Stanford 2010!!! Forum

[lawyering]

Am I the only one right now who has SLS in as a #3 choice? At the moment it's Y > H > S, but you never know, financial aid could change things.

[Tangerine Gleam]

Applied 10/30 with sub-par numbers and still no word.

[Jericwithers]

Dinged. Funny how I got my only two rejections so far from the schools I vastly preferred to all of the others.

This is why I act indifferent to all the schools I applied to. Take em or leave em; never show that you're interest. Sorry to hear about your rejection though; I am expecting mine tomorrow.

[democrattotheend]

My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?

[tintin]

My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?

sounds like a ding sorry, that sucks.

[democrattotheend]

My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?

sounds like a ding sorry, that sucks.

Yeah, I figured. Why can't they just ding by e-mail? Why do they have to torture you with a letter in the mail?

[Jericwithers]

My roommate says I got a letter today. I assume that's bad news, right? They do all of their acceptances by phone and reject by mail, right?

sounds like a ding sorry, that sucks.

Yeah, I figured. Why can't they just ding by e-mail? Why do they have to torture you with a letter in the mail?

It seems there are too many trees in the world.

[WhiskeyGuy]

Stanford is my only outstanding application. I did not initially send out any targeted LOR's, but since I have not been rejected yet and I have a good potential writer I am thinking about it.

The thing is I am a current UC Berkeley undergrad, last semester I took a Law and Econ course that is taught by a faculty of the law school (Boalt) and I did really well in the course. I was thinking I would ask that professor to write a targeted letter to Stanford, but I kind of feel weird doing that since I was already admitted to Boalt. Any thoughts?

Make it happen. Not sending any targeted LORs is not a death knell, but it sure doesn't help. Let SLS know they are one of your top choices by putting in the extra effort.

+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.

Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.

[EijiMiyake]

Stanford is my only outstanding application. I did not initially send out any targeted LOR's, but since I have not been rejected yet and I have a good potential writer I am thinking about it.

The thing is I am a current UC Berkeley undergrad, last semester I took a Law and Econ course that is taught by a faculty of the law school (Boalt) and I did really well in the course. I was thinking I would ask that professor to write a targeted letter to Stanford, but I kind of feel weird doing that since I was already admitted to Boalt. Any thoughts?

Make it happen. Not sending any targeted LORs is not a death knell, but it sure doesn't help. Let SLS know they are one of your top choices by putting in the extra effort.

+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.

Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.

Hm, that sucks. It seems silly to weight something that isn't really your effort, but your recommenders. I'm pretty sure that my letters were the same as my normal letters, except with the addition of that rating matrix.

[lawyering]

+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.

Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.

I did not submit targeted letters; my LORs did not complete the SLS matrix.

[tomhobbes]

+1. They definitely appreciate targeted letters.

Aye aye. As I think of it, I don't know anyone on TLS who has been admitted this cycle without submitting targeted letters. I'm sure they exist, but they are rare.

I did not submit targeted letters; my LORs did not complete the SLS matrix.

I got the sense that targeted letters are only useful if your letter writers have some connection to Stanford. I didn't do anything Stanford-specific either.

[WhiskeyGuy]

The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.

[CardinalRules]

The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.

Right. I didn't mean to suggest that the targeted letter was a prerequisite. It just seems like an easy way to demonstrate interest,

[WhiskeyGuy]

The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.

Right. I didn't mean to suggest that the targeted letter was a prerequisite. It just seems like an easy way to demonstrate interest,

Right. I am agreeing with you

[Jericwithers]

The fact that people get accepted without submitting targeted letters means only that--it does not mean that targeted letters do not help one's candidacy. Targeted letters are one of a handful of ways to demonstrate that you sincerely want to attend SLS, which, judging by the aggregate comments on TLS, is something you'd be wise to demonstrate to Faye Deal. SLS states that they value targeted letters, and the aggregate data on TLS suggests this is so.

Right. I didn't mean to suggest that the targeted letter was a prerequisite. It just seems like an easy way to demonstrate interest,

Right. I am agreeing with you

Wrong. I think you both are correct.

