HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style Forum

[planeride]

Not attempting to be secretive, but this was told to me in confidence and I will respect that. But anyway I spoke to one of the rare few people that was actually informed on the process, and they said H does have a numbers bar (I don't think URMs fall under the same one). Applicants that the adcomm is interested in who aren't initally accepted, with rare rare exception, must be above that bar.

If you are held, you are above it. Again, please don't ask me to post or PM data specifically.

Alright, I'll take your word for it.

Doesn't every school behave like this? Maybe I'm misunderstanding. I'm not sure what the alternative would be.

[EMZE]

Not attempting to be secretive, but this was told to me in confidence and I will respect that. But anyway I spoke to one of the rare few people that was actually informed on the process, and they said H does have a numbers bar (I don't think URMs fall under the same one). Applicants that the adcomm is interested in who aren't initally accepted, with rare rare exception, must be above that bar.

If you are held, you are above it. Again, please don't ask me to post or PM data specifically.

Alright, I'll take your word for it.

That must be a low-ass bar, I was held and my GPA is pretty low.

I'll spare you the trouble of reading through my posts and assure you that my GPA is lower than yours. LSAT too btw. But let's not forget, I'm not exactly holding an acceptance letter either.

[Killingly]

Not attempting to be secretive, but this was told to me in confidence and I will respect that. But anyway I spoke to one of the rare few people that was actually informed on the process, and they said H does have a numbers bar (I don't think URMs fall under the same one). Applicants that the adcomm is interested in who aren't initally accepted, with rare rare exception, must be above that bar.

If you are held, you are above it. Again, please don't ask me to post or PM data specifically.

Alright, I'll take your word for it.

That must be a low-ass bar, I was held and my GPA is pretty low.

I'll spare you the trouble of reading through my posts and assure you that my GPA is lower than yours. LSAT too btw. But let's not forget, I'm not exactly holding an acceptance letter either.

Yeah, but don't you have crazy softs (disregard this if I've got you mixed up with someone else)? Honestly, who really knows what they're doing over there.

[EMZE]

Well, yes, I am applying on my softs, but I just mean you don't bottom out the low range of the GPA's. As far as I can tell, thats me. Probably for LSAT scores too.

[masked kavana]

Well, yes, I am applying on my softs, but I just mean you don't bottom out the low range of the GPA's. As far as I can tell, thats me. Probably for LSAT scores too.

Sorry EMZE I've got you beat on GPA but same LSAT. I applied on my softs as well but they haven't helped anywhere else... I really hope Harvard can look past my numbers...

[Mr. Somebody]

The GPA/LSAT bar could just be the minimum that they accept, which is still very low even for HYS. Wouldn't read much into it.

[seahawk32]

think KB made the call that she's not going to let in any more students because the next Dean should have that right.

I still believe this is the most reasonable explanation for the large amount of holds.

[EMZE]

Well, yes, I am applying on my softs, but I just mean you don't bottom out the low range of the GPA's. As far as I can tell, thats me. Probably for LSAT scores too.

Sorry EMZE I've got you beat on GPA but same LSAT. I applied on my softs as well but they haven't helped anywhere else... I really hope Harvard can look past my numbers...

After post stalking you for stats, you would certainly be an abberation to the aforementioned bar if you were not a URM.. I saw non-URM latino, but depending on your background, you might be being treated as URM, the bar for which I don't quite know

[masked kavana]

Well, yes, I am applying on my softs, but I just mean you don't bottom out the low range of the GPA's. As far as I can tell, thats me. Probably for LSAT scores too.

An aberration lol

If you wouldn't mind would you PM your softs? (sounds awful sorry.. But better than sharing your softs...)


Sorry EMZE I've got you beat on GPA but same LSAT. I applied on my softs as well but they haven't helped anywhere else... I really hope Harvard can look past my numbers...

After post stalking you for stats, you would certainly be an abberation to the aforementioned bar if you were not a URM.. I saw non-URM latino, but depending on your background, you might be being treated as URM, the bar for which I don't quite know

An aberration lol.

