Harvard LLM 2015-2016


law01

Based on the profile of the admitted students posted in the HLS website, more than 70% have 2 or more years of work experience. Then there are 18 law clerks from different countries.

Optimistic girl: do you know any common trait among these 8 people which got them into HLS?



The fact that a lot of people who have work experience apply does not mean that they explictly require work experience. Most of the people applying have work experience for the following reasons (1) Harvard LLM is very expensive so they might had to work for a few years; (2) maybe they decided that they needed a change of career/ or to develop their chances of getting a higher post in their current careers etc. I can assure you that they do not require work experience as I know a few people who went straight from law school; and they have explicitly told me that not having work experience does not mean you can't get admitted.

<blockquote>Based on the profile of the admitted students posted in the HLS website, more than 70% have 2 or more years of work experience. Then there are 18 law clerks from different countries.

Optimistic girl: do you know any common trait among these 8 people which got them into HLS?

</blockquote>

The fact that a lot of people who have work experience apply does not mean that they explictly require work experience. Most of the people applying have work experience for the following reasons (1) Harvard LLM is very expensive so they might had to work for a few years; (2) maybe they decided that they needed a change of career/ or to develop their chances of getting a higher post in their current careers etc. I can assure you that they do not require work experience as I know a few people who went straight from law school; and they have explicitly told me that not having work experience does not mean you can't get admitted.

quote
imnc

The fact that a lot of people who have work experience apply does not mean that they explictly require work experience. Most of the people applying have work experience for the following reasons (1) Harvard LLM is very expensive so they might had to work for a few years; (2) maybe they decided that they needed a change of career/ or to develop their chances of getting a higher post in their current careers etc. I can assure you that they do not require work experience as I know a few people who went straight from law school; and they have explicitly told me that not having work experience does not mean you can't get admitted.


Hi all, A cousin of mine is in Harvard right now as an LLM student and she says pretty much what I believed all these years, that work experience is important which is why three-fourths of the present class have more than 2 years.

@law01, You are arguing like a fine-print lawyer. The fact that there are few people with no work background is good evidence a bias exists. Just because some people like that gain admission does not mean no consideration is given to work. It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself for reasons we do not know.

<blockquote>The fact that a lot of people who have work experience apply does not mean that they explictly require work experience. Most of the people applying have work experience for the following reasons (1) Harvard LLM is very expensive so they might had to work for a few years; (2) maybe they decided that they needed a change of career/ or to develop their chances of getting a higher post in their current careers etc. I can assure you that they do not require work experience as I know a few people who went straight from law school; and they have explicitly told me that not having work experience does not mean you can't get admitted.</blockquote>

Hi all, A cousin of mine is in Harvard right now as an LLM student and she says pretty much what I believed all these years, that work experience is important which is why three-fourths of the present class have more than 2 years.

@law01, You are arguing like a fine-print lawyer. The fact that there are few people with no work background is good evidence a bias exists. Just because some people like that gain admission does not mean no consideration is given to work. It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself for reasons we do not know.
quote
law01

The fact that a lot of people who have work experience apply does not mean that they explictly require work experience. Most of the people applying have work experience for the following reasons (1) Harvard LLM is very expensive so they might had to work for a few years; (2) maybe they decided that they needed a change of career/ or to develop their chances of getting a higher post in their current careers etc. I can assure you that they do not require work experience as I know a few people who went straight from law school; and they have explicitly told me that not having work experience does not mean you can't get admitted.


I di

Hi all, A cousin of mine is in Harvard right now as an LLM student and she says pretty much what I believed all these years, that work experience is important which is why three-fourths of the present class have more than 2 years.

@law01, You are arguing like a fine-print lawyer. The fact that there are few people with no work background is good evidence a bias exists. Just because some people like that gain admission does not mean no consideration is given to work. It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself for reasons we do not know.



I did not say that they do not take into account work experience. All I said is that you are not rejected simply because you don't have work experience. A person with work experience, in my opinion, is in a better position to tick all the boxes; but it does not in any way mean that exceptional candidates will be rejected because of lack of work experience.

<blockquote><blockquote>The fact that a lot of people who have work experience apply does not mean that they explictly require work experience. Most of the people applying have work experience for the following reasons (1) Harvard LLM is very expensive so they might had to work for a few years; (2) maybe they decided that they needed a change of career/ or to develop their chances of getting a higher post in their current careers etc. I can assure you that they do not require work experience as I know a few people who went straight from law school; and they have explicitly told me that not having work experience does not mean you can't get admitted.</blockquote>

I di

Hi all, A cousin of mine is in Harvard right now as an LLM student and she says pretty much what I believed all these years, that work experience is important which is why three-fourths of the present class have more than 2 years.

