I can't help thinking that you apply to a school and thus entrust them with your application, and how long it takes them or how they reach a decision is not really very much to do with you after that point until it becomes excessive. I know this sounds harsh but it's true. Because when people apply to Boalt they are told that they will hear around March - at least I was. Hearing earlier is a bonus (which, from what I understand - though I could be wrong - mostly happens to people with very very high numbers).
Let it be. I also found it a long wait, but waiting is just a part of this game. They have a right to keep hold of apps for as long as they want or need to and to assess them in the ways they deem appropriate. The fact that other law schools do it differently doesn't make Boalt's way illegitimate. At the end of the day, isn't it better not to be told than to be rejected outright if it means you're still in the game? I think so.
By the way, I have similar numbers to Ruskie and was accepted last year (in February). I personally believe a longer review period means they really do look at the whole application rather than simply scanning for numbers and throwing apps in bins accordingly. This is what we all want law schools to do, so it seems unfair to be criticising them for doing so just because it takes a little longer.
35 Replies
3372 Views