If you wouldn't mind would you PM your softs? (sounds awful sorry.. But better than would you mind sharing your softs...)

[EMZE]

think KB made the call that she's not going to let in any more students because the next Dean should have that right.

I still believe this is the most reasonable explanation for the large amount of holds.

I agree (and this discussion is completely independant of the concurrent numbers bar debate thing.)

Short of asking explicitly, determining this would be difficult. Maybe comparing the date of application submission for the last rejected applicant prior to the transition with the date of KB stepping down?

What sticks out is the fact that held applicants from the first wave range very widely in submission dates. It's not like those of us with lower numbers fit in the category of being completed before KBs departure. If those were not holds, what were they?

Or, are those perhaps more competitive holds than the later dated ones from that first huge hold wave?

The answer is in the dates, I'm certain of it.

[FryBreadPower]

think KB made the call that she's not going to let in any more students because the next Dean should have that right.

I still believe this is the most reasonable explanation for the large amount of holds.

I agree (and this discussion is completely independant of the concurrent numbers bar debate thing.)

Short of asking explicitly, determining this would be difficult. Maybe comparing the date of application submission for the last rejected applicant prior to the transition with the date of KB stepping down?

What sticks out is the fact that held applicants from the first wave range very widely in submission dates. It's not like those of us with lower numbers fit in the category of being completed before KBs departure. If those were not holds, what were they?

Or, are those perhaps more competitive holds than the later dated ones from that first huge hold wave?

The answer is in the dates, I'm certain of it.

Well maybe the holds before a certain date would have been held regardless of the dean switch (e.g. in this case they are "classic holds"). Then after some point, many of the holds were to allow JS to make the decisions (although it is possible that within this group there are a number of people who would have also fell in the "classic hold" category had the switch not occurred).

[EvelynS]

Not attempting to be secretive, but this was told to me in confidence and I will respect that. But anyway I spoke to one of the rare few people that was actually informed on the process, and they said H does have a numbers bar (I don't think URMs fall under the same one). Applicants that the adcomm is interested in who aren't initally accepted, with rare rare exception, must be above that bar.

If you are held, you are above it. Again, please don't ask me to post or PM data specifically.

Alright, I'll take your word for it.

That must be a low-ass bar, I was held and my GPA is pretty low.

I would agree. My LSAT #s are far from HLS standard (especially, for non-URM). I think this all "on hold" process is a transition period from KB to JS, although I am sure that there are plenty of high numbers in this "on hold" pool. I still hope for the best

[crooked]

Just want to insert an overly optimistic prediction that tomorrow will be filled with JS2's and a few JS1's for those of us held in limbo...

So, uh ... Bueller?

[AGooner11]

I'd like a fellow holdee's opinion. I'm currently writing my Harvard LOCI with the intention to submit it sometime in the coming week. The problem is that I'm currently abroad and won't be back Stateside until June. As I see it, my options are to email Harvard my LOCI (which I'm told risks them not bothering to print and read it at all) or to have a family member send it by proxy without my signature. I'm considering the latter option, but that's seemingly against H's wishes:

All correspondence to our office should include your LSAC registration number and be signed by you.

I realize that a Harvard LOCI probably won't do much to alter their decision, but it's the only chance I have with my LSAT. Thoughts?

[sharktankdean]

I'd like a fellow holdee's opinion. I'm currently writing my Harvard LOCI with the intention to submit it sometime in the coming week. The problem is that I'm currently abroad and won't be back Stateside until June. As I see it, my options are to email Harvard my LOCI (which I'm told risks them not bothering to print and read it at all) or to have a family member send it by proxy without my signature. I'm considering the latter option, but that's seemingly against H's wishes:

All correspondence to our office should include your LSAC registration number and be signed by you.

I realize that a Harvard LOCI probably won't do much to alter their decision, but it's the only chance I have with my LSAT. Thoughts?

