In this article, I'm sharing things I've learned about admissions from reviewing 100+ of your video applications for the LSAT Unplugged Course Scholarship for Public Interest.
First off --
I'd make a terrible admission officer because I'd say "yes" to everybody.
But when you have 100+ submissions for 10 spots, you have to make some tough
choices. If you don't want to decide randomly, you have to set up *some* basis for decision-making.
Check out videos from the past week to see my favorites -- these are just a few:
Follow the rules.
If I say max 5 minutes, and you go over, I don't *personally* care because 5 minutes is arbitrary. (Same goes for deadlines.)
But with far too many submissions, I have no choice but to use filters - did this person read closely enough to follow the rules? Did they care enough? If I say "yes" to them, is it fair to others who clearly made an effort to stick to the rules?
Go to the max (or come close).
If the time limit is 5 minutes, I expect you to come close to filling the time. 4, 4 1/2 minutes is fine. But if you're only doing 1-2 minutes, It looks like you don't have enough to say or aren't putting in the effort. And if you do 3-4 minutes, those 3-4 minutes had better be on FIRE.
Get personal.
The most compelling entries aren't abstract. I want to hear about your stories -- concrete and real experiences.
You don't need to have started an NGO or anything, but I do like hearing about your personal life and/or work experience -- both to get to know you a bit and connect it to your goals.
Get colorful.
Opening with a hook and showing personality has an impact. A clever or witty open isn't necessary, and don't try to force it. But if it's your style, it definitely gets my attention.
Regardless, don't speak in a monotone or come across as low-energy. Show some passion, that you care about winning and your career goals.
Public interest is public interest.
I left it intentionally vague so as not to exclude any deserving areas I might not know about, but helping investors in the stock market doesn't fall within most definitions of "public interest."
Going the extra mile matters.
A few people made little extra demonstrations of interest - it's not necessary, but as long as it's not annoying, it's appreciated and noticed. It can definitely have an impact in borderline cases.
So does prior interest.
If we've communicated in the past, or I've seen you around (like in the LSAT Unplugged Facebook Group or Instagram), that could sway me one way or the other and add some additional context for your application. Again, not necessary, but it can have an impact.
Applying early helps.
I'd never fault someone for applying at the last minute, but I generally reviewed applications in the order received. I couldn't help noticing those who applied earlier and felt more free to say "yes" to them than when I had fewer slots remaining later in the process.
Personal biases are unavoidable.
I've touched on this already in other areas above but want to add one final thing -- it's possible to make an offhand comment that rubs someone the wrong way. I make real efforts not to penalize someone for expressing a different opinion from my own, but it's still possible to go too far in any direction. Try not to make assumptions about the person reviewing your application, especially when it comes to "hot-button" topics.
***
A few more things:
#1 - I might also break any of the above rules to accept someone if something about their application compels me. There's an element of randomness when it comes to making exceptions, granting liberties, etc. The process is subjective and unfair.
#2 - If you don't win, that doesn't mean *anything* about you personally, your goals, or anything else about your application. You could "do everything right" and still not win - selection has an arbitrary element, especially when there are far too many applications for too few slots.
#3 - This entire process has been incredibly rewarding. I'm so inspired by every single one of you.
I've already reached out to all the winners. And for everyone who applied but *didn't* win, I'll reach out to you personally (if I haven't already) and do whatever I can to help.
#4 - It bothers me that I wasn't able to give access to everyone who needed and deserved it. It kills me to say "no" to anyone, especially those who are clearly passionate. I was only going to choose 10 winners, but I got so many outstanding entries that I upped it to 30.
But it still doesn't feel like enough -- I could have chosen a different 30, and they would have deserved it, too. There's still a lot of work to be done. (A quick reminder - I also offer partial LSAT course scholarships on an ongoing basis.)
#5 - I will definitely do this again in the future.
***
Congratulations to all the winners and to everyone, please keep on fighting.