@law01, You are arguing like a fine-print lawyer. The fact that there are few people with no work background is good evidence a bias exists. Just because some people like that gain admission does not mean no consideration is given to work. It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself for reasons we do not know. </blockquote>


I did not say that they do not take into account work experience. All I said is that you are not rejected simply because you don't have work experience. A person with work experience, in my opinion, is in a better position to tick all the boxes; but it does not in any way mean that exceptional candidates will be rejected because of lack of work experience.
quote
shimmer

Does anyone know whether HLS considers internship as work experience? Thanks!

Does anyone know whether HLS considers internship as work experience? Thanks!
quote
imnc

I did not say that they do not take into account work experience. All I said is that you are not rejected simply because you don't have work experience. A person with work experience, in my opinion, is in a better position to tick all the boxes; but it does not in any way mean that exceptional candidates will be rejected because of lack of work experience.


A small number without work exp are given offers, but they are the exceptional cases as you say, with exceptional CVs. For the rest work exp is pretty much a requirement

<blockquote>I did not say that they do not take into account work experience. All I said is that you are not rejected simply because you don't have work experience. A person with work experience, in my opinion, is in a better position to tick all the boxes; but it does not in any way mean that exceptional candidates will be rejected because of lack of work experience. </blockquote>

A small number without work exp are given offers, but they are the exceptional cases as you say, with exceptional CVs. For the rest work exp is pretty much a requirement
quote
law01

I did not say that they do not take into account work experience. All I said is that you are not rejected simply because you don't have work experience. A person with work experience, in my opinion, is in a better position to tick all the boxes; but it does not in any way mean that exceptional candidates will be rejected because of lack of work experience.


A small number without work exp are given offers, but they are the exceptional cases as you say, with exceptional CVs. For the rest work exp is pretty much a requirement


We are pretty much on the same page here, the only thing I don't agree with you is that work experience is 'required' as such, you would not rejected just because you do not have work experience; you would benefit from having but not the other way around!

<blockquote><blockquote>I did not say that they do not take into account work experience. All I said is that you are not rejected simply because you don't have work experience. A person with work experience, in my opinion, is in a better position to tick all the boxes; but it does not in any way mean that exceptional candidates will be rejected because of lack of work experience. </blockquote>

A small number without work exp are given offers, but they are the exceptional cases as you say, with exceptional CVs. For the rest work exp is pretty much a requirement</blockquote>

We are pretty much on the same page here, the only thing I don't agree with you is that work experience is 'required' as such, you would not rejected just because you do not have work experience; you would benefit from having but not the other way around!
quote
imnc

We are pretty much on the same page here, the only thing I don't agree with you is that work experience is 'required' as such, you would not rejected just because you do not have work experience; you would benefit from having but not the other way around!


:) we are not on same page. This is what my cousin told me: When they review the applications they seperate the no work -exp aside. They will then go thru the lot and discard those who are strong but not great CVs. If there are great CVs those get shortlisted for consideration. But for the others the lack of work exp was a negative. That is why many law school websites state clearly that they strongly prefer expereince

<blockquote>We are pretty much on the same page here, the only thing I don't agree with you is that work experience is 'required' as such, you would not rejected just because you do not have work experience; you would benefit from having but not the other way around!</blockquote>

:) we are not on same page. This is what my cousin told me: When they review the applications they seperate the no work -exp aside. They will then go thru the lot and discard those who are strong but not great CVs. If there are great CVs those get shortlisted for consideration. But for the others the lack of work exp was a negative. That is why many law school websites state clearly that they strongly prefer expereince
quote
law01

We are pretty much on the same page here, the only thing I don't agree with you is that work experience is 'required' as such, you would not rejected just because you do not have work experience; you would benefit from having but not the other way around!


:) we are not on same page. This is what my cousin told me: When they review the applications they seperate the no work -exp aside. They will then go thru the lot and discard those who are strong but not great CVs. If there are great CVs those get shortlisted for consideration. But for the others the lack of work exp was a negative. That is why many law school websites state clearly that they strongly prefer expereince


Indeed some Universities such as NYU, Columbia and Yale require work experience. But I am certain that this is not the case with Harvard, as from the people I know none of them had work experience. Further to this, I contacted Harvard prior to applying, outlining my credentials but highlighting the fact that I don't have any work experience, they told me that I it does not matter and that I should still apply

<blockquote><blockquote>We are pretty much on the same page here, the only thing I don't agree with you is that work experience is 'required' as such, you would not rejected just because you do not have work experience; you would benefit from having but not the other way around!</blockquote>

