this recent post (http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/full-2 ... ojections/) from spivey's blog, 592 applicants with 175+ applied last cycle. Assuming spivey's projection is right, there will still be 475 applicants with 175+ this year. I don't think it would be hard for harvard to keep their 75th while rejecting a bunch of 175+s.

Sure, but with a yield of approximately 50%, Harvard still needs to admit close to 300 175+ students in order to maintain their 75th. If we take into account that presumably these applicants are likely to be the ones who also have the most attractive alternative options (Yale, Stanford, big $$$ at CCN, etc.), it seems reasonable that the yield for this category is lower than average - as the below median admits are probably more like than average to enroll at H, so the number of 175+s they need to admit may well be significantly higher than merely double the number that needs to enroll.

And if they're admitting close to 300, would they not interview more than 300? It seems to me like we have some non-splitter 175+ k-jds that haven't gotten JS1s after seven waves, and that's odd.

[The Argus]

Yesterday marked 6 weeks since I went complete...should I give up on a JS1?

[Hand]

if they're admitting close to 300, would they not interview more than 300? It seems to me like we have some non-splitter 175+ k-jds that haven't gotten JS1s after seven waves, and that's odd.

True enough - with a 75% post-JS1 admit rate, they would need to interview 400 175+s to get enough admits to maintain their 75th. Assuming there are a decent number of splitters among the people with LSATs in the 175-180 range who have GPAs that are presumably below whatever number H is comfortable with, almost everyone with an >25th GPA and a 175+ should get a JS1. What isn't odd is that there are people here who meet these criteria who haven't gotten a JS1 yet, as it's still somewhat early in the cycle; what would be odd is if there is more than a few who won't get one at all.

[pylon]

And if they're admitting close to 300, would they not interview more than 300? It seems to me like we have some non-splitter 175+ k-jds that haven't gotten JS1s after seven waves, and that's odd.

Right, but they've only done ~230 interviews. So far, it makes sense.

[w0w]

Yesterday marked 6 weeks since I went complete...should I give up on a JS1?

ummmm....no.

[w0w]

if they're admitting close to 300, would they not interview more than 300? It seems to me like we have some non-splitter 175+ k-jds that haven't gotten JS1s after seven waves, and that's odd.

True enough - with a 75% post-JS1 admit rate, they would need to interview 400 175+s to get enough admits to maintain their 75th. Assuming there are a decent number of splitters among the people with LSATs in the 175-180 range who have GPAs that are presumably below whatever number H is comfortable with, almost everyone with an >25th GPA and a 175+ should get a JS1. What isn't odd is that there are people here who meet these criteria who haven't gotten a JS1 yet, as it's still somewhat early in the cycle; what would be odd is if there is more than a few who won't get one at all.

I would bet money that people with a 175+ have a higher than 75% post JS1 admit rate. Just as I would bet money that people with <170 have a lower than 75% post JS1 admit rate. So to get 300 they wouldn't need to interview 400. However if they are going to try and increase their medians I would guess they would interview as many as possible with an acceptable GPA.

[Nonconsecutive]

Yesterday marked 6 weeks since I went complete...should I give up on a JS1?

ummmm....no.

Yeah, 6 weeks is seriously not even in the realm of needing to be concerned yet.