Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013) Forum
-
grapefruits

- Posts: 180
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:13 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
-
Anonymous4444

- Posts: 631
- Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:41 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
i think not getting an interview is not considered enough to imply getting dinged.
- jbagelboy

- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
We have somewhat similar stats; I'm also RD, submitted november, no interview request yet. As of last week I was still operating under the tenuous assumption that they had not reached November applicants yet since only sept and oct applicants had been solicited. however I'm pretty sure at this point this is no longer case. Our numbers are not auto-reject in this cycle, so getting an interview can't be the only sign that one has a shot in my opinion.grapefruits wrote:Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
- Mr. Elshal

- Posts: 611
- Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:30 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
I'm a 175, 3.72, submitted in October and have not received an interview request. I'm assuming waitlistjbagelboy wrote:We have somewhat similar stats; I'm also RD, submitted november, no interview request yet. As of last week I was still operating under the tenuous assumption that they had not reached November applicants yet since only sept and oct applicants had been solicited. however I'm pretty sure at this point this is no longer case. Our numbers are not auto-reject in this cycle, so getting an interview can't be the only sign that one has a shot in my opinion.grapefruits wrote:Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
-
curious66

- Posts: 381
- Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:34 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
Chicago Admissions said that Interviews are optional.. not a requirement and apparently it is not held against you if you are not invited for an interview. The lady at admissions went as far as saying that they often interview candidates to get clarification on a particular piece of the application. That said, all the ED applicants did get one.Anonymous4444 wrote:i think not getting an interview is not considered enough to imply getting dinged.
It will be interesting to see in a few months if any of us RD folks that did not get an interview actually get accepted.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
wisteria

- Posts: 285
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 4:43 am
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
Did you even go under review? I submitted mid-Nov too, went complete on 12/5, and I'm not even under review. So I'm not expecting anything until they actually read my file.grapefruits wrote:Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
-
grapefruits

- Posts: 180
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:13 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
I went UR on 1/9. Really trying to pretend that it's a good thing.wisteria wrote:Did you even go under review? I submitted mid-Nov too, went complete on 12/5, and I'm not even under review. So I'm not expecting anything until they actually read my file.grapefruits wrote:Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
ETA: I also listed almost 20 schools for the "where are you applying" question. Didn't apply to nearly that many. Feel like it definitely hurt though. Also listed usnwr as one of the reasons I applied. Really hate myself.
Last edited by grapefruits on Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- LSATSCORES2012

- Posts: 770
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 2:12 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
I have been following this thread neurotically and to my knowledge no one who went UR after the new year has received an invitation to interview. I'm UR 1/3, so I'm hoping that turns out to be correct.
- chickpea

- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
Also UR 1/3, also hoping this is correct.LSATSCORES2012 wrote:I have been following this thread neurotically and to my knowledge no one who went UR after the new year has received an invitation to interview. I'm UR 1/3, so I'm hoping that turns out to be correct.
- jbagelboy

- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
lol. yea no offense but thats.. no good. I mentioned fewer schools than I actually applied to. on the bright side, I doubt it will actually have that much tangible impact on your application. no worries.grapefruits wrote:I went UR on 1/9. Really trying to pretend that it's a good thing.wisteria wrote:Did you even go under review? I submitted mid-Nov too, went complete on 12/5, and I'm not even under review. So I'm not expecting anything until they actually read my file.grapefruits wrote:Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
ETA: I also listed almost 20 schools for the "where are you applying" question. Didn't apply to nearly that many. Feel like it definitely hurt though. Also listed usnwr as one of the reasons I applied. Really hate myself.
-
az21833

- Posts: 1403
- Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:57 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
are any RD with auto-admit or near numbers who applied earlier not been invited to a interview? this should answer the question regarding whether all applicants are being interviewed in the rd pool or not.
- Crowing

- Posts: 2631
- Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
I didn't answer that question for any schooljbagelboy wrote:lol. yea no offense but thats.. no good. I mentioned fewer schools than I actually applied to. on the bright side, I doubt it will actually have that much tangible impact on your application. no worries.grapefruits wrote:I went UR on 1/9. Really trying to pretend that it's a good thing.wisteria wrote:Did you even go under review? I submitted mid-Nov too, went complete on 12/5, and I'm not even under review. So I'm not expecting anything until they actually read my file.grapefruits wrote:Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
ETA: I also listed almost 20 schools for the "where are you applying" question. Didn't apply to nearly that many. Feel like it definitely hurt though. Also listed usnwr as one of the reasons I applied. Really hate myself.
- Audeamus

