Chicago c/o 2015 Applicants (2011-2012 cycle) Forum

[skers]

We've talked about this before here, but I do think TLS underrated holisticism In admissions. Softs won't get one where their numbers wouldn't otherwise, but I think that gets conflated with softs being largely irrelevant. Obviously, this is different depending on school.

[curiouscat]

This cycle has been weird for me as well. 4.0/170: WL'd at Harvard, In at Columbia and Chicago (attending, of course), big $ at UVA and UMich, sticker at Duke/Georgetown, absolute silence from UPenn...weirdness.

Wait, Harvard has waitlisted people? How did I miss this?

[Doorkeeper]

This cycle has been weird for me as well. 4.0/170: WL'd at Harvard, In at Columbia and Chicago (attending, of course), big $ at UVA and UMich, sticker at Duke/Georgetown, absolute silence from UPenn...weirdness.

Wait, Harvard has waitlisted people? How did I miss this?

He/she probably meant held. A lot of people confuse the two.

[Nelson]

We've talked about this before here, but I do think TLS underrated holisticism In admissions. Softs won't get one where their numbers wouldn't otherwise, but I think that gets conflated with softs being largely irrelevant. Obviously, this is different depending on school.

Softs matter, but the way they are used by adcomms may as well be randomness to an outside observer. Underperforming or outperforming your numbers as a border candidate isn't predictable in most cases.

[PopTorts13]

Nice to know Nelson gets it.

Tiago, NYU is perhaps an outlier example, but I absolutely get what you are saying and I am not denying that numbers are important, but when you have so many spots and more than enough numbers to fit the bill it comes down to other aspects. Those other aspects some times are the very reason that splitters such as yourself are admitted to top programs; I doubt it is as simple as many TLSers make it out to be. Of course juggling GPA and LSAT numbers are relevant when admitting applicants but diversity matters within those numbers and sometimes outside of them as well. Surely you agree with that.

Not wanting to argue anymore about this because it is rather pointless and heavily based on an educated opinion. So I'm done. I much rather congratulate applicants, give advice and ask questions then bicker about law school admissions theory, ha ha.

[AntipodeanPhil]

We've talked about this before here, but I do think TLS underrated holisticism In admissions. Softs won't get one where their numbers wouldn't otherwise, but I think that gets conflated with softs being largely irrelevant. Obviously, this is different depending on school.

+ 1 (especially at most of the t14)

At some schools, though, softs clearly don't matter. Evidence:

http://georgia.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/1011/

[skers]

We've talked about this before here, but I do think TLS underrated holisticism In admissions. Softs won't get one where their numbers wouldn't otherwise, but I think that gets conflated with softs being largely irrelevant. Obviously, this is different depending on school.

Softs matter, but the way they are used by adcomms may as well be randomness to an outside observer. Underperforming or outperforming your numbers as a border candidate isn't predictable in most cases.

Oh, I think it does appear really random. Honestly while we all have a bit of special snowflake syndrome, for the most part we are probably relatively indistinguishable as candidates. I base my claim of hollisticism at Chicago on the ED process which should ostensibly be the most numbers driven where many lower numbered applicants were admitted over higher numbered ones.

[Doorkeeper]

We've talked about this before here, but I do think TLS underrated holisticism In admissions. Softs won't get one where their numbers wouldn't otherwise, but I think that gets conflated with softs being largely irrelevant. Obviously, this is different depending on school.

Softs matter, but the way they are used by adcomms may as well be randomness to an outside observer. Underperforming or outperforming your numbers as a border candidate isn't predictable in most cases.

Oh, I think it does appear really random. Honestly while we all have a bit of special snowflake syndrome, for the most part we are probably relatively indistinguishable as candidates. I base my claim of hollisticism at Chicago on the ED process which should ostensibly be the most numbers driven where many lower numbered applicants were admitted over higher numbered ones.

I agree. I can't speak about URM candidates, but for the rest I think for 90% of applicants, especially those coming right out of undergrad, it's straight up numbers. Then for people at the margins, things like personal statements and letters of recommendation come into play. Further, interesting WE that the school wants to have represented can also help out (ie: I know Yale Law wants to have more students with a business background, so they might look more favorably at someone who worked at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs before applying).

