Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread Forum

[carboncopyx]

This entire thread nowadays...

In other news, I dreamt last night that my Status Checker went DLS! I actually think I was happy about it in my dream. And then when I checked it this morning, it was still submitted for review.

[je12345]

I haven't posted any replies here, and I wasn't going to until I heard back, but seeing as I'm post-DLS, post-call, post-everything, I figured I'd join in all the fun. I'm in Harvard/Yale, so while Stanford would be awesome, I'm not exactly hurting. That said, I've enjoyed getting to know all the different characters, and will enjoy meeting some of you at the Yale/Harvard ASWs next weekend.

I did some interesting data analysis, and thought I'd share it here. I went through all of the LSN data from this year for admits to HYS, and found some interesting results. First, I'm dividing Harvard's LSAT range (160-180) into quartiles and showing the percentage admitted to each school out of that quartile. For reference, I've color-coded the highest and lowest percentages for each quartile per school:

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Note that this is not those who are going to the school, but those who are accepted to the school. Considering that in general, the three schools are lumped together, the profile of applicants should be similar, right? Why, then, does Stanford accept a much higher percentage from the middle two quartiles than its competitors? While the three schools' average GPAs are almost identical, the LSAT profile is where the difference is.

I'll let the forum make more conjectures about the data, but here's what I see. By merit of the fact that Harvard accepts the most applicants, we might conjecture that Harvard's admits generally comprise the universe of valid applicants. This is a loose generalization, but in other words, if you were accepted to Yale or Stanford, you were probably also accepted to Harvard. What Stanford seems to be doing is taking the slice of that universe that Yale is not taking--those with high GPAs but relatively mediocre LSAT scores. (I have to smile when I say that, because in this context, anything sub-170 is "relatively mediocre"!)

Now, there's still overlap, but Stanford would prefer a higher yield rate, and when you're competing with both Harvard and Yale for an applicant, that's not going to work out very well. (If each school get's an even chance--not likely, since Yale's yield rate is 83% and Harvard's is 64%, Stanford's going to have a yield rate of 33%--well below their current yield rate of 47%.) The other thing that Stanford may do is "expand the universe"--choose applicants who may have been overlooked by HLS because of a mediocre LSAT score. So long as Stanford remains competitive (i.e., in the top 5), its ranking won't suffer if its GPA is still very high.

Any thoughts from the others in the forum?

Anyways, hopefully that serves as a diversion from status checking. Speaking of which, my status checker isn't working. Anybody know why? (kidding--couldn't help it though! )

[bluecouch]

I haven't posted any replies here, and I wasn't going to until I heard back, but seeing as I'm post-DLS, post-call, post-everything, I figured I'd join in all the fun. I'm in Harvard/Yale, so while Stanford would be awesome, I'm not exactly hurting. That said, I've enjoyed getting to know all the different characters, and will enjoy meeting some of you at the Yale/Harvard ASWs next weekend.

I did some interesting data analysis, and thought I'd share it here. I went through all of the LSN data from this year for admits to HYS, and found some interesting results. First, I'm dividing Harvard's LSAT range (160-180) into quartiles and showing the percentage admitted to each school out of that quartile. For reference, I've color-coded the highest and lowest percentages for each quartile per school:

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Note that this is not those who are going to the school, but those who are accepted to the school. Considering that in general, the three schools are lumped together, the profile of applicants should be similar, right? Why, then, does Stanford accept a much higher percentage from the middle two quartiles than its competitors? While the three schools' average GPAs are almost identical, the LSAT profile is where the difference is.

I'll let the forum make more conjectures about the data, but here's what I see. By merit of the fact that Harvard accepts the most applicants, we might conjecture that Harvard's admits generally comprise the universe of valid applicants. This is a loose generalization, but in other words, if you were accepted to Yale or Stanford, you were probably also accepted to Harvard. What Stanford seems to be doing is taking the slice of that universe that Yale is not taking--those with high GPAs but relatively mediocre LSAT scores. (I have to smile when I say that, because in this context, anything sub-170 is "relatively mediocre"!)

