Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014) Forum

[TheMostDangerousLG]

Aw, shucks. My only chance of getting in rests on there being a paucity of 175+ takers.

[lawschool22]

ls22, i know you're trying to find the glimmer that supports your view that the pool is weak so you individually (and altruistically, others in your position) have better chances in this cycle, but using the dates' coincidence seems like grasping at straws.

they don't hear about it until Monday. then they say that they field calls from applicants it takes at least the rest of Monday to get a few of those calls.

so you're basically saying that since they didn't tell applicants this on Tuesday, it must be in response to the bandwidth data's release.

and with the release, it looks like the 173+ category held steady. +38 in the 175+ category. there are 5 scores in the 170-174 category, so assuming uniform distribution and assuming you were correct in saying that the raw decrease in the 170-4 range was -92, then there are about 36 fewer 173s and 174s. it would be odd if significantly more than 36 of the 92 came out of 173-4. so why would the bandwidth release cause them to take this "novel and hence drastic enough to say something about their app pool" measure?

I didn't say it "must" be in response, just that it was coincidental. Look we aren't going to agree on this so it's probably best if we discontinue this line of discussion for the sake of the rest of the participants in this thread. And I'm not trying to find a glimmer for my own sake. I simply enjoyed the theories etc as a way to pass the time. So thank you for assuming this was all a self serving ploy.

Edit: fixed iPhone autocorrect

[andapieceoftoast]

Edited: to remove the dumb.

[TheMostDangerousLG]

There were only 353 people who got scores in this range. Which means a 12% increase corresponds to roughly (if my algebra is correct ) an increase of around 38 applicants with a score in this range.

MDLG, don't be discouraged. Look at the above.
The number of 175+ scorers aren't even enough to fill an entire class at HLS, not to mention the fact that there are two similarly selective schools also competing for these same applicants.
Those scoring 174 and below STILL have an excellent shot of getting into HYS!

But Harvard isn't trying to fill the class with people who scored 175+, they are trying to get ~200 of them to maintain their 75th percentile. And given that there is an increase in people with that score, that means that someone who has a 175+ and a sub-25th percentile GPA could theoretically have a decreased shot at getting in.

[andapieceoftoast]

There were only 353 people who got scores in this range. Which means a 12% increase corresponds to roughly (if my algebra is correct ) an increase of around 38 applicants with a score in this range.

MDLG, don't be discouraged. Look at the above.
The number of 175+ scorers aren't even enough to fill an entire class at HLS, not to mention the fact that there are two similarly selective schools also competing for these same applicants.
Those scoring 174 and below STILL have an excellent shot of getting into HYS!

But Harvard isn't trying to fill the class with people who scored 175+, they are trying to get ~200 of them to maintain their 75th percentile. And given that there is an increase in people with that score, that means that someone who has a 175+ and a sub-25th percentile GPA could theoretically have a decreased shot at getting in.

Edit: removing idiotic post ***I'll just see myself out***

[TheMostDangerousLG]

Well, I guess I revealed my ignorance. Just trying to stay positive and I still believe that this cycle is going to be kind to us all!

Edit: I think I may have missed the sarcasm in your original post. My apologies. I for one am sub-175 so I guess I was projecting my own insecurities about not getting into HLS on you.

Huh? I wasn't being sarcastic. Unless there's a giant hole in my logic (and that is far from unlikely), it seems to me like super splitters (well, the still-have-some-chance-at-Harvard version of super splitters) may not have as great a shot as we originally might have thought given the crazy decline in applicants the last couple of years.

I'm actually not sure where the score distribution data came from though; can someone link me to a source?

[somuchwaiting]

Huh? I wasn't being sarcastic. Unless there's a giant hole in my logic (and that is far from unlikely), it seems to me like super splitters (well, the still-have-some-chance-at-Harvard version of super splitters) may not have as great a shot as we originally might have thought given the crazy decline in applicants the last couple of years.

I'm actually not sure where the score distribution data came from though; can someone link me to a source?

http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/2014-l ... rsus-2013/

[andapieceoftoast]

Huh? I wasn't being sarcastic. Unless there's a giant hole in my logic (and that is far from unlikely), it seems to me like super splitters (well, the still-have-some-chance-at-Harvard version of super splitters) may not have as great a shot as we originally might have thought given the crazy decline in applicants the last couple of years.

I'm actually not sure where the score distribution data came from though; can someone link me to a source?

I already told this to MDLG via PM...but I am sorry guys. I feel like an ass, as I have misinterpreted everything. Please ignore my idiot comments - I'm going to delete them, just because I'm embarrassed how badly I misinterpreted the discussion.

Bottom line, best of luck to all of us. I am trying to keep the faith that the numbers will ever be in our favor.

[lawschool22]

Well, I guess I revealed my ignorance. Just trying to stay positive and I still believe that this cycle is going to be kind to us all!

Edit: I think I may have missed the sarcasm in your original post. My apologies. I for one am sub-175 so I guess I was projecting my own insecurities about not getting into HLS on you.

Huh? I wasn't being sarcastic. Unless there's a giant hole in my logic (and that is far from unlikely), it seems to me like super splitters (well, the still-have-some-chance-at-Harvard version of super splitters) may not have as great a shot as we originally might have thought given the crazy decline in applicants the last couple of years.

