HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style Forum

[FryBreadPower]

Tagged.

[anemonesque]

I'd been steadily losing hope, and was kinda expecting the hold (submitted early and didn't hear a peep for 3 months). Almost relieved.

Got in Chicago today so I can't be that awful of an applicant. 3.82/177. Fingers crossed for good news!

[Gorges]

Got in Chicago today so I can't be that awful of an applicant. 3.82/177. Fingers crossed for good news!

Hey numbers twin, let's not lose hope. Love us, Harvard!

[Take Two]

Held yesterday as well. Dont really have a thing to add so I guess I just do nothing and hope. Good luck everyone!

[cogitoergosum]

How many of us held (especially those of us expecting worse) have meaningful WE? I know I expected worse, but have 5 years of interesting WE. The talk has been that HLS is placing more emphasis on WE than in years past..

[chucklesmcgee]

How many of us held (especially those of us expecting worse) have meaningful WE? I know I expected worse, but have 5 years of interesting WE. The talk has been that HLS is placing more emphasis on WE than in years past..

I've been running my own business for 2 years...

[pineappledazzler]

I was held, but I'm a K-JD with no WE (unless summers as a lifeguard count lol).

[poe]

I have a couple of years of WE, but it's at a very low-level job and is likely the main weakness of my application.

[Take Two]

I am an americorps member. who knows what that means.

[EMZE]

If the effort is being made to determine why each of us was held, I don't think you'll find a common trend outside of what Harvard said in their e-mail.

In my case, specifically, I know of a friend from my undergrad accepted to HLS this year. I also know that she applied alongside her husband, from the same school. All of us have the same work experience field (military), but slightly different paths we've taken through the Army. I would be willing to bet my own status hinges heavily on what she decides to do.

[curiouscat]

Weak WE here. I just graduated not long ago and so I've got just a few months of WE, and nothing that sounds especially exciting. I'm thinking it's one of the weaker points of my application.

[larsoner]

Held as well yesterday. I was wondering if anyone has any ideas on the two big hold dates (1/9 and 1/13). I was an early October submitter and I was expecting rejection. Were the holds done by date of submission or was one pile: I can't decide if we should let these people in? and another pile: I can't decide if we should just reject them now and be done with it?

[AmoryB]

Throwing my hat into the mix here as well, received the Hold e-mail yesterday. Below median LSAT, above 75th GPA, K-JD, here's to holding out hope for a little longer!

[amc987]

Checking in. I was held yesterday as well. Submitted late Oct, complete 11/10. URM. Stats in post history.

I think that Harvard may be covering its bases by holding more applicants than usual this year to compensate for the smaller number of LSAT takers and the correspondingly smaller applicant pool. By doing this, Harvard can keep a bunch of applicants they kind of like but aren't completely sure that they'd like to take while they wait and see whether they get more compelling applicants later on in the cycle. It's kind of a win-win for them.

Thoughts?

[Take Two]

Checking in. I was held yesterday as well. Submitted late Oct, complete 11/10. URM. Stats in post history.

I think that Harvard may be covering its bases by holding more applicants than usual this year to compensate for the smaller number of LSAT takers and the correspondingly smaller applicant pool. By doing this, Harvard can keep a bunch of applicants they kind of like but aren't completely sure that they'd like to take while they wait and see whether they get more compelling applicants later on in the cycle. It's kind of a win-win for them.

Thoughts?

yeah this seems almost certainly right. there is no downside for them.

[cogitoergosum]

I know the conventional wisdom is held > waitlist > rejection - are we still thinking that this is the case? I ask because while there are a number of great applicants in the held pool, there is also a surprising number of folks (myself included) saying "OMG - I thought I was going to be rejected!!!" Is this just the way things always are because it's HLS, or are we a weak held pool? Does this make anyone else doubt the hierarchy presented above? Is it possible that HLS just said "we're out of time for these guys and can't pay them much attention right now, so let's hold them all..."?

I definitely want to be wrong on this one (who doesn't like thinking they have a decent shot at HLS??), but just had to throw it out there because I'm wondering myself...

[FryBreadPower]

I know the conventional wisdom is held > waitlist > rejection - are we still thinking that this is the case? I ask because while there are a number of great applicants in the held pool, there is also a surprising number of folks (myself included) saying "OMG - I thought I was going to be rejected!!!" Is this just the way things always are because it's HLS, or are we a weak held pool? Does this make anyone else doubt the hierarchy presented above? Is it possible that HLS just said "we're out of time for these guys and can't pay them much attention right now, so let's hold them all..."?