Can you send it by Fedex/UPS? Because that seems to be the only way to solve both problems. And depending on where u are and what method you send it by..it could get to them within a week. I honestly think that if you are held and you have a helpful LOCI you should send it ASAP because i believe that J.S. has to be rereading (or reading) the held applicants now especially since there is a large amount. There is no way she is just doing the Dec-Jan group only and if we are guessing what the held group will start hearing back in March then a LOCI should be in the mail now to account for delivery , processing and evaluation.

[AGooner11]

I'd like a fellow holdee's opinion. I'm currently writing my Harvard LOCI with the intention to submit it sometime in the coming week. The problem is that I'm currently abroad and won't be back Stateside until June. As I see it, my options are to email Harvard my LOCI (which I'm told risks them not bothering to print and read it at all) or to have a family member send it by proxy without my signature. I'm considering the latter option, but that's seemingly against H's wishes:

All correspondence to our office should include your LSAC registration number and be signed by you.

I realize that a Harvard LOCI probably won't do much to alter their decision, but it's the only chance I have with my LSAT. Thoughts?

Can you send it by Fedex/UPS?

Unfortunately they're not an option from my location. I might be able to send it by local mail services, but I'm not convinced the letter would actually get to Cambridge. I've heard mixed reviews, but a postcard I sent arrived in 12 days so who knows. I'll look into it since that might be my only option that follows H's guidelines. Thanks.

[planeride]

I'd like a fellow holdee's opinion. I'm currently writing my Harvard LOCI with the intention to submit it sometime in the coming week. The problem is that I'm currently abroad and won't be back Stateside until June. As I see it, my options are to email Harvard my LOCI (which I'm told risks them not bothering to print and read it at all) or to have a family member send it by proxy without my signature. I'm considering the latter option, but that's seemingly against H's wishes:

All correspondence to our office should include your LSAC registration number and be signed by you.

I realize that a Harvard LOCI probably won't do much to alter their decision, but it's the only chance I have with my LSAT. Thoughts?

Can you send it by Fedex/UPS?

Unfortunately they're not an option from my location. I might be able to send it by local mail services, but I'm not convinced the letter would actually get to Cambridge. I've heard mixed reviews, but a postcard I sent arrived in 12 days so who knows. I'll look into it since that might be my only option that follows H's guidelines. Thanks.

Call/email them and ask? I'm sure they've dealt with this problem before.

I'd be surprised if they wouldn't let you just email it after you explain your situation.

[PopTorts13]

Does anyone else's status checker say under review with the date that they received their hold notification?

[boosk]

Does anyone else's status checker say under review with the date that they received their hold notification?

yup (01/09)

[cogitoergosum]

Does anyone else's status checker say under review with the date that they received their hold notification?

Did this come up on status checker as a change, or has it always been that way?

[cogitoergosum]

Mine is same, but my status checker isn't flagging it as a change.

I thought the header used to say something like "your application has been held," while now it says "your application to Harvard Law School is complete." My app hasn't flagged any changes though, so maybe I'm just going crazy.

[Killingly]

Does anyone else's status checker say under review with the date that they received their hold notification?

Mine does. 1/13.

[PopTorts13]

Does anyone else's status checker say under review with the date that they received their hold notification?

Did this come up on status checker as a change, or has it always been that way?

I was complete on the 22nd of December, Held on the 10th and just checked my status today out of curiosity and it now says, "Application Under Review" with "Current Status Date: 2/10/2012". I wasn't sure if this was the norm for the majority of us. Hope this helps.

[yepyepyep]

Hey all question: Are you all submitting your FAFSA/Need Access to Harvard/Stanford if you haven't heard from them yet? Is that common practice, or are we supposed to hold off? I think the Harvard webpage said you can wait on Need Access (but you can also submit it, no problem), but it didn't say anything about FAFSA. Thoughts?

[curiouscat]

Does anyone else's status checker say under review with the date that they received their hold notification?

Did this come up on status checker as a change, or has it always been that way?

I was complete on the 22nd of December, Held on the 10th and just checked my status today out of curiosity and it now says, "Application Under Review" with "Current Status Date: 2/10/2012". I wasn't sure if this was the norm for the majority of us. Hope this helps.

This seems to be the norm - your status date updates once you get held, but the status itself ("application under review") stays the same.