Fordham Waiting Room Forum

[hannah87]

Thank God Monday is a holiday.

Israel Independence Day?

+1

[primusux]

Waitlisted today....so long NYC

[OperaSoprano]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

[nygrrrl]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

Wow. Thanks for letting us know, Opera.

[Emma.]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

Wow. Thanks for letting us know, Opera.

How many was it before this year?

[nygrrrl]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

Wow. Thanks for letting us know, Opera.

How many was it before this year?

160

[MrSoOoFLy]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

Wow. Thanks for letting us know, Opera.

How many was it before this year?

160

smfh

st johns here i come.

[doza]

Withdrew just now! I hope it helps one of you guys! Good luck!

Another withdrawal here! I just told Fordham that I won't be going there . . such a tough decision, since I was thrilled to get in! But I also hope that it helps one of you guys. Good luck!!

[Columbia Law]

Any predictions of the numbers of the "new 80" bottom students in the Fordham FT? I bet the bottom 80 this year will have lower numbers than last year. And what will the new PT medians be and the chances to get off the waitlist at either?

[tommytahoe]

Any predictions of the numbers of the "new 80" bottom students in the Fordham FT? I bet the bottom 80 this year will have lower numbers than last year. And what will the new PT medians be and the chances to get off the waitlist at either?

What is the "new 80" bottom students in the Fordham FT? I'm not aware of this dynamic...

[Columbia Law]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

[tommytahoe]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

Got it. I had no idea. Incoming class stays the same(ish), but they take 80 from PT and add 80 to FT. Hmmm. Yes, I wonder how they change the numbers as a result.

[nygrrrl]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

Got it. I had no idea. Incoming class stays the same(ish), but they take 80 from PT and add 80 to FT. Hmmm. Yes, I wonder how they change the numbers as a result.

Seems as if the medians will go up. Evening/PT Division has historically had lower medians; if you shift 1/2 of those seats into the Day/FT Division where numbers are generally higher, it should raise the medians overall. (Instead of thinking of it as moving people with lower numbers from PT to FT, think of it as opening a bunch more seats to people who may have higher numbers.) I'm just guessing, btw - I'm sure OS will have a better explanation!

[OperaSoprano]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

Got it. I had no idea. Incoming class stays the same(ish), but they take 80 from PT and add 80 to FT. Hmmm. Yes, I wonder how they change the numbers as a result.

Nygrrrl is right. It's a move to raise numbers. I'm sure you guys saw what GW did, and with what result. Deans have been fired when schools drop in the rankings. I honestly don't think Fordham had any choice, though there are other reasons, such as concerns that non-working evening students have a huge advantage over those who work. They want to limit the program to people who will be working or taking care of other obligations. Personally, I don't think this should be a requirement to go PT (I work part time, and that balance is best for me), but I can see both sides of this. I am certain that the new 80 will have regular FT numbers. There are always people caught in between, who would rather go FT, and have higher numbers than the PT program typically gets. My class was the strongest PT class in Fordham's history, and I think they'll try to narrow the gap from both sides.

I love my school, and while I don't love this decision, I see why it was made, and why it was inevitable.

[tommytahoe]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

Got it. I had no idea. Incoming class stays the same(ish), but they take 80 from PT and add 80 to FT. Hmmm. Yes, I wonder how they change the numbers as a result.

Nygrrrl is right. It's a move to raise numbers. I'm sure you guys saw what GW did, and with what result. Deans have been fired when schools drop in the rankings. I honestly don't think Fordham had any choice, though there are other reasons, such as concerns that non-working evening students have a huge advantage over those who work. They want to limit the program to people who will be working or taking care of other obligations. Personally, I don't think this should be a requirement to go PT (I work part time, and that balance is best for me), but I can see both sides of this. I am certain that the new 80 will have regular FT numbers. There are always people caught in between, who would rather go FT, and have higher numbers than the PT program typically gets. My class was the strongest PT class in Fordham's history, and I think they'll try to narrow the gap from both sides.
I love my school, and while I don't love this decision, I see why it was made, and why it was inevitable.

I see. My guess was they would prop up either the 25th or the medians, or both (of course, not knowing thing one about the mechanism of these kinds of maneuvers).