I definitely want to be wrong on this one (who doesn't like thinking they have a decent shot at HLS??), but just had to throw it out there because I'm wondering myself...

Ya but there are also a number of people who were disappointed to be held. I think at this point people are more excited for the held because they had assumed they would be rejected after such a long period of radio silence. I'm sure if people knew they were going to be held back in Oct. they wouldn't have been as excited.

[EMZE]

Checking in. I was held yesterday as well. Submitted late Oct, complete 11/10. URM. Stats in post history.

I think that Harvard may be covering its bases by holding more applicants than usual this year to compensate for the smaller number of LSAT takers and the correspondingly smaller applicant pool. By doing this, Harvard can keep a bunch of applicants they kind of like but aren't completely sure that they'd like to take while they wait and see whether they get more compelling applicants later on in the cycle. It's kind of a win-win for them.

Thoughts?

Agreed. I mentioned earlier on this thread why I believe I specifically was held, and believe that every more unique applicant probably has some counterpart with a similar background/experience that Harvard is waiting to hear back from, in addition to looking for newer applicants with roughly similar experiences, before they make a decision. For those of you straight out of undergrad or that are a little more generic, I would imagine that you probably already have the numbers to get in, it is just a matter of Harvard trying to genuinely create a class with a wide breadth of experiences. I know that time and again people will say Harvard is purely numbers, but the fact that I am being held with my numbers at least means they read and considered my application.

RE: cogitoergosum, past held threads had those individuals like myself saying the same exact thing. Don't think this is a unique situation for this year.

[anemonesque]

I know the conventional wisdom is held > waitlist > rejection - are we still thinking that this is the case?

Don't want to think that's the case! I doubt anyone who was surprised they weren't rejected was an "autoreject"--but this cycle is definitely slow/weird. I'm a K-JD, with part time work experience, but that part of the resume is definitely weak. I am also not diverse in any way. My life on paper looks pretty boring and I wonder if all they see in me are numbers... Maybe they are holistic in a way then, not wanting me

[cogitoergosum]

I know the conventional wisdom is held > waitlist > rejection - are we still thinking that this is the case?

Don't want to think that's the case! I doubt anyone who was surprised they weren't rejected was an "autoreject"--but this cycle is definitely slow/weird. I'm a K-JD, with part time work experience, but that part of the resume is definitely weak. I am also not diverse in any way. My life on paper looks pretty boring and I wonder if all they see in me are numbers... Maybe they are holistic in a way then, not wanting me

Just to clarify: by "held > waitlist > rejection," I meant "held better than waitlist better than rejection."

[FryBreadPower]

I'd be curious to see more definitive numbers on the URM composition of the held-pool. Everything thus far has been nothing but pure speculation. LSN doesn't seem to imply that many URMs have been admitted thus far.

[cogitoergosum]

The other thing I'm wondering about:

If indeed held is more than "didn't get to this in time," do you guys think this allows us deduce much about our apps relative to the rest of the 2012 applicant pool? Anyone think being held at Harvard means one has a decent shot at Penn, for instance?

I know I'm getting pretty loose with my reasoning here, but it's still 2 more hours until the Broncos and I can't stop thinking about this!!!

[FryBreadPower]

The other thing I'm wondering about:

If indeed held is more than "didn't get to this in time," do you guys think this allows us deduce much about our apps relative to the rest of the 2012 applicant pool? Anyone think being held at Harvard means one has a decent shot at Penn, for instance?

I know I'm getting pretty loose with my reasoning here, but it's still 2 more hours until the Broncos and I can't stop thinking about this!!!

Based off the number of Held at Harvard and WL at Chicago I'm not sure if this line of reasoning is working out well.

[cogitoergosum]

The other thing I'm wondering about:

If indeed held is more than "didn't get to this in time," do you guys think this allows us deduce much about our apps relative to the rest of the 2012 applicant pool? Anyone think being held at Harvard means one has a decent shot at Penn, for instance?

I know I'm getting pretty loose with my reasoning here, but it's still 2 more hours until the Broncos and I can't stop thinking about this!!!

Based off the number of Held at Harvard and WL at Chicago I'm not sure if this line of reasoning is working out well.

Yeah, well I think that trying to apply it to Chicago is even more loose... If held is only slightly (if at all) better than waitlist at HLS, then I wouldn't, even in a recreational sort of way, try to say that it means one won't be waitlisted at an *almost* peer school. But regarding schools like MVP, does anyone think held @ HLS means probably good news @ MVP??

[cogitoergosum]

ehh, upon a look at last year's lower HLS wl's, it doesn't look like there's much to my theory...