rejected at back up school! please provide reasons why... Forum

[rubies]

oh, and besides my advice above on how you should go about resubmitting next year... consider applying for a JD/MS in Chemistry... that way you can get into patent law + might be easier for someone with your background. (For biology you need a PhD.)

I actually indicated that I will apply to Texas Tech's JD/MS in Biotechnology.. lol but yeah, we have the same idea. =] thanks.

Well, good call, you're on the right track. As the poster about T-Tech indicates, some schools have local issues (maybe they preferentially recruit their UGs through blended programs, which would affect LSAT medians and make you less of a sure thing, maybe they have massive nepotism, the JD/MS has different standards, who knows). But IF you're unsatisfied by your cycle or only get into South Texas, my advice is that you take a tech job after graduation, take a humanities class over summer & fall (good to get a Letter, show you can write, and actually practice the kind of writing/reading you'll have to do in Law School), study for the LSAT, try to score in the mid-160s, and try again - it'll be a more competitive year, but you'll also be a far more competitive applicant and have some excellent opportunities. Good luck!

I guess I'd have to. Thanks!

[rubies]

Hey! I really enjoyed reading this post. I am currently an undergraduate student at Texas Tech and I actually have a straight answer for you. Although I did like reading through all the guesses. Texas Tech (TTU, haha not TT?) is a conservative close-minded school, where money and religion speak the loudest. I worked in the Chancellor's office for several years, and have spoken to him about how over 50% of TTU law spots are reserved. Are you the son of a big Lubbock cotton farmer who donates thousands to the scholarship fun? Was your mom in the same sorority as the admissions dean's wife when they attended TTU in the 70s? Do you worship with his grandkids at the Baptist church on Broadway on wednesday night? Does your dad golf with the right people?

No? Then your chances are immensely diminished. Lubbock is a small place; Tech is even smaller. Everyone knows someone who knows someone who can get them in. If you didn't, that might be your reason. I'm not saying you can't get in without some connections, but it's a lot harder.

Also, the admissions people at the TTU law school know that the TTU undergraduate grades are inflated. If you attended Texas Tech (I'm not sure if you mentioned it), your GPA is middle of the road.

I wouldn't cry over it. I took a class at the law school a few semesters ago and the professors reminded students that complete sentences have both a subject and a verb! It's not a great school. I'm sure you can do better.

Wreck'em Tech!

Hey! Thanks for your reply; I actually didn't know all those things at TTU, besides their conservative nature. (It is TX, sadly.)

[dresden doll]

Hey! I really enjoyed reading this post. I am currently an undergraduate student at Texas Tech and I actually have a straight answer for you. Although I did like reading through all the guesses. Texas Tech (TTU, haha not TT?) is a conservative close-minded school, where money and religion speak the loudest. I worked in the Chancellor's office for several years, and have spoken to him about how over 50% of TTU law spots are reserved. Are you the son of a big Lubbock cotton farmer who donates thousands to the scholarship fun? Was your mom in the same sorority as the admissions dean's wife when they attended TTU in the 70s? Do you worship with his grandkids at the Baptist church on Broadway on wednesday night? Does your dad golf with the right people?

No? Then your chances are immensely diminished. Lubbock is a small place; Tech is even smaller. Everyone knows someone who knows someone who can get them in. If you didn't, that might be your reason. I'm not saying you can't get in without some connections, but it's a lot harder.

Also, the admissions people at the TTU law school know that the TTU undergraduate grades are inflated. If you attended Texas Tech (I'm not sure if you mentioned it), your GPA is middle of the road.

I wouldn't cry over it. I took a class at the law school a few semesters ago and the professors reminded students that complete sentences have both a subject and a verb! It's not a great school. I'm sure you can do better.

Wreck'em Tech!

Harsh, but useful response. I wouldn't be sorry one bit if I were OP and read such an appraisal of a school I had applied to. TT appears the diametrical opposite of everything I desire in my LS.

[Sparky]

Rubies, I think your personal statement alone could be the cause for your rejection at Texas Tech. Aside from a few minor grammar and punctuation errors, your statement shows decent grammatical correctness. I noticed a few things, however, that might have hurt you in your personal statement:

1. If you asked me to tell you the main point of your essay, I wouldn't know what to say. If I were an AdCom reading several Personal statements a day, I would be annoyed at how difficult it is to follow this personal statement. I think it would help if you clearly stated your purpose in this essay, and clearly tied all of the other information and experiences to that purpose.

2. To me this personal statement comes across as compensating a lack of ability for organization with a dazzling vocabulary. I feel like your choice of complex vocabulary is a little excessive and comes across as trying too hard to be a good writer.

3. I think it was a very bad idea to include the following sentence:

"Various professors describe me as “anal” (short for analytical), an attribute I proudly admit to possess."

First of all, anal is not short for analytical, it is short for anal-retentive. Being anal-retentive is not a good thing (unless you are diagnosed as such and thus become an URM), and the last thing AdComs want is to bring in someone who obsessively pays so much attention to detail that he/she annoys everyone else (including the faculty) and becomes a detriment to his/her self. The fact that you annoyed your undergraduate professors enough to compromise the professional nature of their class by dishing out insults would raise major red flags. Aside from that, your apparent mis-understanding of what they meant by "anal" is far less than impressive.