Either way, I'm a FT 163/3.81, still awaiting a response. I don't feel confident, but I am, as ever, hopeful.

EDITED: Like 3 times b/c I kept folding my comments into OS's

[OperaSoprano]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

Got it. I had no idea. Incoming class stays the same(ish), but they take 80 from PT and add 80 to FT. Hmmm. Yes, I wonder how they change the numbers as a result.

Nygrrrl is right. It's a move to raise numbers. I'm sure you guys saw what GW did, and with what result. Deans have been fired when schools drop in the rankings. I honestly don't think Fordham had any choice, though there are other reasons, such as concerns that non-working evening students have a huge advantage over those who work. They want to limit the program to people who will be working or taking care of other obligations. Personally, I don't think this should be a requirement to go PT (I work part time, and that balance is best for me), but I can see both sides of this. I am certain that the new 80 will have regular FT numbers. There are always people caught in between, who would rather go FT, and have higher numbers than the PT program typically gets. My class was the strongest PT class in Fordham's history, and I think they'll try to narrow the gap from both sides.
I love my school, and while I don't love this decision, I see why it was made, and why it was inevitable.

I see. My guess was they would prop up either the 25th or the medians, or both (of course, not knowing thing one about the mechanism of these kinds of maneuvers).

Either way, I'm a FT 163/3.81, still awaiting a response. I don't feel confident, but I am, as ever, hopeful.

EDITED: Like 3 times b/c I kept folding my comments into OS's

You are a pretty good example of an applicant whom this decision may harm. A 163 is ordinarily too low for FT (absent URM status), but those numbers would have made you a really strong PT candidate, had you wanted it. You may have a slightly better shot at FT now, especially since Fordham loves GPAs, but not close to the near lock you would have had PT last cycle.

[tommytahoe]

Thanks. I will try not to think about it too much.
I have been collecting waitlists like baseball cards since February. I keep them in an album, and Fordham could complete my set!

[OperaSoprano]

Thanks. I will try not to think about it too much.
I have been collecting waitlists like baseball cards since February. I keep them in an album, and Fordham could complete my set!

I know how you feel. It was the card of a lifetime, though only one of two WLs for me, but with my numbers (164/3.37, 3.63 degree GPA) I never thought I'd get to play it. I hope you get your good news.

[tommytahoe]

Thanks. I will try not to think about it too much.
I have been collecting waitlists like baseball cards since February. I keep them in an album, and Fordham could complete my set!

I know how you feel. It was the card of a lifetime, though only one of two WLs for me, but with my numbers (164/3.37, 3.63 degree GPA) I never thought I'd get to play it. I hope you get your good news.

Cheers. I plan a long summer on waitlist stake-out duty. I have extraordinary patience. I'm driving from CA to DC in June, and camping out at my sister's place in the final grueling weeks.

[chicoalto0649]

Wow.....my friend is a 3.6/160 PT student who got admitted last year but took a deferral....she's quite lucky and will be one of the 80 chosen few. Not sure I am loving the decision to halve the PT program but w.e. Gotta close the gap on GW some how

[timertimer61]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

wait on my acceptance letter from october, it says that there will be about 160 entering evening students for fall of 2010...so did they cut it down to 80 midway into the admissions process?

[Columbia Law]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

Got it. I had no idea. Incoming class stays the same(ish), but they take 80 from PT and add 80 to FT. Hmmm. Yes, I wonder how they change the numbers as a result.

Nygrrrl is right. It's a move to raise numbers. I'm sure you guys saw what GW did, and with what result. Deans have been fired when schools drop in the rankings. I honestly don't think Fordham had any choice, though there are other reasons, such as concerns that non-working evening students have a huge advantage over those who work. They want to limit the program to people who will be working or taking care of other obligations. Personally, I don't think this should be a requirement to go PT (I work part time, and that balance is best for me), but I can see both sides of this. I am certain that the new 80 will have regular FT numbers. There are always people caught in between, who would rather go FT, and have higher numbers than the PT program typically gets. My class was the strongest PT class in Fordham's history, and I think they'll try to narrow the gap from both sides.