I see you and appreciate the work that you're doing.
The world needs you more than ever.
Steve
First off --
I'd make a terrible admission officer because I'd say "yes" to everybody.
But when you have 100+ submissions for 10 spots, you have to make some tough
choices. If you don't want to decide randomly, you have to set up *some* basis for decision-making.
Check out videos from the past week to see my favorites -- these are just a few:
Follow the rules.
If I say max 5 minutes, and you go over, I don't *personally* care because 5 minutes is arbitrary. (Same goes for deadlines.)
But with far too many submissions, I have no choice but to use filters - did this person read closely enough to follow the rules? Did they care enough? If I say "yes" to them, is it fair to others who clearly made an effort to stick to the rules?
Go to the max (or come close).
If the time limit is 5 minutes, I expect you to come close to filling the time. 4, 4 1/2 minutes is fine. But if you're only doing 1-2 minutes, It looks like you don't have enough to say or aren't putting in the effort. And if you do 3-4 minutes, those 3-4 minutes had better be on FIRE.
Get personal.
The most compelling entries aren't abstract. I want to hear about your stories -- concrete and real experiences.
You don't need to have started an NGO or anything, but I do like hearing about your personal life and/or work experience -- both to get to know you a bit and connect it to your goals.
Get colorful.
Opening with a hook and showing personality has an impact. A clever or witty open isn't necessary, and don't try to force it. But if it's your style, it definitely gets my attention.
Regardless, don't speak in a monotone or come across as low-energy. Show some passion, that you care about winning and your career goals.
Public interest is public interest.
I left it intentionally vague so as not to exclude any deserving areas I might not know about, but helping investors in the stock market doesn't fall within most definitions of "public interest."
Going the extra mile matters.
A few people made little extra demonstrations of interest - it's not necessary, but as long as it's not annoying, it's appreciated and noticed. It can definitely have an impact in borderline cases.
So does prior interest.
If we've communicated in the past, or I've seen you around (like in the LSAT Unplugged Facebook Group or Instagram), that could sway me one way or the other and add some additional context for your application. Again, not necessary, but it can have an impact.
Applying early helps.
I'd never fault someone for applying at the last minute, but I generally reviewed applications in the order received. I couldn't help noticing those who applied earlier and felt more free to say "yes" to them than when I had fewer slots remaining later in the process.
Personal biases are unavoidable.
I've touched on this already in other areas above but want to add one final thing -- it's possible to make an offhand comment that rubs someone the wrong way. I make real efforts not to penalize someone for expressing a different opinion from my own, but it's still possible to go too far in any direction. Try not to make assumptions about the person reviewing your application, especially when it comes to "hot-button" topics.
***
A few more things:
#1 - I might also break any of the above rules to accept someone if something about their application compels me. There's an element of randomness when it comes to making exceptions, granting liberties, etc. The process is subjective and unfair.
#2 - If you don't win, that doesn't mean *anything* about you personally, your goals, or anything else about your application. You could "do everything right" and still not win - selection has an arbitrary element, especially when there are far too many applications for too few slots.
#3 - This entire process has been incredibly rewarding. I'm so inspired by every single one of you.
I've already reached out to all the winners. And for everyone who applied but *didn't* win, I'll reach out to you personally (if I haven't already) and do whatever I can to help.
#4 - It bothers me that I wasn't able to give access to everyone who needed and deserved it. It kills me to say "no" to anyone, especially those who are clearly passionate. I was only going to choose 10 winners, but I got so many outstanding entries that I upped it to 30.
But it still doesn't feel like enough -- I could have chosen a different 30, and they would have deserved it, too. There's still a lot of work to be done. (A quick reminder - I also offer partial LSAT course scholarships on an ongoing basis.)
#5 - I will definitely do this again in the future.
***
Congratulations to all the winners and to everyone, please keep on fighting.
I see you and appreciate the work that you're doing.
The world needs you more than ever.
Steve
No comments:
Post a Comment