This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Marc03
« on: April 12, 2008, 02:58:32 PM »
If they don't do anything to increase your knowledge and appreciation for the school after you apply, you have to be basing your desire to apply primarily on reputation or location. That's not a very informed decision, IMO (especially for schools below T-30 or so).
I applied to Tulane mostly out of curiosity but they did a stellar job of making themselves available, illuminating their programs PLUS making me feel welcomed.
It's rather like chasing a guy for months who once told you, "Yeah, maybe we can go out someday," while another guy - just as rich, just as cute - always opens doors for you, gives you little thoughtful gifts, and tells you how nice you look with an open invitation to go out whenever you're available. Why keep chasing the snob when the sweet guy is interested in you?
because the snob is the one you really want? the sweet guy would be a form of "settling".
I am in absolutely no way bashing Tulane, great school in a great city. But if SMU is the one you love then isn't it worth it to wait just a little while longer? There are some extenuating circumstances that force you to choose early (such as cosmo's SO), but if you're like most of the general application pool, then there is no reason to rush the decision.
« on: April 12, 2008, 02:13:26 PM »
I don't quite get why you guys are so impatient. Even if you waited til halfway through May, that would still leave you over 3 months to prepare to move to wherever you decide. If you really do have SMU as your top choice (which it seems apparent that you do) then why not wait patiently and hope for the best? I'm not sure what the downside is.
Choose your best alternative (Tulane in your case), and put your deposit down. That leaves only two possible results:
1. SMU rejects: you end up at Tulane and are perfectly happy
2. SMU accepts: you sacrifice a Tulane seat deposit, but get to spend 3 years at the Law School you truly want to attend.
my two cents.
« on: April 11, 2008, 02:45:42 PM »
George Mason by telephone.
Cardozo by telephone.
« on: April 05, 2008, 05:33:40 PM »
I'm working with a 2.7/169.. definite splitter. To top that off, I applied VERY late to every law school (pretty much at or near the deadlines for each).
SMU - 46 $$
Baylor - 55 $$
U of H - 55 $$
Tx Tech - t3
Notre Dame- 22
tons of tier 1s plus georgetown.
« on: March 31, 2008, 06:05:58 PM »
Because it's common sense. If parents are expecting one child and get triplets instead, it seems likely that they'll wind up driving off to college in three Miatas rather than one Porsche. If a campus depends on system-wide funding, as most public schools do, then the share of that funding allocated to all purposes for one law school will obviously be higher than the same system would provide for each of two or four or five law schools.
This is where your reasoning is flawed: Who is to say that the parent of the single child would not also have a foster child and maybe a horse to whom they also allocate their resources toward? You (mistakenly) assume that the Law School is the ONLY beneficiary from endowments. Take UT for example - to say that the Law School has full access to the extremely large endowment is to say that there are no other programs or schools supported by the UT system that would have partial access to the same endowment. When in fact, the UT system has a large assortment of successful programs, both undergraduate and graduate, that benefit from the same aforementioned endowment. Staying in Texas, other examples include Baylor which supports reputable Business, Law, and Medical schools.
UT is an outstanding school and I only use it as an example since I am most familiar with it living here in Texas. I am simply stating that using an entire university system's endowment as the basis for your rankings is inherently flawed when other programs are excluded in the calculation.
« on: March 31, 2008, 04:48:55 PM »
Baylor (half tuition)
Houston ($10k per year)
« on: March 28, 2008, 02:10:37 PM »
Baylor slips and U of Houston rises. Interesting.
« on: March 22, 2008, 04:04:01 PM »
Accepted to SMU by phone on 3/18
75k scholie by mail today!
« on: March 22, 2008, 04:03:15 PM »
Waitlisted at Notre Dame.
« on: March 19, 2008, 12:34:29 PM »
I agree with your friend for the most part. One big factor to me with regards to Baylor vs. SMU came down to Waco vs. Dallas. When you throw that significant factor into the equation, the picture becomes much clearer. That's not to say that one is "necessarily" better than the other, but you should know that you'll be in two vast extremes as far as your local environment is concerned
University of Houston - great, underrated school but the campus will not be winning any aesthetics competitions anytime in the near future.