I love my school, and while I don't love this decision, I see why it was made, and why it was inevitable.

I know it sounds like we are asking you psychic questions, but what I meant was this. Any given year there are people who are taken off the waitlist (usually). Judging by the Fordham thread last year, over half of them were people with strong numbers but generally lower than the medians. But now the class is bigger by 80 students. Considering the fact that Fordham had to accept people last year off the waitlist when the FT class was smaller, I would assume that they would have to accept some this year. Even with the record amount of applicants, wouldn't it make sense that the lowest 80 would still be around the 25% but slightly lower than last year?

*I only give a crap because I have a family interest in this. 164/3.9 ish. On both waitlists. If he gets denied would apply next year again. He applied in December this year. Would it be his best bet to retake or apply really early with same score if he wanted Fordham no matter PT or FT?

[OperaSoprano]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

wait on my acceptance letter from october, it says that there will be about 160 entering evening students for fall of 2010...so did they cut it down to 80 midway into the admissions process?

They must have. They didn't say anything to us. I pride myself on knowing what's going on, and I only knew rumors myself, so I decided to do something about that. My guess is that the decision can't be more than a few months old.

[OperaSoprano]

Not that there is a "new bottom 80" per se. Its just that they are including another 80 person day section. For all the f- I know that portion might not be affected being that there are many more applicants this year. But lets say you included 80 more people any given year, there is a good chance that the 80 lowest might have had lower numbers. Just wanted to see what people think.

Got it. I had no idea. Incoming class stays the same(ish), but they take 80 from PT and add 80 to FT. Hmmm. Yes, I wonder how they change the numbers as a result.

Nygrrrl is right. It's a move to raise numbers. I'm sure you guys saw what GW did, and with what result. Deans have been fired when schools drop in the rankings. I honestly don't think Fordham had any choice, though there are other reasons, such as concerns that non-working evening students have a huge advantage over those who work. They want to limit the program to people who will be working or taking care of other obligations. Personally, I don't think this should be a requirement to go PT (I work part time, and that balance is best for me), but I can see both sides of this. I am certain that the new 80 will have regular FT numbers. There are always people caught in between, who would rather go FT, and have higher numbers than the PT program typically gets. My class was the strongest PT class in Fordham's history, and I think they'll try to narrow the gap from both sides.



I love my school, and while I don't love this decision, I see why it was made, and why it was inevitable.

I know it sounds like we are asking you psychic questions, but what I meant was this. Any given year there are people who are taken off the waitlist (usually). Judging by the Fordham thread last year, over half of them were people with strong numbers but generally lower than the medians. But now the class is bigger by 80 students. Considering the fact that Fordham had to accept people last year off the waitlist when the FT class was smaller, I would assume that they would have to accept some this year. Even with the record amount of applicants, wouldn't it make sense that the lowest 80 would still be around the 25% but slightly lower than last year?

*I only give a crap because I have a family interest in this. 164/3.9 ish. On both waitlists. If he gets denied would apply next year again. He applied in December this year. Would it be his best bet to retake or apply really early with same score if he wanted Fordham no matter PT or FT?

Last year, a 164/3.9 was sufficient for FT admission given early (read: no later than November, most likely) admission. Many people applying later got waitlisted, even with phenomenal numbers. Unless your friend is working, it now seems his chances are still better at FT. If he doesn't get in this year it will likely be for lack of space. I would recommend he do what I did, and consider a June retake as insurance. If I hadn't gotten in, but had raised my own 164 measurably, that would have been something to make it worth waiting. People do get in with his numbers, though he could absolutely clinch it (and likely get money) by gaining 2 or 3 points in a retake.

[timertimer61]

I talked to admissions today, and wanted to reconfirm that the PT class will be 80 people this year.

wait on my acceptance letter from october, it says that there will be about 160 entering evening students for fall of 2010...so did they cut it down to 80 midway into the admissions process?

They must have. They didn't say anything to us. I pride myself on knowing what's going on, and I only knew rumors myself, so I decided to do something about that. My guess is that the decision can't be more than a few months old.

do you think they will change the policy in switching pt to ft at all?