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

[Lavitz]

one would think the admissions office would try to compensate for an expected higher yield rate.

I think you give the admissions office too much credit.

No, but you may be right. This is what I counted on LSN:

Last year: 163 admitted, 84 withdrew, 18 attending
This year: 153 admitted, 70 withdrew, 19 attending

Probably not statistically significant, but it's all I've got. Slightly smaller number of admits, less people reporting withdrawals so far, yet roughly the same number of people committing. So that could mean they'd need to pull roughly the same number from the WL as last year.

Unlike last year though, they still have a pile of some January apps to go through. Not to mention the reports from ASW of unexpectedly high turnout. So while they may still pull from the WL, I'm still expecting them to pull at least slightly less people than last year.

[FlowBro]

Decisions early next week?

[jvincent11]

Decisions early next week?

I mean sure it's possible, but who knows. I definitely expect a decision by Friday night though.

[FlowBro]

I hope you are right! At this point, I just want to know if I am in or WL or if they maybe want an interview. Don't even want to think about negotiating a scolly if I were to get accepted.

[Crowing]

Also I could be being naive, but I don't see why #5 USNWR vs. T#4 USNWR would (not just should which is a given, but would) mean anything to anyone - I mean the school didn't even pass any others in rank. Hell it's still 5th on the list since it's sorted alphabetically; the visual arrangement probably appeals just as much as the actual rankings to anybody shallow enough to take them seriously.

I guess I could see the killer LST stats from this year being of some influence (though I suppose I see that as an instance of "would" but still not "should" since while employment data certainly matters, a single year fluctuation shouldn't be blown out of proportion).

[Big Dog]

Also I could be being naive, but I don't see why #5 USNWR vs. T#4 USNWR would (not just should which is a given, but would) mean anything to anyone

Not naive, just practical. The vast majority of applicants are east coasters, and they would prefer Columbia (and even NYU) at the same price as a LS in fly-over country. One ranking spot is meaningless to 99.9% of the populace. Chicago's emphasis on interviewing most applicants will affect their yield -- by how much remains to be seen -- but one spot in USNews? No reason to think it will matter.

[Emma.]

Also I could be being naive, but I don't see why #5 USNWR vs. T#4 USNWR would (not just should which is a given, but would) mean anything to anyone

Not naive, just practical. The vast majority of applicants are east coasters, and they would prefer Columbia (and even NYU) at the same price as a LS in fly-over country. One ranking spot is meaningless to 99.9% of the populace. Chicago's emphasis on interviewing most applicants will affect their yield -- by how much remains to be seen -- but one spot in USNews? No reason to think it will matter.

You might think that, but the last time UChicago bumped up a spot (2010) the entering class that year ended up overenrolled.

[LSATSCORES2012]

Also I could be being naive, but I don't see why #5 USNWR vs. T#4 USNWR would (not just should which is a given, but would) mean anything to anyone

Not naive, just practical. The vast majority of applicants are east coasters, and they would prefer Columbia (and even NYU) at the same price as a LS in fly-over country. One ranking spot is meaningless to 99.9% of the populace. Chicago's emphasis on interviewing most applicants will affect their yield -- by how much remains to be seen -- but one spot in USNews? No reason to think it will matter.

You might think that, but the last time UChicago bumped up a spot (2010) the entering class that year ended up overenrolled.

Was that bump over NYU? I don't think there's much difference in lay prestige between Chicago and NYU but there is definitely a difference between Chicago and Columbia (in favor of Columbia), and I think the people who would be influenced by one spot in the rankings would be just as heavily influenced by this. So tying or passing NYU, I think, would have more of an effect on Chicago's yield than tying or passing Columbia.

[jbagelboy]

Also I could be being naive, but I don't see why #5 USNWR vs. T#4 USNWR would (not just should which is a given, but would) mean anything to anyone

Not naive, just practical. The vast majority of applicants are east coasters, and they would prefer Columbia (and even NYU) at the same price as a LS in fly-over country. One ranking spot is meaningless to 99.9% of the populace. Chicago's emphasis on interviewing most applicants will affect their yield -- by how much remains to be seen -- but one spot in USNews? No reason to think it will matter.

