Held @ Harvard 2013 style Forum

[WhiteyCakes]

Held

[ksd2138]

I'm joining the team.

175/3.56. Good intl. journalism-related softs, average LORs, PI-oriented PS.

Applied 10/28, held 1/18.

[shakespeare]

Checking in.
Two confusions:
1) Held without interviews? Logic behind this?
2) Being held = Good sign or bad sign? Some people who applied approx. when I did haven't received any news. Safe to say they will get good news next week?

[shakespeare]

Meant to post this here:


I tend to think: LOCI = more chances of making a typo or not catching a grammatical error (or realizing a grammatical error exists in your LOCI)...thoughts?

[Lavitz]

Checking in.
Two confusions:
1) Held without interviews? Logic behind this?
2) Being held = Good sign or bad sign? Some people who applied approx. when I did haven't received any news. Safe to say they will get good news next week?

1) It always happens. The vast majority of holds will not have had an interview first. Harvard is just holding them because it's been a long time since they went complete and they haven't decided whether or not to offer them an interview.
2) It depends on the situation. If you were expecting either a hold or a ding and you got the hold, then obviously it's a "good" sign in the sense that Harvard found something about your app compelling enough to at least wait to compare you to the rest of the applicant pool. If you went complete only a short while ago, like in December, and were hoping that you were about to get a JS1, then I would say it's a bad sign, since if you were competitive enough to receive a JS1 in the next few weeks, they probably would've just waited instead of holding you. Everything's up in the air, so people could easily receive either good news or bad news soon, depending on the strength of the app.

Meant to post this here:


I tend to think: LOCI = more chances of making a typo or not catching a grammatical error (or realizing a grammatical error exists in your LOCI)...thoughts?

People are going to laugh at this reasoning, but to be fair, this is the same logic I employed during my interview: every time I open my mouth, I risk saying something stupid to hurt my chances, so I'll just say as little as possible and hope I skate through.

Obviously that strategy didn't work.

Now, I consider myself a strong writer, so I'm not concerned about any LOCI I write bringing me down. I figure--unlike with speaking--the more opportunities I have to write something, the stronger my app will be. So if you're not a good writer, you may be tempted to employ the logic above. And I know that JS has said we shouldn't feel compelled to write anything extra. But I still think that if you have something substantial to say, the better strategy would be to just suck it up and write the best LOCI you can, and just make absolutely sure there are no typos, instead of just passing on the opportunity because you're afraid you'll make a mistake. Had I applied this logic to my JS1 and planned my answers in advance so I'd spend more time speaking but making sure that whatever I said would be pure gold, I would've performed much better--like I did in my Chicago interview.

Ultimately, I don't think any LOCI will be a game-changer. But I do believe it could push you one inch closer to victory.*

And if I go down, I'm going down swinging.

*If you liked that link, I can post more motivational videos / quotes / pics.

[jbagelboy]

.

[helix23]

Ultimately, I don't think any LOCI will be a game-changer. But I do believe it could push you one inch closer to victory.*

And if I go down, I'm going down swinging.

*If you liked that link, I can post more motivational videos / quotes / pics.

I imagined you looking like the guy at 2:53 when you wrote this

[Lavitz]

I imagined you looking like the guy at 2:53 when you wrote this

I knew exactly who you were referring to before rewatching to double-check.

In the Hold email, JS mentioned "a promotion at work" as a reasonable/recommended addition to my application at this point. While I didn't think much of it at the time, to my complete surprise, I actually was "promoted" to some degree on Friday; not different title, but decision by my manager to renegotiation higher pay since I'm taking on additional casework (I'm a management/litigation consultant with a midsize firm in California).

Also some interesting developments occurred this week for 2 of my clients that involved me performing activites not at all mentioned on my resume from when I submitted in October (that I can't really mention here due to confidentiality) but that through my pseudo-involvement definitely could be construed as interesting additional information. not really sure how much detail I could get in to with them anyway though. Either way, my resume could definitely be updated with pertinent details.