4. Try to get away from using passive voice so much. Your writing becomes much more powerful and clear when you employ active voice.

5. It's great that you aren't "romanced by the marvels of a utopia," but that has little relevance as to why anyone ought to admit you to law school. You sound like you are making excuses as to why you took a different path to law school than most. It would set you apart if you instead expounded on how your unique experiences clearly will allow you to bring something to the table as a law student.

I am sorry if I came across as critical, but I think that a stronger personal statement could have been the difference between acceptance and denial in this situation. Another thing you might want to look into is weather or not Texas Tech even likes to admit people with a science background. You may just not fit their mold. Don't worry, though. There are plenty of schools that love science backgrounds.

[JuryDueT1000]

Maybe one of your recommender's stuck it to you in their LOR?

Poor personal statement? Glaring grammatical errors/typos?

Criminal record?

[bama philosophe]

Rubies, I think your personal statement alone could be the cause for your rejection at Texas Tech. Aside from a few minor grammar and punctuation errors, your statement shows decent grammatical correctness. I noticed a few things, however, that might have hurt you in your personal statement:

1. If you asked me to tell you the main point of your essay, I wouldn't know what to say. If I were an AdCom reading several Personal statements a day, I would be annoyed at how difficult it is to follow this personal statement. I think it would help if you clearly stated your purpose in this essay, and clearly tied all of the other information and experiences to that purpose.

2. To me this personal statement comes across as compensating a lack of ability for organization with a dazzling vocabulary. I feel like your choice of complex vocabulary is a little excessive and comes across as trying too hard to be a good writer.

3. I think it was a very bad idea to include the following sentence:

"Various professors describe me as “anal” (short for analytical), an attribute I proudly admit to possess."

First of all, anal is not short for analytical, it is short for anal-retentive. Being anal-retentive is not a good thing (unless you are diagnosed as such and thus become an URM), and the last thing AdComs want is to bring in someone who obsessively pays so much attention to detail that he/she annoys everyone else (including the faculty) and becomes a detriment to his/her self. The fact that you annoyed your undergraduate professors enough to compromise the professional nature of their class by dishing out insults would raise major red flags. Aside from that, your apparent mis-understanding of what they meant by "anal" is far less than impressive.

4. Try to get away from using passive voice so much. Your writing becomes much more powerful and clear when you employ active voice.

5. It's great that you aren't "romanced by the marvels of a utopia," but that has little relevance as to why anyone ought to admit you to law school. You sound like you are making excuses as to why you took a different path to law school than most. It would set you apart if you instead expounded on how your unique experiences clearly will allow you to bring something to the table as a law student.

I am sorry if I came across as critical, but I think that a stronger personal statement could have been the difference between acceptance and denial in this situation. Another thing you might want to look into is weather or not Texas Tech even likes to admit people with a science background. You may just not fit their mold. Don't worry, though. There are plenty of schools that love science backgrounds.

+1 for being honest, but not mean-spirited.

I tend to agree with nearly every criticism of the PS here. It was verbose and hard to follow. Not trying to be mean or "holier than thou," just trying to be constructive.

[rubies]

Rubies, I think your personal statement alone could be the cause for your rejection at Texas Tech. Aside from a few minor grammar and punctuation errors, your statement shows decent grammatical correctness. I noticed a few things, however, that might have hurt you in your personal statement:

1. If you asked me to tell you the main point of your essay, I wouldn't know what to say. If I were an AdCom reading several Personal statements a day, I would be annoyed at how difficult it is to follow this personal statement. I think it would help if you clearly stated your purpose in this essay, and clearly tied all of the other information and experiences to that purpose.

2. To me this personal statement comes across as compensating a lack of ability for organization with a dazzling vocabulary. I feel like your choice of complex vocabulary is a little excessive and comes across as trying too hard to be a good writer.

3. I think it was a very bad idea to include the following sentence:

"Various professors describe me as “anal” (short for analytical), an attribute I proudly admit to possess."

First of all, anal is not short for analytical, it is short for anal-retentive. Being anal-retentive is not a good thing (unless you are diagnosed as such and thus become an URM), and the last thing AdComs want is to bring in someone who obsessively pays so much attention to detail that he/she annoys everyone else (including the faculty) and becomes a detriment to his/her self. The fact that you annoyed your undergraduate professors enough to compromise the professional nature of their class by dishing out insults would raise major red flags. Aside from that, your apparent mis-understanding of what they meant by "anal" is far less than impressive.

4. Try to get away from using passive voice so much. Your writing becomes much more powerful and clear when you employ active voice.

5. It's great that you aren't "romanced by the marvels of a utopia," but that has little relevance as to why anyone ought to admit you to law school. You sound like you are making excuses as to why you took a different path to law school than most. It would set you apart if you instead expounded on how your unique experiences clearly will allow you to bring something to the table as a law student.

I am sorry if I came across as critical, but I think that a stronger personal statement could have been the difference between acceptance and denial in this situation. Another thing you might want to look into is weather or not Texas Tech even likes to admit people with a science background. You may just not fit their mold. Don't worry, though. There are plenty of schools that love science backgrounds.