[Nelson]

Further, interesting WE that the school wants to have represented can also help out (ie: I know Yale Law wants to have more students with a business background, so they might look more favorably at someone who worked at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs before applying).

Working for a big consultancy or a bank is probably some of the most generic work experience you can have. It might help at OCI, but I doubt it helps you much if at all for admissions.

[Doorkeeper]

Further, interesting WE that the school wants to have represented can also help out (ie: I know Yale Law wants to have more students with a business background, so they might look more favorably at someone who worked at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs before applying).

Working for a big consultancy or a bank is probably some of the most generic work experience you can have. It might help at OCI, but I doubt it helps you much if at all for admissions.

Maybe for most schools, but that's not the case for a law school, such as Yale, that's worried about their ability to attract students with a law and business focus it isn't. They're one of the small subsections of admitted students that choose Harvard or Stanford over Yale at a high enough rate for Yale to be worried about it.

[PopTorts13]

My guess is that next Friday a new round of Rubys will be rewarded via e-mail. Any takers, eh, eh? Mark your calendars, March 2nd!

[MichelFoucault]

My guess is that next Friday a new round of Rubys will be rewarded via e-mail. Any takers, eh, eh? Mark your calendars, March 2nd!

I'm pretty sure on the phone call last week Ann said to expect financial aid letters this week. any reason why you think it would be next week?

[AntipodeanPhil]

My guess is that next Friday a new round of Rubys will be rewarded via e-mail. Any takers, eh, eh? Mark your calendars, March 2nd!

I'm pretty sure on the phone call last week Ann said to expect financial aid letters this week. any reason why you think it would be next week?

Ruby's aren't handed out at the same time as non-Ruby financial aid.

[PopTorts13]

My guess is that next Friday a new round of Rubys will be rewarded via e-mail. Any takers, eh, eh? Mark your calendars, March 2nd!

I'm pretty sure on the phone call last week Ann said to expect financial aid letters this week. any reason why you think it would be next week?

Sure thing, I thought that several people said that they received their Ruby offer via e-mail rather than the traditional phone call three weeks from when they were admitted. I was admitted on February 10th, so that was my guess.

I missed Ann's call because I was in a conference, but she didn't pass that information on me other than saying congrats in a voicemail and letting me know that if any questions arise to ask her. But if my memory serves me correct, I do believe other scholarships are sent via snail mail. I hope that helps some.

Anyone have any experience with Rubys and scholarships this cycle at UChi? Thanks!

[soj]

The first round of Rubys were sent out by email on February 3.

[MichelFoucault]

Does anyone else remember Ann telling them something about when to expect a financial aid package in the phone call?

[avd90]

2nd UR today

[ralph_pootawn]

Does anyone else remember Ann telling them something about when to expect a financial aid package in the phone call?

I was told they expect to release decisions the week of feb 20th aka this week.

[luxxe]

This cycle has been weird for me as well. 4.0/170: WL'd at Harvard, In at Columbia and Chicago (attending, of course), big $ at UVA and UMich, sticker at Duke/Georgetown, absolute silence from UPenn...weirdness.

Didn't you withdraw from everywhere like 2 months ago anyway?

[TheIdealist]

So I just went UR a second time after my first on the 20th. Is this speed indicative of a ding/wl? Uchi is a big reach for me, but I'm an URM. I was just surprised to see an update that quickly so I thought I would ask.

[Nelson]

So I just went UR a second time after my first on the 20th. Is this speed indicative of a ding/wl? Uchi is a big reach for me, but I'm an URM. I was just surprised to see an update that quickly so I thought I would ask.

Time between URs was the subject of much speculation earlier in the thread but didn't seem to be predictive of decisions.

[Xifeng]

Does anyone else remember Ann telling them something about when to expect a financial aid package in the phone call?

I was told they expect to release decisions the week of feb 20th aka this week.

Last year we got them by email, and the award $ amount was in an attachment to the email. So no need to stalk your mailboxes if the trend continues.

[jrthor10]

How many UR did people have before getting a decision?

[PopTorts13]

How many UR did people have before getting a decision?

3 For me and a majority of other people

EDIT: t-7 days until the next Ruby batch!

[Liquox]

lolol, under review first 2/20 then 2/23. it's game over, isn't it?