It isn't in the schools interest to tell people why they are rejected, because at least 95% of the time it is strictly because of numbers/USNWR ranking.If they told people this it would run contrary to the crap that nearly every school spouts about looking at more than just numbers.People under their medians would be less likely to apply in the future, thus providing less revenue and a lower rejection rate.
Quote from: ptown on March 15, 2007, 10:49:44 AMIt isn't in the schools interest to tell people why they are rejected, because at least 95% of the time it is strictly because of numbers/USNWR ranking.If they told people this it would run contrary to the crap that nearly every school spouts about looking at more than just numbers.People under their medians would be less likely to apply in the future, thus providing less revenue and a lower rejection rate.I agree that it's not in the schools' interest to tell you why, but not because it represents a significant loss of revenue. If they get 5,000 applicants that pay $50, that's $350,000 total, which really is peanuts for a school. I think it's not in their interest because presenting yourself to them correctly is all part of the game.
Quote from: SleepySwirl on March 15, 2007, 03:05:11 PMQuote from: ptown on March 15, 2007, 10:49:44 AMIt isn't in the schools interest to tell people why they are rejected, because at least 95% of the time it is strictly because of numbers/USNWR ranking.If they told people this it would run contrary to the crap that nearly every school spouts about looking at more than just numbers.People under their medians would be less likely to apply in the future, thus providing less revenue and a lower rejection rate.I agree that it's not in the schools' interest to tell you why, but not because it represents a significant loss of revenue. If they get 5,000 applicants that pay $50, that's $350,000 total, which really is peanuts for a school. I think it's not in their interest because presenting yourself to them correctly is all part of the game. You forgot one important category of why law schools could reject you...Poor Math Skills(5,000 applicants that pay $50, that's $250,000 total...)Rob
Saw dashrashi's LSN site. Since she seems to use profanity, one could say that HYP does not necessarily mean class or refinement.
I got my first rejection (of many, I am certain, just look at my silly LSN) last week from Emory. When I told my mother, she exclaimed, "But WHY?!" At first I was a little put off, "I don't *know*. How should I know? Because they didn't like me. And most likely because my numbers were too low." Emory and me ... well, that's easy to understand. But there are other people whose numbers are within range, and still get rejections. That's gotta be so frustrating. It's like handing in a test and getting it back with an F on it, only the prof didn't bother telling you what you did wrong. Obviously knowing what you did wrong on a test is important pedagogically, and there doesnt seem to be such a necessity with law school apps (unless you are applying again, or are trying to get good at helping other people apply). But STILL! My mom is right. It'd sure be nice if they pointed at where you went wrong. Obviously I understand the difficulties with this (goodness, they dont even have time to personalize all the acceptances, much less the rejections!), but it'd still be nice to know why. Well, maybe not "nice," but "interesting" at least. They could do it by just checking a number or something. 1. LSAT too low. 2. GPA too low. 3. Crappy PS. 4. Not enough diversity. 5. Crappy LORs. 6. We don't take convicted felons. 7. We woulda taken you, but you applied too late in the cycle. 8. No Work Experience. 9. Too young. 10. Not enough leadership roles. Or worse: All of the above. You suck.So anyway, just my random middle-of-the-night rant.
They could do it by just checking a number or something. 1. LSAT too low. 2. GPA too low. 3. Crappy PS. 4. Not enough diversity. 5. Crappy LORs. 6. We don't take convicted felons. 7. We woulda taken you, but you applied too late in the cycle. 8. No Work Experience. 9. Too young. 10. Not enough leadership roles. Or worse: All of the above. You suck.
Quote from: woeisme on January 11, 2008, 02:11:43 PMQuote from: SilentSwirl on March 14, 2007, 06:01:55 AMThey could do it by just checking a number or something. 1. LSAT too low. 2. GPA too low. 3. Crappy PS. 4. Not enough diversity. 5. Crappy LORs. 6. We don't take convicted felons. 7. We woulda taken you, but you applied too late in the cycle. 8. No Work Experience. 9. Too young. 10. Not enough leadership roles. Or worse: All of the above. You suck.I've thought about this a lot. I agree.dang dude...you must be bored...how come you're draggin up all these all old threads?
Quote from: SilentSwirl on March 14, 2007, 06:01:55 AMThey could do it by just checking a number or something. 1. LSAT too low. 2. GPA too low. 3. Crappy PS. 4. Not enough diversity. 5. Crappy LORs. 6. We don't take convicted felons. 7. We woulda taken you, but you applied too late in the cycle. 8. No Work Experience. 9. Too young. 10. Not enough leadership roles. Or worse: All of the above. You suck.I've thought about this a lot. I agree.
Discussion
Resources