You might think that, but the last time UChicago bumped up a spot (2010) the entering class that year ended up overenrolled.

Was that bump over NYU? I don't think there's much difference in lay prestige between Chicago and NYU but there is definitely a difference between Chicago and Columbia (in favor of Columbia), and I think the people who would be influenced by one spot in the rankings would be just as heavily influenced by this. So tying or passing NYU, I think, would have more of an effect on Chicago's yield than tying or passing Columbia.

I do not follow this. Your second and third sentences appear contradictory.

Edit: Ill explain what I mean: I know this is all mass culture psychobabble, but from a mass culture psychobabble perspective, wouldnt UChicago making gains on the school that actually does have higher prestige in your interpretation (CLS) be of greater significance?

IMO chicago presents a veritable alternative to the new york schools for comparable employment prospects, whereas NYU/CLS are extremely similar schools. Many people would either be choosing between nyu and cls, OR go to chicago over both.

[Crowing]

I think what he's saying is that Chicago and NYU have similar lay prestige and therefore a bump in the rankings would be a sort of tiebreaker for Chicago. Meanwhile Columbia has higher lay prestige so even though Chicago tied Columbia people won't really be influenced by that ranking shift because in their minds Columbia has always been more preftigious.

That's not my opinion (don't necessarily disagree either though; who the fuck knows about this shit) - just trying to translate.

[LSATSCORES2012]

Assuming, in many people's minds, the ranking of what's important when choosing a school goes USNews Ranking -> Lay Prestige (which is probably something like it is in most people's minds, though I think for many (most?) TLSers this isn't the case because employment is thrown in there), then we have the following two scenarios:

1. (what presumably happened) 5. NYU & 6. Chicago -> 5. Chicago & 5. NYU (Chicago ties NYU) or 5. NYU & 6. Chicago -> 5. Chicago & 6. NYU (Chicago passed NYU)
In this situation, we go from NYU winning the USR -> LP battle to a tie or Chicago winning the USR -> LP battle, which will cause a significant change in the decisions of people choosing between NYU and Chicago.

2. (what just happened) 5. Chicago & 4. Columbia -> 4. Chicago & 4. Columbia
In this situation, we go from Columbia winning the USR -> LP battle to Columbia still winning the USR -> LP battle, because though they are tied in terms of USNews Ranking, Columbia's LP exceeds Chicago's LP.

So I doubt whether tying Columbia would have as large an effect on Chicago's yield as tying or passing NYU would.

Of course, no one, no matter how much they value these kinds of social structures, would be likely to make their law school decision based upon such a rigid equation, but if there are a lot of people out there, all of whom think in this general mindset, even if it's not such a rigidly rule-based system, then this is what we would expect.

Of course, there's also the fact that I do think that TLS is legitimately changing how people make law school decisions (mostly because I think that we posters are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of who is influenced by what we say - right now, for example, there are three times as many guests browsing this subforum as there are registered users, and four times as many guests on the forum as a whole as there are registered users - assuming they don't browse as long as us, I'd bet that TLS reaches about 70-80% of the applicant pool), and Chicago's being on top of the LST rankings this year might also affect their yield.

FYI, right now Chicago and Stanford are tied on LSN in terms of the biggest yield improvements from last year, and Columbia is third. NYU is last among the top 7 schools. Caveat is, of course, that this is LSN data.

TL;DR

Chicago and NYU have similar lay prestige and therefore a bump in the rankings would be a sort of tiebreaker for Chicago. Meanwhile Columbia has higher lay prestige so even though Chicago tied Columbia people won't really be influenced by that ranking shift because in their minds Columbia has always been more preftigious.

and TLS is bigger than we think so maybe I'm wrong.