I'm actually not sure where the score distribution data came from though; can someone link me to a source?

Let me know if I'm following (I think I am ). You're saying that due to the decline in applicant quality over the past few years, schools may lower their acceptable LSAT/GPA combo (primarily by lowering LSAT standards) and therefore the super-high LSAT plus low GPA is less valuable, because as they move down the LSAT scale, an increased number of appealing GPA's become available?

Edit: Well I just re-read you past several posts and now I'm not so sure I have it lol. Are you saying you're discouraged by the increase in 175-180 scores?

[sasquatchsam]

I do not really have an opinion on the whole application deadline extension but I do believe that HLS is perhaps even more focused on numbers this year than in previous cycles. My only evidence is my own experience. My cycle has not been progressing very quickly (I have only heard back from a couple of schools and been waitlisted at a school not known for YP) except for an HLS acceptance. I think it is very probable that HLS was willing to ignore my unspectacular application because my numbers helped them protect their medians.

[luckystar84]

deleted

[TheMostDangerousLG]

Everyone just forget my posts, I think I'm overtired and not explaining my thoughts very well. I just meant that the increase in the number of applicants with higher LSAT scores may slightly diminish the boost of having a high LSAT.

[jingosaur]

Everyone just forget my posts, I think I'm overtired and not explaining my thoughts very well. I just meant that the increase in the number of applicants with higher LSAT scores may slightly diminish the boost of having a high LSAT.

This may be true, but it's only 38 more. I'm sure at least a few of them have lower GPAs than you.

[wtrc]

Hi all- sorry I've been out for the night, but just to chime in on those numbers now that they are posted publicly...

1) An increase of 38 is barely statistically significant. Agreed that the 4.6% decline in the 170-174 is probably more significant, especially for the top schools with medians around 172/173. I don't think the 75th's matter nearly as much as the medians.

2) The 170+'s decreased substantially more than any other category last year from 2012, iirc, so I'm not surprised if that category stops the decline first and bounces back.

3) TTTT's are absolutely screwed.

[redsox]

Can we get a separate thread for wild speculation about how the color of the lights on the Prudential Center tonight may or may not affect HLS admissons decisions this week?

These endless swaps of shaky logic based on even more questionable knowledge make it really hard to glean any real information from this thread.

[lawschool22]

Can we get a separate thread for wild speculation about how the color of the lights on the Prudential Center tonight may or may not affect HLS admissons decisions this week?

These endless swaps of shaky logic based on even more questionable knowledge make it really hard to glean any real information from this thread.

As a participant in the speculation this is what I was worried about, so I decided to stop responding lol . I think today was a bit abnormal on the speculation front given the three or four headlines that came out today.

[luckystar84]

deleted

[luckystar84]

deleted

[lawschool22]

Can we get a separate thread for wild speculation about how the color of the lights on the Prudential Center tonight may or may not affect HLS admissons decisions this week?

These endless swaps of shaky logic based on even more questionable knowledge make it really hard to glean any real information from this thread.

yea it was a waste of my time too esp. since I don't enjoy making up theories to pass the time. but what I was doing wasn't speculation...I was countering speculation. the burden wasn't mine, so even if my logic was shaky, its shakiness doesn't support the "snow-email means they're desperate" theory which should be argued for on its own terms

You should just stop. You're not doing yourself any favors.

[mont4620]

Huh? I wasn't being sarcastic. Unless there's a giant hole in my logic (and that is far from unlikely), it seems to me like super splitters (well, the still-have-some-chance-at-Harvard version of super splitters) may not have as great a shot as we originally might have thought given the crazy decline in applicants the last couple of years.

I'm actually not sure where the score distribution data came from though; can someone link me to a source?

http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/2014-l ... rsus-2013/

Can someone explain this data a little bit more? Where does it come from? Is it just for Harvard, or law school applications in general?

[luckystar84]

deleted

[wowhio]

Harvard needs to let some people in soon or this board is going to explode.

[lawschool22]

yea I've already said I don't have a horse in this race so I should've dropped out a long time ago, as long as you saying "just stop" isn't your way of saying you won the argument.

you posed a question, so it was reasonable to respond to that one. then you're saying just stop and I haven't said anything substantive since then, but would you really be the first one to stop responding if you thought your theory hasn't been weakened?

I don't care who "wins" the argument. That you think that just shows that you think the focus of every forum discussion is to win some imaginary argument you're waging with (in your mind) an inferior opponent.

I told you to stop because you were continuing to attack my character and motives which I didn't appreciate and felt was unbecoming.

I stopped engaging with you on this topic because it was going nowhere, obviously. But if it makes you feel better and superior to me to think I stopped because my "theory was weakened" then by all means do so. If you feeling you have "beaten" me will end the annoying PMs and endless questioning of me and my merits, then that is a small price to pay for an end to your badgering.

[redsox]

yea I've already said I don't have a horse in this race so I should've dropped out a long time ago, as long as you saying "just stop" isn't your way of saying you won the argument.

you posed a question, so it was reasonable to respond to that one. then you're saying just stop and I haven't said anything substantive since then, but would you really be the first one to stop responding if you thought your theory hasn't been weakened?

You should just stop.

[illyria]

Harvard needs to let some people in soon or this board is going to explode.