[BioEBear2010]

I had one prof without any affiliation to Stanford write a targeted letter. Don't really know what I was thinking, haha.

[CardinalRules]

I had one prof without any affiliation to Stanford write a targeted letter. Don't really know what I was thinking, haha.

But Dean Deal did.

[adameus]

I sincerely want to attend SLS. However I'm not sure my application made that clear. I did not have targeted letters and I submitted on the last day. do you think it would be wise to send in a LOCI stating my interest in Stanford? I don't really have anything to update them on as I've just been working at the same job that I've been at for the last 3 years. I just want to convey to them the fact that I am very interested in Attending Stanford.

I was thinking of sending them an email about the fact that I haven't been told that I went complete and as part of that email stating my dying love for Stanford. Thoughts?

[BenJ]

That sounds reasonable to me. I had no significant updates in my LOCI, either, but I thought I needed to make clear that I really was enthusiastic about attending Stanford. (Who knows if it will work.)

Although combining it with a question about completion might not be the greatest idea if you're just your LOCI in the body of the email. Maybe send an email asking about completion and also mention "additional materials" attached, and attach the LOCI as a Word document or PDF. That way, the question about completion doesn't end up being part of the LOCI. Just a thought.

[CardinalRules]

That sounds reasonable to me. I had no significant updates in my LOCI, either, but I thought I needed to make clear that I really was enthusiastic about attending Stanford. (Who knows if it will work.)

Although combining it with a question about completion might not be the greatest idea if you're just your LOCI in the body of the email. Maybe send an email asking about completion and also mention "additional materials" attached, and attach the LOCI as a Word document or PDF. That way, the question about completion doesn't end up being part of the LOCI. Just a thought.

I agree that you might want to send it as an attachment, so that the secretary doesn't just read the email, send you the completion notification, and delete your message, thinking "problem solved."

[JohnnyTrojan08]

What are the forum's thoughts on a LOCI even if I haven't heard anything since going under review? I applied late, didn't go under review until early March, didn't submit targeted letters or the matrix (because of silly LSAC, not because my recommenders didn't fill it out)... it's ironic that I didn't resubmit the forms on LSAC because I ended up having to wait for transcripts to be cleared anyway. Hindsight.

However, since early March I've been nominated for a competitive national Teach For America award (i.e. 1 of 7) and got my school a 150K grant. Those seem like worthy resume-updates based on other stuff in the thread, which also allows me to reiterate my interest in Stanford.

And in response to a few pages back, virtually tied with Harvard but with completely different reasons. I'd like to hear back from Stanford so I can actually start comparing.

[CardinalRules]

What are the forum's thoughts on a LOCI even if I haven't heard anything since going under review? I applied late, didn't go under review until early March, didn't submit targeted letters or the matrix (because of silly LSAC, not because my recommenders didn't fill it out)... it's ironic that I didn't resubmit the forms on LSAC because I ended up having to wait for transcripts to be cleared anyway. Hindsight.

However, since early March I've been nominated for a competitive national Teach For America award (i.e. 1 of 7) and got my school a 150K grant. Those seem like a worthy resume-updates based on other stuff in the thread, which also allows me to reiterate my interest in Stanford.

And in response to a few pages back, virtually tied with Harvard but with completely different reasons. I'd like to hear back from Stanford so I can actually start comparing.

I LOL'd at the modesty in the last line. Not surprising from a Trojan, though. I kid, of course.

You should send the new information, definitely, but present it as a resume update rather than as a LOCI. If you didn't go under review until early March, it's not surprising that you haven't heard from them.

[JohnnyTrojan08]

Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW.

But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good.

And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.

[crackberry]

Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW.

But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good.

And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.

Need I remind you what the Trojans' record is against the Cardinal the last three years?

[BioEBear2010]

Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW.

But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good.

And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.

Need I remind you what the Trojans' record is against the Cardinal the last three years?

The Trojans' record against unwanted pregnancies is pretty solid, though.