[Lavitz]

I can't speak for anyone else but I viewed the jump in the rankings as a proxy for whether or not the administration has its act together.

It was pretty clear that one of the purposes of the Rubies was to increase Chicago's ranking, as admitted here:

Attracting the best and the brightest students to Chicago with full-tuition scholarships will generate a virtuous cycle.[...]The more accomplished a school's faculty and students, the greater its reputation and ranking is likely to be, which means that more top students will be attracted to enroll.

So I've been watching to see whether or not Chicago would succeed in its efforts. If it couldn't at least tie Columbia after several cycles with this new offer--or worse, if NYU tied Chicago despite the Rubies--then yes, I'd be concerned about what would happen to its ranking and its reputation in general after it loses that money.

The fact that the plan worked shows that Chicago is not in decline. Of course, I'm sure the LST data has contributed to this perception as well. So I don't think it was a decisive factor or anything, but I do think the rankings bump may have contributed to the popularity of Chicago this cycle by at least reassuring everyone that Chicago isn't at risk of falling in the rankings anytime soon.

Then again, maybe I was the only one overthinking this and nobody who actually deposited viewed it this way.

[Mal Reynolds]

Even if ASW was well attended I'm not sure that means Chicago has already over enrolled. But, all else equal, I think there is a definite possibility that an increase in ranking could affect enrollment and yield in the aggregate.

I think you guys are over-thinking this a little. There will absolutely be more acceptances and people will absolutely be taken from the wait list. If last year is any indication, wait list->accepts even got a solid amount of money, although I sure as hell wouldn't like to be waiting come summer time. I don't think it's worthwhile trying to divine whether there will be more or less than last year. Sure, it could be less, and Chicago may have over-enrolled. I think there is an even greater chance that they'll have to pull more from the wait list. There has been a quantifiable drop in admissions standards this year and I think Chicago is trying to deal with that partially by taking longer to give out decisions. They are beholden to HYS and CN at this point and we're basically just waiting for the other shoe to drop. I don't know when that will be, but it will happened.

Having some weird debate about lay prestige, ranking, and reputations of these schools is pretty worthless. There are too many counter-veiling forces at work.

[Lavitz]

I think you guys are over-thinking this a little.

Yes, I know I am.

Having some weird debate about lay prestige, ranking, and reputations of these schools is pretty worthless.

Unless I'm trying to get my post count up to 1000 for that banner in North's thread.*


*Without going into the Lounge

[Mal Reynolds]

*Without going into the Lounge

You're gonna have to at some point-it's inevitable. There's only so much time you can spend in the on-topics. You'll get a nice welcome if you start your own thread.

[Lavitz]

You're gonna have to at some point-it's inevitable. There's only so much time you can spend in the on-topics. You'll get a nice welcome if you start your own thread.

Hah, thanks for the advice.

[toothbrush]

You're gonna have to at some point-it's inevitable. There's only so much time you can spend in the on-topics. You'll get a nice welcome if you start your own thread.

Hah, thanks for the advice.

Don't do this. The lounge isn't a nice place.

[Lavitz]

Don't do this. The lounge isn't a nice place.

If anything, I'd probably just stick to the fitness thread. They seem pretty chill.

[JXander]

UR1, 4/17; UR2 4/26; UR3 5/6.

Is the decision typically made on the day of the third UR?

[TripTrip]

*Without going into the Lounge

You're gonna have to at some point-it's inevitable. There's only so much time you can spend in the on-topics. You'll get a nice welcome if you start your own thread.

Bleh.

The A/D/W board is much nicer than the lounge.

[aja8576]

UR1, 4/17; UR2 4/26; UR3 5/6.

Is the decision typically made on the day of the third UR?

Same here. UR3 on 5/6/2013.

[nba101790]

Same.

[Belgorn]

Samsies.

[CaptainLeela]

Welcome to TLS

[fivestarfolds]

Yeah, I just went UR3


Submitted 1/4
Complete 1/17
UR1 3/29
UR2 4/23
UR3 5/6