Now, there's still overlap, but Stanford would prefer a higher yield rate, and when you're competing with both Harvard and Yale for an applicant, that's not going to work out very well. (If each school get's an even chance--not likely, since Yale's yield rate is 83% and Harvard's is 64%, Stanford's going to have a yield rate of 33%--well below their current yield rate of 47%.) The other thing that Stanford may do is "expand the universe"--choose applicants who may have been overlooked by HLS because of a mediocre LSAT score. So long as Stanford remains competitive (i.e., in the top 5), its ranking won't suffer if its GPA is still very high.

Any thoughts from the others in the forum?

Anyways, hopefully that serves as a diversion from status checking. Speaking of which, my status checker isn't working. Anybody know why? (kidding--couldn't help it though! )

Nothing makes me feel more warm and fuzzy about being admitted to an elite law school than the understanding that Stanford wanted me because Harvard didn't.

You're killing my buzz, man.

[LSATSCORES2012]

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Not sure how you got this data, but I get, as of last night,

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 21% | 0.0% | 25%
165-169 | 19% | 3% | 29%
170-174 | 45% | 33% | 64%
175-180 | 70% | 43% | 69%

ETA: Are you including applications that are still pending?

[wert3813]

I haven't posted any replies here, and I wasn't going to until I heard back, but seeing as I'm post-DLS, post-call, post-everything, I figured I'd join in all the fun. I'm in Harvard/Yale, so while Stanford would be awesome, I'm not exactly hurting. That said, I've enjoyed getting to know all the different characters, and will enjoy meeting some of you at the Yale/Harvard ASWs next weekend.

I did some interesting data analysis, and thought I'd share it here. I went through all of the LSN data from this year for admits to HYS, and found some interesting results. First, I'm dividing Harvard's LSAT range (160-180) into quartiles and showing the percentage admitted to each school out of that quartile. For reference, I've color-coded the highest and lowest percentages for each quartile per school:

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Note that this is not those who are going to the school, but those who are accepted to the school. Considering that in general, the three schools are lumped together, the profile of applicants should be similar, right? Why, then, does Stanford accept a much higher percentage from the middle two quartiles than its competitors? While the three schools' average GPAs are almost identical, the LSAT profile is where the difference is.

I'll let the forum make more conjectures about the data, but here's what I see. By merit of the fact that Harvard accepts the most applicants, we might conjecture that Harvard's admits generally comprise the universe of valid applicants. This is a loose generalization, but in other words, if you were accepted to Yale or Stanford, you were probably also accepted to Harvard. What Stanford seems to be doing is taking the slice of that universe that Yale is not taking--those with high GPAs but relatively mediocre LSAT scores. (I have to smile when I say that, because in this context, anything sub-170 is "relatively mediocre"!)

Now, there's still overlap, but Stanford would prefer a higher yield rate, and when you're competing with both Harvard and Yale for an applicant, that's not going to work out very well. (If each school get's an even chance--not likely, since Yale's yield rate is 83% and Harvard's is 64%, Stanford's going to have a yield rate of 33%--well below their current yield rate of 47%.) The other thing that Stanford may do is "expand the universe"--choose applicants who may have been overlooked by HLS because of a mediocre LSAT score. So long as Stanford remains competitive (i.e., in the top 5), its ranking won't suffer if its GPA is still very high.

Any thoughts from the others in the forum?

Anyways, hopefully that serves as a diversion from status checking. Speaking of which, my status checker isn't working. Anybody know why? (kidding--couldn't help it though! )

My thought is that to all the -1Ls lurker who read this and decide not to retake should notice that URMs aren't separated out. IF YOU ARE NOT A URM AND DO NOT SCORE ABOVE A 169 YOUR CHANCES OF GETTING INTO ONE OF HYS ARE VERY LOW. RETAKE.

[iteachtenthgrade]

DLS, ya'll. 11/5 submit.

172/3.6 - it was expected and I feel so liberated! Later today I'll be committing to Berkeley officially, where I'll be spending the next 6-7 years. Good luck to you all! It's been a pleasure and you've made this awful wait a whole lot better.