Critical, yes. Helpful, much more so. Thank you.

[20160810]

I don't know Tech's policy on averaging LSATs, but general wisdom on this board is this: You cannot count a school as a "safety" unless your GPA and LSAT are both at or above the 75s. Yours come in just below, which means it's more of a safety-target.

That said, here is what could have happened:

1.) They could have been yield protecting (This is unlikely, they probably only would have done this for someone with your GPA and an LSAT north of 160, and even then I don't think TT is notorious for YPing).

2.) Your personal statement might have been off-putting, or one of your LORs was not up to par. You never know when this might be the case. Someone in the admissions office at Pacific-McGeorge (where I am more than autoadmit based on numbers) told me he found my PS off-putting because it made it seem like my decision to go to law school was hastily reached. Point is: When it comes to your writing, everyone has an opinion.

3.) Just plain old bad luck.

[patrickd139]

Does anyone else read this PS, and the only thing that comes to mind is Arrested Development's Tobias Funke?

"Okay, Lindsay, are you forgetting that I was a professional twice over — an analyst and a therapist. The world’s first analrapist."

[ilovemesomeme]

I'm confused, LSN status has OP as accepted. What's up with that?

[Veritas]

I'm confused, LSN status has OP as accepted. What's up with that?

that is strange. Is this some kind of boring flame?

[kellbell]

I talked to her yesterday. They accepted her when she called! TTU did not take into account her most recent LSAT score. If she sees this, maybe she can explain better, but they withdrew the rejection.

[ilovemesomeme]

I talked to her yesterday. They accepted her when she called! TTU did not take into account her most recent LSAT score. If she sees this, maybe she can explain better, but they withdrew the rejection.

I know that adcomms see thousands of applications and are bound to make some mistakes, but that is inexcusable. That is basically my worst fear confirmed. I hope nobody fails to take into account my highest score.

[frank_the_tank]

3. I think it was a very bad idea to include the following sentence:

"Various professors describe me as “anal” (short for analytical), an attribute I proudly admit to possess."

First of all, anal is not short for analytical, it is short for anal-retentive. Being anal-retentive is not a good thing (unless you are diagnosed as such and thus become an URM), and the last thing AdComs want is to bring in someone who obsessively pays so much attention to detail that he/she annoys everyone else (including the faculty) and becomes a detriment to his/her self. The fact that you annoyed your undergraduate professors enough to compromise the professional nature of their class by dishing out insults would raise major red flags. Aside from that, your apparent mis-understanding of what they meant by "anal" is far less than impressive.

HAHA. That is hilarious. Did she not have a single person read her PS before submitting?

[bama philosophe]

I talked to her yesterday. They accepted her when she called! TTU did not take into account her most recent LSAT score. If she sees this, maybe she can explain better, but they withdrew the rejection.

I know that adcomms see thousands of applications and are bound to make some mistakes, but that is inexcusable. That is basically my worst fear confirmed. I hope nobody fails to take into account my highest score.

Well, congratulations to the OP. I'm glad you got everything sorted out--good luck with the rest of your cycle. Shame on you, TTU admissions office!

[rubies]

3. I think it was a very bad idea to include the following sentence:

"Various professors describe me as “anal” (short for analytical), an attribute I proudly admit to possess."

First of all, anal is not short for analytical, it is short for anal-retentive. Being anal-retentive is not a good thing (unless you are diagnosed as such and thus become an URM), and the last thing AdComs want is to bring in someone who obsessively pays so much attention to detail that he/she annoys everyone else (including the faculty) and becomes a detriment to his/her self. The fact that you annoyed your undergraduate professors enough to compromise the professional nature of their class by dishing out insults would raise major red flags. Aside from that, your apparent mis-understanding of what they meant by "anal" is far less than impressive.

HAHA. That is hilarious. Did she not have a single person read her PS before submitting?

Negative. For science majors, being anal is actually quite desirable (i.e. in the lab, meticulous, etc.) But of course - to each their own connotation.

[Veritas]

3. I think it was a very bad idea to include the following sentence:

"Various professors describe me as “anal” (short for analytical), an attribute I proudly admit to possess."

First of all, anal is not short for analytical, it is short for anal-retentive. Being anal-retentive is not a good thing (unless you are diagnosed as such and thus become an URM), and the last thing AdComs want is to bring in someone who obsessively pays so much attention to detail that he/she annoys everyone else (including the faculty) and becomes a detriment to his/her self. The fact that you annoyed your undergraduate professors enough to compromise the professional nature of their class by dishing out insults would raise major red flags. Aside from that, your apparent mis-understanding of what they meant by "anal" is far less than impressive.

HAHA. That is hilarious. Did she not have a single person read her PS before submitting?

Negative. For science majors, being anal is actually quite desirable (i.e. in the lab, meticulous, etc.) But of course - to each their own connotation.

It's just an incredibly awful word choice (especially how it is used in your PS)

[dvd]

`

[msbeautifulbasham]

TT wasn't an obvious safety for them though... more of a target/fit

TITCR