Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants) Forum

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
Post Reply

Have you been admitted?

Yes
76
21%
No
290
79%
 
Total votes: 366

User avatar
Cocoblues

Bronze
Posts: 321
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 10:18 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by Cocoblues » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:18 pm

teampeeta wrote:
Cocoblues wrote:
koalacity wrote:...could she be done for the day already? At 8:30 AM PST? :shock:
I hope not. :(
I'm a late Jan complete. Part of me thinks it's too early, but folks that went complete around the same period have gotten in this week. I'm not sure if it's time to freak out. :?
Isn't it pretty rare for people to hear back from Stanford so quickly? I think it takes a few months for most people. There are exceptions, but they're usually people with really strong numbers/ softs. Probably not worth freaking out until you know something definitive.

FWIW, mac2013 is my numbers twin and got in today. I went complete in late-Jan and haven't heard a thing.

Oh, OK. Thanks. That's why I was only semi-freaking out (if there is such a thing)! Most late Jan completes will probably hear back a lot later.

User avatar
hellomellow

Bronze
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:35 am

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by hellomellow » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:21 pm

The-Specs wrote:My impression is:

1. Auto-Admits
2. URM's with solid numbers
3. Splitters with diversity (see mnindc for this)
4. Splitters/RS/Incredible softs
5. Everyone else
So if we are in group 3-5 we still have hope? :) *nervously smiling?*

User avatar
barrelofmonkeys

Gold
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:41 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by barrelofmonkeys » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:23 pm

hellomellow wrote:
The-Specs wrote:My impression is:

1. Auto-Admits
2. URM's with solid numbers
3. Splitters with diversity (see mnindc for this)
4. Splitters/RS/Incredible softs
5. Everyone else
So if we are in group 3-5 we still have hope? :) *nervously smiling?*
Is there a group 6 for "significantly worse than everyone else?"

User avatar
wtrc

Gold
Posts: 2053
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by wtrc » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:24 pm

hellomellow wrote:
The-Specs wrote:My impression is:

1. Auto-Admits
2. URM's with solid numbers
3. Splitters with diversity (see mnindc for this)
4. Splitters/RS/Incredible softs
5. Everyone else
So if we are in group 3-5 we still have hope? :) *nervously smiling?*
Interesting.

While I'd love to think of myself in #1, I think I'm a 4 or 5er, with a GPA below the median. Or as BOM just scooped me on, a 6er

User avatar
selden

New
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:27 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by selden » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:26 pm

.

edited, posted in wrong thread
Last edited by selden on Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


User avatar
The-Specs

Silver
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:55 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by The-Specs » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:27 pm

hellomellow wrote:
The-Specs wrote:My impression is:

1. Auto-Admits
2. URM's with solid numbers
3. Splitters with diversity (see mnindc for this)
4. Splitters/RS/Incredible softs
5. Everyone else
So if we are in group 3-5 we still have hope? :) *nervously smiling?*
I like to think so as I am in category 4. :)

User avatar
angels2fly

Bronze
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:15 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by angels2fly » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:29 pm

barrelofmonkeys wrote:
hellomellow wrote:
The-Specs wrote:My impression is:

1. Auto-Admits
2. URM's with solid numbers
3. Splitters with diversity (see mnindc for this)
4. Splitters/RS/Incredible softs
5. Everyone else
So if we are in group 3-5 we still have hope? :) *nervously smiling?*
Is there a group 6 for "significantly worse than everyone else?"
hope you arent asking for yourself!

User avatar
barrelofmonkeys

Gold
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:41 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by barrelofmonkeys » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:30 pm

angels2fly wrote:
barrelofmonkeys wrote:
Is there a group 6 for "significantly worse than everyone else?"
hope you arent asking for yourself!
oh, you can be sure i am

User avatar
JD1776

New
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:08 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by JD1776 » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:32 pm

The-Specs wrote:My impression is:

1. Auto-Admits
2. URM's with solid numbers
3. Splitters with diversity (see mnindc for this)
4. Splitters/RS/Incredible softs
5. Everyone else
Yea, I have to think they roughly gauge the caliber/competitiveness of the applications (based on GPA/LSAT) as they come in, and then conduct a thorough review of those top candidates first. I suspect that's how they would isolate the so-called "auto-admits."

But what do I know?

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


User avatar
Icecold62

Bronze
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 2:40 am

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by Icecold62 » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:35 pm

Ok what is URM?

User avatar
t-14orbust

Gold
Posts: 2130
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:43 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by t-14orbust » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:37 pm

Icecold62 wrote:Ok what is URM?
Under-represented Minority = African American, Native American, Mexican, Puerto Rican

data suggests they get a significant boost in admissions

User avatar
cesium

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 10:49 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by cesium » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:39 pm

Icecold62 wrote:Ok what is URM?
URM = "under-represented minorities". Usually refers to African-Americans, Hispanic/Latino-Americans, and Native Americans. I don't think it applies to Asian-Americans and Arabs; though, it may, depending on a particular school's demographics. I believe it also includes self-identified LGBT applicants.