[wert3813]

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Not sure how you got this data, but I get, as of last night,

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 21% | 0.0% | 25%
165-169 | 19% | 3% | 29%
170-174 | 45% | 33% | 64%
175-180 | 70% | 43% | 69%

ETA: Are you including applications that are still pending?

You're getting that one out of every 5 people with a 160-164 gets into Harvard?

[wert3813]

DLS, ya'll. 11/5 submit.

172/3.6 - it was expected and I feel so liberated! Later today I'll be committing to Berkeley officially, where I'll be spending the next 6-7 years. Good luck to you all! It's been a pleasure and you've made this awful wait a whole lot better.

Good luck ITTG. Who is a female.

[LSATSCORES2012]

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Not sure how you got this data, but I get, as of last night,

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 21% | 0.0% | 25%
165-169 | 19% | 3% | 29%
170-174 | 45% | 33% | 64%
175-180 | 70% | 43% | 69%

ETA: Are you including applications that are still pending?

You're getting that one out of every 5 people with a 160-164 gets into Harvard?

Yea... nearly all URM/AA if you look at the data points. I think it's sampling bias (more likely to put up your decision if you get in) and that these people had high GPA's.

And based on the LSN page it seems right: http://harvard.lawschoolnumbers.com/applicants
(not including Pending decisions, of course)

[wert3813]

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Not sure how you got this data, but I get, as of last night,

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 21% | 0.0% | 25%
165-169 | 19% | 3% | 29%
170-174 | 45% | 33% | 64%
175-180 | 70% | 43% | 69%

ETA: Are you including applications that are still pending?

You're getting that one out of every 5 people with a 160-164 gets into Harvard?

Yea... nearly all URM/AA if you look at the data points. I think it's sampling bias (more likely to put up your decision if you get in) and that these people had high GPA's.

And based on the LSN page it seems right: http://harvard.lawschoolnumbers.com/applicants
(not including Pending decisions, of course)

Got it. All the caveats+most pendings with that LSAT will be dings=I can see that.

[je12345]

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Not sure how you got this data, but I get, as of last night,

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 21% | 0.0% | 25%
165-169 | 19% | 3% | 29%
170-174 | 45% | 33% | 64%
175-180 | 70% | 43% | 69%

ETA: Are you including applications that are still pending?

Mine aren't acceptance rates, but percentage of the total admits. So if you add up the vertical columns, they'll all add up to 100% (rounding errors notwithstanding) .So for example, of all of the applicants Stanford accepted, 21.5% of them scored between a 165 and a 169. (In other words, I don't care who was rejected or waitlisted--I'm only looking at the universe of those accepted to these schools.)

Nothing makes me feel more warm and fuzzy about being admitted to an elite law school than the understanding that Stanford wanted me because Harvard didn't.

You're killing my buzz, man.

Not my intent...sorry!! To the contrary, congratulations

[LSATSCORES2012]

Got it. All the caveats+most pendings with that LSAT will be dings=I can see that.

At first you made me think my website was broken

[dnptan]

My thought is that to all the -1Ls lurker who read this and decide not to retake should notice that URMs aren't separated out. IF YOU ARE NOT A URM AND DO NOT SCORE ABOVE A 169 YOUR CHANCES OF GETTING INTO ONE OF HYS ARE VERY LOW. RETAKE.

+1. Wert PSA

[bluecouch]

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 7.1% | 0.0% | 6.2%
165-169 | 12.9% | 4.0% | 21.5%
170-174 | 42.1% | 60.0% | 58.5%
175-180 | 37.9% | 36.0% | 13.8%

Not sure how you got this data, but I get, as of last night,

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 21% | 0.0% | 25%
165-169 | 19% | 3% | 29%
170-174 | 45% | 33% | 64%
175-180 | 70% | 43% | 69%

ETA: Are you including applications that are still pending?

Mine aren't acceptance rates, but percentage of the total admits. So if you add up the vertical columns, they'll all add up to 100% (rounding errors notwithstanding) .So for example, of all of the applicants Stanford accepted, 21.5% of them scored between a 165 and a 169. (In other words, I don't care who was rejected or waitlisted--I'm only looking at the universe of those accepted to these schools.)