I don't want to send additional info to Harvard unless I really have something to say. I'm only thinking this could relevant because it was specifically mentioned in her email, but I'm not sure how to best present it, or whether its even worth it. Anyone in a similar position?

This is actually similar to my situation (increased work involvement). I figure that if it would just be new bulletpoints in a resume as opposed to a new title or position, it wouldn't be worth it to send an updated resume. But I think I can get away with framing it as a traditional one-page LOCI, using the work descriptions as the reason for submitting the letter before shifting to something like "these experiences have reinforced my desire to attend Harvard because of [A, B and C]."

Of course, this is still in the panning stages so I'd love to hear other thoughts on this.

[az21833]

In the Hold email, JS mentioned "a promotion at work" as a reasonable/recommended addition to my application at this point. While I didn't think much of it at the time, to my complete surprise, I actually was "promoted" to some degree on Friday; not different title, but decision by my manager to renegotiation higher pay since I'm taking on additional casework (I'm a management/litigation consultant with a midsize firm in California).

Also some interesting developments occurred this week for 2 of my clients that involved me performing activites not at all mentioned on my resume from when I submitted in October (that I can't really mention here due to confidentiality) but that through my pseudo-involvement definitely could be construed as interesting additional information. not really sure how much detail I could get in to with them anyway though. Either way, my resume could definitely be updated with pertinent details.

I don't want to send additional info to Harvard unless I really have something to say. I'm only thinking this could relevant because it was specifically mentioned in her email, but I'm not sure how to best present it, or whether its even worth it. Anyone in a similar position?

if they cant be mentioned here, they cant be mentioned to harvard. but id write a loci about the promotion

[shakespeare]

Checking in.
Two confusions:
1) Held without interviews? Logic behind this?
2) Being held = Good sign or bad sign? Some people who applied approx. when I did haven't received any news. Safe to say they will get good news next week?

1) It always happens. The vast majority of holds will not have had an interview first. Harvard is just holding them because it's been a long time since they went complete and they haven't decided whether or not to offer them an interview.
2) It depends on the situation. If you were expecting either a hold or a ding and you got the hold, then obviously it's a "good" sign in the sense that Harvard found something about your app compelling enough to at least wait to compare you to the rest of the applicant pool. If you went complete only a short while ago, like in December, and were hoping that you were about to get a JS1, then I would say it's a bad sign, since if you were competitive enough to receive a JS1 in the next few weeks, they probably would've just waited instead of holding you. Everything's up in the air, so people could easily receive either good news or bad news soon, depending on the strength of the app.

Meant to post this here:


I tend to think: LOCI = more chances of making a typo or not catching a grammatical error (or realizing a grammatical error exists in your LOCI)...thoughts?

People are going to laugh at this reasoning, but to be fair, this is the same logic I employed during my interview: every time I open my mouth, I risk saying something stupid to hurt my chances, so I'll just say as little as possible and hope I skate through.

Obviously that strategy didn't work.

Now, I consider myself a strong writer, so I'm not concerned about any LOCI I write bringing me down. I figure--unlike with speaking--the more opportunities I have to write something, the stronger my app will be. So if you're not a good writer, you may be tempted to employ the logic above. And I know that JS has said we shouldn't feel compelled to write anything extra. But I still think that if you have something substantial to say, the better strategy would be to just suck it up and write the best LOCI you can, and just make absolutely sure there are no typos, instead of just passing on the opportunity because you're afraid you'll make a mistake. Had I applied this logic to my JS1 and planned my answers in advance so I'd spend more time speaking but making sure that whatever I said would be pure gold, I would've performed much better--like I did in my Chicago interview.

Ultimately, I don't think any LOCI will be a game-changer. But I do believe it could push you one inch closer to victory.*

And if I go down, I'm going down swinging.