User avatar
t-14orbust

Gold
Posts: 2130
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:43 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by t-14orbust » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:42 pm

cesium wrote:
Icecold62 wrote:Ok what is URM?
URM = "under-represented minorities". Usually refers to African-Americans, Hispanic/Latino-Americans, and Native Americans. I don't think it applies to Asian-Americans and Arabs; though, it may, depending on a particular school's demographics. I believe it also includes self-identified LGBT applicants.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 14&t=35568
Since this question comes up many times, let's try to keep all of the answers and responses in one thread. Everything below is the answers that other TLS posters will give you when you ask a question. I know this because I've spent way too much time on this site for over a year.

The general consensus on this board (TLS) is that the only groups to receive URM (Under Represented Minority) boosts are: Black/African Americans, Native Americans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans.

If you are from any other Latin American or Spanish speaking country, the consensus is to just check the Hispanic box. You may not receive as much of a boost as those that check Mexican or Puerto Rican, but it may still help you in showing diversity to the class.

For Native Americans some schools require that you show a tribe affiliation. This is not all schools, but check with the schools you are interested in before deciding to check this box.

For Arabs/Indians/Pakistanians/Middle Easterners, for law school purposes you are usually not considered a URM. This is for a variety of reasons. It's most likely not fair, but life isn't fair.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


jdapplicant

Bronze
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 2:05 am

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by jdapplicant » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:43 pm

cesium wrote:
Icecold62 wrote:Ok what is URM?
URM = "under-represented minorities". Usually refers to African-Americans, Hispanic/Latino-Americans, and Native Americans. I don't think it applies to Asian-Americans and Arabs; though, it may, depending on a particular school's demographics. I believe it also includes self-identified LGBT applicants.

Asian-Americans are "over-represented minorities" because they make up a much higher percentage of top law schools than US population in general. There's no t14 where Asian-Americans make up a lower percentage.

Howl

Bronze
Posts: 296
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:11 am

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by Howl » Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:57 pm

jdapplicant wrote:
cesium wrote:
Icecold62 wrote:Ok what is URM?
URM = "under-represented minorities". Usually refers to African-Americans, Hispanic/Latino-Americans, and Native Americans. I don't think it applies to Asian-Americans and Arabs; though, it may, depending on a particular school's demographics. I believe it also includes self-identified LGBT applicants.

Asian-Americans are "over-represented minorities" because they make up a much higher percentage of top law schools than US population in general. There's no t14 where Asian-Americans make up a lower percentage.
I don't think this hurts them though; Spivey mentioned how Asians are still reported by schools as "minorities," and how this could possibly still be favorable for them. It probably doesn't have an effect either way.

Being female, although, is a bit of a boost :D

User avatar
The-Specs

Silver
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:55 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by The-Specs » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:06 pm

Howl wrote:
jdapplicant wrote: Asian-Americans are "over-represented minorities" because they make up a much higher percentage of top law schools than US population in general. There's no t14 where Asian-Americans make up a lower percentage.
I don't think this hurts them though; Spivey mentioned how Asians are still reported by schools as "minorities," and how this could possibly still be favorable for them. It probably doesn't have an effect either way.

Being female, although, is a bit of a boost :D
Asian-Americans receive a significant boost at Stanford vis-a-vis their white/Caucasian counterparts (one that is greater than at other schools) but less of a boost than do other URMs.

User avatar
kershka

Silver
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by kershka » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:16 pm

WOW! look at all these news admits! Congrats!

Here's hoping she took a long lunch break and will resume calls in the late afternoon (since she started early morning)

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


User avatar
kershka

Silver
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by kershka » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:17 pm

wtrc wrote:
pokemonsters wrote:Congrats to all new admits! With January completes being accepted, are December November October completes likely fated to be held / WL / dinged at this point?

User avatar
drawstring

Gold
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by drawstring » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:18 pm

kershka wrote:
wtrc wrote:
pokemonsters wrote:Congrats to all new admits! With January completes being accepted, are December November October completes likely fated to be held / WL / dinged at this point?

User avatar
jingosaur

Gold
Posts: 3188
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by jingosaur » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:21 pm

kershka wrote:
wtrc wrote:
pokemonsters wrote:Congrats to all new admits! With January completes being accepted, are December November October completes likely fated to be held / WL / dinged at this point?
No. I don't think anyone can be ruled out yet. Just be patient!

User avatar
koalacity

Silver
Posts: 1162
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:56 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by koalacity » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:21 pm

kershka wrote:WOW! look at all these news admits! Congrats!

Here's hoping she took a long lunch break and will resume calls in the late afternoon (since she started early morning)
hi kershka!

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


User avatar
kershka

Silver
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by kershka » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:38 pm

koalacity wrote:
kershka wrote:WOW! look at all these news admits! Congrats!

Here's hoping she took a long lunch break and will resume calls in the late afternoon (since she started early morning)
hi kershka!
hihihi! :D :D

User avatar
Arrow4Christ

Bronze
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 12:07 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by Arrow4Christ » Fri Feb 07, 2014 5:48 pm

Well...it's still early in Palo Alto... :lol:

User avatar
The-Specs

Silver
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:55 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by The-Specs » Fri Feb 07, 2014 5:50 pm

I am calling it for today…

Mostly because that is the only way anything will ever happen

User avatar
Jessasaurus

Bronze
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:02 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Post by Jessasaurus » Fri Feb 07, 2014 6:24 pm

I really hope Stanford doesn't release rejections on valentine's day....That just seems cruel.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”