Nothing makes me feel more warm and fuzzy about being admitted to an elite law school than the understanding that Stanford wanted me because Harvard didn't.

You're killing my buzz, man.

Not my intent...sorry!! To the contrary, congratulations

Just giving you a hard time

[LSATSCORES2012]

Mine aren't acceptance rates, but percentage of the total admits. So if you add up the vertical columns, they'll all add up to 100% (rounding errors notwithstanding) .So for example, of all of the applicants Stanford accepted, 21.5% of them scored between a 165 and a 169. (In other words, I don't care who was rejected or waitlisted--I'm only looking at the universe of those accepted to these schools.)

Oh, okay, interesting way to look at it. Of course, you're assuming that all three schools get a similar number of applicants in each range. Here's the data on total applicants in each range:

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 12% | 10% | 11%
165-169 | 30% | 23% | 33%
170-174 | 41% | 45% | 41%
175-180 | 17% | 22% | 15%

Based on this, it looks like Stanford just has less high quality applicants than Harvard or Yale. Of course, this difference isn't quite as significant as the difference shown in the percentage of admits, so perhaps it's a result of both factors. Very interesting information, either way.

[ssanonymous]

Mine aren't acceptance rates, but percentage of the total admits. So if you add up the vertical columns, they'll all add up to 100% (rounding errors notwithstanding) .So for example, of all of the applicants Stanford accepted, 21.5% of them scored between a 165 and a 169. (In other words, I don't care who was rejected or waitlisted--I'm only looking at the universe of those accepted to these schools.)

Oh, okay, interesting way to look at it. Of course, you're assuming that all three schools get a similar number of applicants in each range. Here's the data on total applicants in each range:

LSAT Range | Harvard | Yale | Stanford
160-164 | 12% | 10% | 11%
165-169 | 30% | 23% | 33%
170-174 | 41% | 45% | 41%
175-180 | 17% | 22% | 15%

Based on this, it looks like Stanford just has less high quality applicants than Harvard or Yale. Of course, this difference isn't quite as significant as the difference shown in the percentage of admits, so perhaps it's a result of both factors. Very interesting information, either way.

Disagree. But, you're right, they have less with the highest LSAT scores.

[LSATSCORES2012]

Disagree. But, you're right, they have less with the highest LSAT scores.

Good point

[TrustInMusic]

The analysis is, I think, right on the money. We've seen throughout this cycle (and previous ones too) that S tends to accept California-based applicants. I think the move to accept lower LSAT applicants is in line with the California strategy of boosting yield rate. LOCIs also seem to be a "plus" in the application to Stanford, as well as targeted LORs - showing their concern for yield rate.

With this in mind, I think I know where I stand in the SLS vs. HLS debate.
However, both schools are top-quality and I do believe that both HLS and SLS students have a bright future in front of them.

Have fun at SLS ASW to all those attending!

[whereskyle]

Is there a pattern with recent decisions? It seems many of the recent DLSers are early November completes. Is the same true of those, who have been recently admitted?

[bluecouch]

Is there a pattern with recent decisions? It seems many of the recent DLSers are early November completes. Is the same true of those, who have been recently admitted?

I was an early/mid December submit and was admitted on Saturday.

[ssanonymous]

Is there a pattern with recent decisions? It seems many of the recent DLSers are early November completes. Is the same true of those, who have been recently admitted?

No pattern except the URM wave a few days ago. Other than that, it has been pretty random.

[djwjddl]

But it's over no (for acceptances)?

[ssanonymous]

But it's over no (for acceptances)?

didn't someone report a lowercase email yesterday? And I predict a huge wave of rejections tomorrow. My heart hurts.

edit: they were joking. Ok, no more acceptances.

[helix23]

But it's over no (for acceptances)?

didn't someone report a lowercase email yesterday? And I predict a huge wave of rejections tomorrow. My heart hurts.

edit: they were joking. Ok, no more acceptances.

"we've made our final decisions" could mean that they've decided to accept you and haven't gotten around to calling you/changing the font size of your email...

[Anonymous4444]

edit: whatever