*If you liked that link, I can post more motivational videos / quotes / pics.

Thanks. Problem is, I'm not really sure how much I really have to say...

[Lavitz]

Thanks. Problem is, I'm not really sure how much I really have to say...

Well, I'm not saying you should write one if you truly can't think of anything to write about. I'm just saying that if you do have something to say, you shouldn't hold yourself back by viewing it as nothing more than a chance to mess up.

[shakespeare]

What i mean is:
I don't have much to say because Harvard's opportunities in the field I'm interested in studying is relatively sparse (esp. compared to the schools I've already been accepted by)...Do I just BS my way through it? Because there is nothing really specific about Harvard that "fits" my interest...

[shakespeare]

Hm. Just read through my whole application. I think I summed everything up pretty well...anyone else contemplating not adding anything more to their application?

[Lavitz]

What i mean is:
I don't have much to say because Harvard's opportunities in the field I'm interested in studying is relatively sparse (esp. compared to the schools I've already been accepted by)...Do I just BS my way through it? Because there is nothing really specific about Harvard that "fits" my interest...

If it's just BS, then you probably shouldn't write it. But really, what's your topic going to be? If you mean you'd be writing that you want to attend Harvard because of your specific interests when you know that Harvard doesn't cater to them, that's probably not going to work. In your case, it sounds like you don't need to do anything else right now. If you get a JS1, you'll have another opportunity to add substance to your app during the interview.

[shakespeare]

Perhaps this merits a clarification on the exact definition of LOCI.
(Letter of Committed Interest???) I thought it meant something like: why i want to go to this school.

[shntn]

Perhaps this merits a clarification on the exact definition of LOCI.
(Letter of Committed Interest???) I thought it meant something like: why i want to go to this school.

Letter of continued interest. And basically, yeah, but a bit more subtle than a "Why X?" statement.

[amsong]

It's too bad that "Additional letters of recommendation are not necessary". I have a fucking great one from my CEO.

[trojandave]

It's too bad that "Additional letters of recommendation are not necessary". I have a fucking great one from my CEO.

Not necessary doesn't mean not allowed. If it can truly help and provide new context without being redundant or annoying, send it - what is there to lose?

[GoodTimes]

Meant to post this here:


I tend to think: LOCI = more chances of making a typo or not catching a grammatical error (or realizing a grammatical error exists in your LOCI)...thoughts?

I had multiple egregious typos in my personal statement and got admitted. Although I think it was a really good statement despite that. I think Harvard is an intelligent enough school to realize that your GPA, work, LSAT, etc, is a better indicator of your future success than whatever can be gleaned from the fact that someone failed to spot a typo in a submitted document.

[amsong]

It's too bad that "Additional letters of recommendation are not necessary". I have a fucking great one from my CEO.

Not necessary doesn't mean not allowed. If it can truly help and provide new context without being redundant or annoying, send it - what is there to lose?

I don't know. It's definitely different from the letters from my professors, but I'm not sure that bombarding them with a fourth LOR shows "good judgment", or whatever the blog post from last year said. Plus I assume I would have to have my CEO email them directly, which seems a bit complicated. I guess I'll have to think on it.

[Hattori Hanzo]

It's too bad that "Additional letters of recommendation are not necessary". I have a fucking great one from my CEO.

Not necessary doesn't mean not allowed. If it can truly help and provide new context without being redundant or annoying, send it - what is there to lose?

I don't know. It's definitely different from the letters from my professors, but I'm not sure that bombarding them with a fourth LOR shows "good judgment", or whatever the blog post from last year said. Plus I assume I would have to have my CEO email them directly, which seems a bit complicated. I guess I'll have to think on it.

LOR: 4th one should have something substantial to say about you that the first 3 didn't. It's reserved for very rare cases.

