Should law schools be forced to respond to applicants.... Forum

[evilgenius]

Not hearing from schools that I applied to months ago has made me increasingly impatient over the last few weeks. I'm starting to feel as though law schools should be required to have a deadline to respond to applicants or to publish an admissions response time line. Maybe 6-8 weeks? Or less? And maybe if they don't respond to us within a certain time line, they should be required to (at least partially) refund our application fees.

After all, we do pay an application fee. A fee which is very much a gamble because we don't know if we will be admitted to law school X. We're paying them for a service - to review our applications. Schools give us a deadline for completing applications. If we do get into law school X, we have to pay a seat deposit by a certain deadline. Most of the time these deadlines are non-negotiable.

Anyone else have thoughts? Ad comms trolls, feel free to weigh in if you disagree.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just frustrated.

[Teoeo]

no

[DoktorZaius]

It's a nice sentiment, but I can't say I agree with it. You know what you're getting into when you apply, so it is what it is. If a law school has a notoriously slow/unhelpful admissions office, it's bad for their PR. IMO the invisible hand does a good enough job of discouraging poor service in this regard.

[gdane]

Stop whining. It sucks to be under review or application complete for a long time, but the school is ensuring that they give your application a thorough look. Noone here knows what goes on in the admissions office. Noone here knows how Admissions Comittee's do their work. Many on here assume that a bunch of people get in a room, read files, make a decision and then sent that decision out 2 months later. I dont claim to know the process, but Im sure this isnt it. Its probably a very complicated process.

Point is that no, schools should not have to be forced to respond to applicants. Imposing a 6-8 week deadline might make things worse. It would become more of a numbers games as schools find that they cannot meet the 6-8 week deadline.

[Langfall]

I disagree they should be forced to form some kind of decision by a date (say April 1st) as a courtesy to ppl who havet heard back yet and have to send in deposits. Thats a bit better than giving admissions a set number of weeks. But, fact is, none of it is going to happen

[Zaraa]

The traditional 6-8 weeks is an estimate and everyone feels the pressure waiting for the response of that process. However I DO think they should respond is via emails/calls where legitimate concerns are expressed. As an example from my own experiences - the online status checker said decision letter mailed 4 weeks ago but I have yet to receive anything. I called and emailed without any answer. This is especially frustrating as this school sent out an email upon application submission that if nothing was heard from them in 8 weeks to call and email their office. With an application fee and an open invitation for contact I do believe it is reasonable and should be expected for a school to respond after a month of trying to find out what happened with the mail.

[BaiAilian2013]

Not hearing from schools that I applied to months ago has made me increasingly impatient over the last few weeks.

By "months ago," do you mean six months or more? Cuz if not, STFU YOU BASTARD!!

I do think there should be some sort of standardization that prevents schools from setting deposit deadlines that fall before other schools have sent out decisions. Like all decisions have to reach applicants by May 1st, and no deposit deadlines can be earlier than May 2nd, or something.

[evilgenius]

Stop whining. It sucks to be under review or application complete for a long time, but the school is ensuring that they give your application a thorough look. Noone here knows what goes on in the admissions office. Noone here knows how Admissions Comittee's do their work. Many on here assume that a bunch of people get in a room, read files, make a decision and then sent that decision out 2 months later. I dont claim to know the process, but Im sure this isnt it. Its probably a very complicated process.

Point is that no, schools should not have to be forced to respond to applicants. Imposing a 6-8 week deadline might make things worse. It would become more of a numbers games as schools find that they cannot meet the 6-8 week deadline.

I'm sure its very complicated - that's why I think it should be a bit more transparent. The entire application process is weighted heavily toward the schools. Its bad enough that we don't know why or why we're not accepted at a given school. Since we're paying $50-$100 on average for a school to make a decision, the least we can ask is that the school actually makes a decision in a reasonable time frame.

I've read many post online from applicants that applied somewhere in October and still haven't heard back - now they have seat deposit deadlines approaching from other schools. They will have to fork out $400 to secure a seat (who knows if this is refundable) at another school, while they still await a response.

I'm just saying, we give them money and they get back to us whenever they are ready. And we're not even certain that they will get back to us at all.

[evilgenius]

Not hearing from schools that I applied to months ago has made me increasingly impatient over the last few weeks.

By "months ago," do you mean six months or more? Cuz if not, STFU YOU BASTARD!!

I do think there should be some sort of standardization that prevents schools from setting deposit deadlines that fall before other schools have sent out decisions. Like all decisions have to reach applicants by May 1st, and no deposit deadlines can be earlier than May 2nd, or something.

What I mean by "months ago" is irrelevant. I'm just saying we, as applicants, have to abide by a time line. And so should they.

I agree with the proposal above - this seems reasonable.

[09042014]

They'd just waitlist people they are iffy about.

[j.wellington]

I do think there should be some sort of standardization that prevents schools from setting deposit deadlines that fall before other schools have sent out decisions. Like all decisions have to reach applicants by May 1st, and no deposit deadlines can be earlier than May 2nd, or something.

This. The most frustrating thing is not being able to sit down and compare offers once all the dust settles. Instead, you have to play out a series of hypotheticals. I'll go to X, unless I get into Y. But then if Z offers me money... If every school could agree through LSAC to have a final decision deadline followed by a two week consideration period, it would be very helpful for applicants and good for the schools' PR.

I also see no reason why schools can't offer an outline of their review process, but I think being super secret about it all makes them feel way special.

[Sias]

They'd just waitlist people they are iffy about.

True. And I'm not sure I have the emotional capacity to handle a system in which schools wait list the people they're iffy about.