Submitted all of my apps by mid-December with September score. GW's offer came in through email within 2 wks w/ scholarship. WashU contacted me for interview within a week and a half, and offer came in three weeks after interview. Fordham, USC Gould, BU, and Emory all came in within a month. BU called me. Emory only sent snail mail. Michigan Law took almost two months, and even sent me an email telling me to wait "patiently" after 6weeks. Their offer came in an email on a Saturday. Still waiting on Duke&Northwestern.

Had two interviews this cycle, one was for Washington University in St. Louis, and the other one was for Northwestern University.

For Wash U:

They sent an interview request within a week of the submission of my completed application. The gist of their request was: "We found much to admire in your application, and we would like to get to know you more." My counselor and I thought that there were 2 main objectives of their interview: 1. I am an international student, so they wanted to gauge with my spoken English ability; 2. they wanted to get to know me beyond my resume. And we prepared accordingly. The interview took place over Skype, and it was exactly what we anticipated. The assistant admission's officer asked questions about my extracurriculars, "why law school", "why WashU", questions about my hobbies, and questions about my upbringing. She also gave me time to ask questions. The interview was very informal (we ended up chatting about rock climbing, baking, and our favorite tattoo artists), and my answers were about 40-50 seconds long each. The total interview was about 20 minutes.

My offer arrived in my mailbox around 2 and a half weeks after the interview with a very generous scholarship offer.

For Northwestern:

I scheduled their on-campus interview, and I had a current student (she's a 2L at Northwestern) interview me. The interview was 35 minutes long. They asked for my resume before the interview, and basically went through my resume with me during the interviews. Questions asked:

Tell me a little bit about yourself.

Why law school, and why law school now?

Why Northwestern?

Which one of your resume items demonstrate your leadership ability the best? What does leadership mean to you?

Anything not on your resume that you would like us to know?

What do you want to do with a law degree?

Favorite class in undergrad?

Hardest class in undergrad?

Curveball questions:

What would you do if you didn't get into any law school this application cycle?

What factors matter the most to you when you decide where to attend law school?

To be honest, I'd be super annoyed if my partner asked either of my parents for "blessing" or "permission" :D (And.... she asked you not to. I'd listen to my girlfriend instead of my yes men friends)

Thank you, everybody!

I went home to get some rest after school yesterday and took some night quill. I feel slightly better now. Hopefully it will be gone by Monday!

@twssmith644 hmmm, that's good to know. I'm also debating whether to cancel or not. Felt very hazy for the first two sections and not sure if I bombed them or not...

@mengdixu568 I only started doing that after not finishing two sections :( lesson learned, I suppose

@justingraham299 for the first two sections yes, and I realized how much time it wasted. So after that I started doing a whole page.

What are the real benefits of canceling a score? I thought that we have the option to only send our highest scores to the schools we apply to?

main lesson learned today: ALWAYS USE BUBBLE SHEETS WHEN PTing. I did not realize how much time it actually takes to bubble the answers and I ran out of time on two of the sections :O

I've never done BR group before, so I'm not sure how it works. Someone please teach me the ways :D

count me in!

Thank you, everybody! I think I will just have to leave my bag at the train station.

Here are my thoughts:

I chose D because I misread the sentence "hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by this diseases". I read it as "hardly any lobsters live long enough to (be infected by) this disease", which led me to think that E is irrelevant because the lobsters would't even have the disease. I realized the right way of understanding this sentence, after reviewing, is that "lobster will have the disease, but they don't live enough to feel the affects of it". This sentence is flawed because it focuses on the lobsters; it assumed that the proposal was made for the sake of lobsters. E attacks that assumption and states that humans are the ones being protected here by the proposal.

Am I understanding this correctly? Please let me know!

Conclusion: Anthropologists are wrong for claiming that human species survived because they evolved the ability to cope with DNE.

Premise: 1. Aa evolved the ability to survive.

2. Aa did not survive.

In a nutshell:

C: Hsurvive-->ability to cope with DNE

P: 1. ~Aasurvive

2. ~[Aasurvive--> ability to cope with DNE]

Invalid because Hsurvive is a sufficient inplication of ability to cope, not a necessary one. Having the ability to cope does not mean one must have survived PH. The conclusion of the stimulus confuses "Hsurvive-->Cope with DNE" with "Cope with DNE-->Hsurvive". (A) reflects this flaw.