- Posts: 430
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:28 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
I don't think listing USNWR as one of the reasons you applied will hurt you in the slightest. Admissions reps know that applicants consider rankings, and I suspect they call B.S. on any applicant who claims USNWR had nothing to do with where he or she applied.grapefruits wrote:I went UR on 1/9. Really trying to pretend that it's a good thing.wisteria wrote:Did you even go under review? I submitted mid-Nov too, went complete on 12/5, and I'm not even under review. So I'm not expecting anything until they actually read my file.grapefruits wrote:Forgive me of this has been addressed already, I only ever use TLS on my phone and I don't have the patience to check through every page. If I'm RD, submitted mid-Nov and haven't gotten so much as a request for an interview, should I expect to just never get one and be dinged, or is this normal?
ETA: I also listed almost 20 schools for the "where are you applying" question. Didn't apply to nearly that many. Feel like it definitely hurt though. Also listed usnwr as one of the reasons I applied. Really hate myself.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- TexasAggie13

- Posts: 120
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 4:42 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
Complete 11/15 still not UR. Boo.
-
Anonymous4444

- Posts: 631
- Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:41 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
On Tuesday this thread will be crazy....
- Yukos

- Posts: 1774
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
They should just unload everything on Tuesday. One-hundred percent of the acceptances, dings and waitlists in 24 hours would be epic.Anonymous4444 wrote:On Tuesday this thread will be crazy....
- Mr. Elshal

- Posts: 611
- Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:30 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
This would actually be really cool. Any precedent for something like this?Yukos wrote:They should just unload everything on Tuesday. One-hundred percent of the acceptances, dings and waitlists in 24 hours would be epic.Anonymous4444 wrote:On Tuesday this thread will be crazy....
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
harvardboy24

- Posts: 32
- Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:12 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
I'm 3.97, 171 went complete 12/7. Have heard nothing since.... What does this mean?
-
vzapana

- Posts: 530
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:54 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
nothing - they haven't gotten to the december apps.harvardboy24 wrote:I'm 3.97, 171 went complete 12/7. Have heard nothing since.... What does this mean?
-
Anonymous4444

- Posts: 631
- Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:41 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
It means u won't be hearing back for a while
-
Big Dog

- Posts: 1205
- Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
I disagree.I don't think listing USNWR as one of the reasons you applied will hurt you in the slightest.
Yes, but the question is clearly a chance to report, 'Why Chicago?' Chicago has a small class, and like all top law schools, cares about yield. And if ranking is the ONLY reason for applying, the adcom will know (with near certainty), that such applicant will choose any other, higher ranked school.Admissions reps know that applicants consider rankings, and I suspect they call B.S. on any applicant who claims USNWR had nothing to do with where he or she applied.
btw: Academics just hate, HATE, USNews' ranking. Yes, they know it is important, but they hate it all the same. If you were an adcom, and that is the only/primary reason given for reading an app, would you give it serious consideration?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
shntn

- Posts: 5319
- Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:45 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
What Big Dog said.Big Dog wrote:I disagree.I don't think listing USNWR as one of the reasons you applied will hurt you in the slightest.
Yes, but the question is clearly a chance to report, 'Why Chicago?' Chicago has a small class, and like all top law schools, cares about yield. And if ranking is the ONLY reason for applying, the adcom will know (with near certainty), that such applicant will choose any other, higher ranked school.Admissions reps know that applicants consider rankings, and I suspect they call B.S. on any applicant who claims USNWR had nothing to do with where he or she applied.
btw: Academics just hate, HATE, USNews' ranking. Yes, they know it is important, but they hate it all the same. If you were an adcom, and that is the only/primary reason given for reading an app, would you give it serious consideration?
- Audeamus

- Posts: 430
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:28 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
shntn wrote:What Big Dog said.Big Dog wrote:I disagree.I don't think listing USNWR as one of the reasons you applied will hurt you in the slightest.
Yes, but the question is clearly a chance to report, 'Why Chicago?' Chicago has a small class, and like all top law schools, cares about yield. And if ranking is the ONLY reason for applying, the adcom will know (with near certainty), that such applicant will choose any other, higher ranked school.Admissions reps know that applicants consider rankings, and I suspect they call B.S. on any applicant who claims USNWR had nothing to do with where he or she applied.
btw: Academics just hate, HATE, USNews' ranking. Yes, they know it is important, but they hate it all the same. If you were an adcom, and that is the only/primary reason given for reading an app, would you give it serious consideration?
Whoa whoa whoa. I was under the impressions we were talking about listing listing USNWR as one of several reasons for applying. If it's the only reason someone puts then, yeah, that is likely a problem. But checking it among others? I think that is just honest.
-
Anonymous4444

- Posts: 631
- Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:41 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
Is it weird that I was upset that Monday is a holiday bec id rather here back from schools and be at work than stay home?
-
shntn

- Posts: 5319
- Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 1:45 pm
Re: Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)
Yep.Anonymous4444 wrote:Is it weird that I was upset that Monday is a holiday bec id rather here back from schools and be at work than stay home?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login