LOCI: It doesn't hurt but remember that it's your last bullet and it can be a long wait until August so use it wisely. In my cycle, I sent a LOCI in late March to let them know of some approaching scholarship deadlines. Of course the LOCI had the wrong date on it so I sent a follow-up correction.

[amsong]

It's too bad that "Additional letters of recommendation are not necessary". I have a fucking great one from my CEO.

Not necessary doesn't mean not allowed. If it can truly help and provide new context without being redundant or annoying, send it - what is there to lose?

I don't know. It's definitely different from the letters from my professors, but I'm not sure that bombarding them with a fourth LOR shows "good judgment", or whatever the blog post from last year said. Plus I assume I would have to have my CEO email them directly, which seems a bit complicated. I guess I'll have to think on it.

LOR: 4th one should have something substantial to say about you that the first 3 didn't. It's reserved for very rare cases.

LOCI: It doesn't hurt but remember that it's your last bullet and it can be a long wait until August so use it wisely. In my cycle, I sent a LOCI in late March to let them know of some approaching scholarship deadlines. Of course the LOCI had the wrong date on it so I sent a follow-up correction.

Thanks! Re: LOR: Would a 4th then be sent from the applicant or the recommender, if it were sent? Still haven't decided. I think the fourth LOR does say something substantial that sets it apart from the other three, but again, not sure if it's overkill.

On the LOCI, would you then recommend that one be sent a little bit later on in the cycle? I don't have much new to report, really, as I'm not in school or anything. It just feels a little bit odd to receive a held email and then do nothing about it -- I don't want it to seem like lack of interest or effort on my part, obviously.

Again, thank you.

[Hattori Hanzo]

Thanks! Re: LOR: Would a 4th then be sent from the applicant or the recommender, if it were sent? Still haven't decided. I think the fourth LOR does say something substantial that sets it apart from the other three, but again, not sure if it's overkill.

On the LOCI, would you then recommend that one be sent a little bit later on in the cycle? I don't have much new to report, really, as I'm not in school or anything. It just feels a little bit odd to receive a held email and then do nothing about it -- I don't want it to seem like lack of interest or effort on my part, obviously.

Again, thank you.

IIRC additional LORs are submitted like the first 3 through LSAC. LOCI is sent directly.
LOCI: wait until you have something to say. They obviously know everybody on the WL or held would love to get in and not sending in a LOCI won't be interpreted as lack of interest.

[amsong]

IIRC additional LORs are submitted like the first 3 through LSAC. LOCI is sent directly.
LOCI: wait until you have something to say. They obviously know everybody on the WL or held would love to get in and not sending in a LOCI won't be interpreted as lack of interest.

Apologies, I was unclear -- from my view, LSAC is telling me that Harvard has been assigned the maximum number of LOR (3), so I don't currently see a way of sending an additional one through LSAC. No worries if you don't know anything about this, though, as I imagine the technical aspects of apps/additional info change slightly every year.

Re: LOCI: good to know.

Thank you again! Incidentally, I'm in the middle of a Tarantino marathon. Kill Bill is weird for me because I watched Part II before I knew Part I was even a movie (I don't know how that happened).

[Hattori Hanzo]

IIRC additional LORs are submitted like the first 3 through LSAC. LOCI is sent directly.
LOCI: wait until you have something to say. They obviously know everybody on the WL or held would love to get in and not sending in a LOCI won't be interpreted as lack of interest.

Apologies, I was unclear -- from my view, LSAC is telling me that Harvard has been assigned the maximum number of LOR (3), so I don't currently see a way of sending an additional one through LSAC. No worries if you don't know anything about this, though, as I imagine the technical aspects of apps/additional info change slightly every year.

Re: LOCI: good to know.

Thank you again! Incidentally, I'm in the middle of a Tarantino marathon. Kill Bill is weird for me because I watched Part II before I knew Part I was even a movie (I don't know how that happened).

Yeah my info is from 2010 so things could have changed.

I was watching the Crazy 88 scene yesterday! What a movie :>