:) we are not on same page. This is what my cousin told me: When they review the applications they seperate the no work -exp aside. They will then go thru the lot and discard those who are strong but not great CVs. If there are great CVs those get shortlisted for consideration. But for the others the lack of work exp was a negative. That is why many law school websites state clearly that they strongly prefer expereince</blockquote>

Indeed some Universities such as NYU, Columbia and Yale require work experience. But I am certain that this is not the case with Harvard, as from the people I know none of them had work experience. Further to this, I contacted Harvard prior to applying, outlining my credentials but highlighting the fact that I don't have any work experience, they told me that I it does not matter and that I should still apply
quote
imnc


Indeed some Universities such as NYU, Columbia and Yale require work experience.


Also Univ Chicago and Stanford. So pretty much most of the top 5 require some work exp.

As for harvard, I read that 72% of the present class has more than 2 years work. Dont forget that some countries it is very rare for lawyers with work exp to apply so to fulfil that country's quota someone without work exp may be taken and that increases the %. From countries where applicants with work apply, it is very much a problem if you do not have exp. Of course Harvard will not admit officially but the statistics point to that.

<blockquote>
Indeed some Universities such as NYU, Columbia and Yale require work experience. </blockquote>

Also Univ Chicago and Stanford. So pretty much most of the top 5 require some work exp.

As for harvard, I read that 72% of the present class has more than 2 years work. Dont forget that some countries it is very rare for lawyers with work exp to apply so to fulfil that country's quota someone without work exp may be taken and that increases the %. From countries where applicants with work apply, it is very much a problem if you do not have exp. Of course Harvard will not admit officially but the statistics point to that.
quote
lb.mx

Regarding Harvard's preferences, do you believe having a "above average" rating from LSAC may harm my chances of admission? I believe I have a stellar CV and great extracurricular activities, even being invited to join a group of foreign lawyers at Harvard by a member of its faculty, but the fact that I was rated "above average" keeps me up at night.

Regarding Harvard's preferences, do you believe having a "above average" rating from LSAC may harm my chances of admission? I believe I have a stellar CV and great extracurricular activities, even being invited to join a group of foreign lawyers at Harvard by a member of its faculty, but the fact that I was rated "above average" keeps me up at night.
quote
Inactive User

Hello dblai. In my "Track your status" section of Harvards webpage I also have the status of my recommendation letters as "no current status" however in comments it says that my application is complete so I'm sure the information is just outdated.

Does your application appears as complete in the comments section?


My status says "Application is complete" and this was updated on 14th Jan.

<blockquote>Hello dblai. In my "Track your status" section of Harvards webpage I also have the status of my recommendation letters as "no current status" however in comments it says that my application is complete so I'm sure the information is just outdated.

Does your application appears as complete in the comments section?</blockquote>

My status says "Application is complete" and this was updated on 14th Jan.
quote
Inactive User

Same here !

Same here !
quote
paxromana

We should expect the "Update Email" from HLS this week regarding the status of the Admission process.

We should expect the "Update Email" from HLS this week regarding the status of the Admission process.
quote
Inactive User

Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.

Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.
quote
paxromana

Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.


Going by the previous years' posts, there is a standard email which is sent out in the end of January saying that the admission process is on track (or something to that effect).

<blockquote>Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.</blockquote>

Going by the previous years' posts, there is a standard email which is sent out in the end of January saying that the admission process is on track (or something to that effect).
quote
law01

Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.


Going by the previous years' posts, there is a standard email which is sent out in the end of January saying that the admission process is on track (or something to that effect).


As far as I am aware Harvard make it explicitly clear that they WILL NOT send us any email at any point in regards to the admission process and therefore we shouls regularly check 'embark'

<blockquote><blockquote>Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.</blockquote>

Going by the previous years' posts, there is a standard email which is sent out in the end of January saying that the admission process is on track (or something to that effect).</blockquote>

As far as I am aware Harvard make it explicitly clear that they WILL NOT send us any email at any point in regards to the admission process and therefore we shouls regularly check 'embark'
quote
paxromana

Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.


Going by the previous years' posts, there is a standard email which is sent out in the end of January saying that the admission process is on track (or something to that effect).


As far as I am aware Harvard make it explicitly clear that they WILL NOT send us any email at any point in regards to the admission process and therefore we shouls regularly check 'embark'


FYI:

Ref 1: http://www.llm-guide.com/board/130036/6
(See posts from DDM, srsSL)

Ref 2: http://www.llm-guide.com/board/130036/9
(See MJ1989's post)

<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>Is it so? Does HLS send an update email as well? When I had last applied to Harvard in 2011, I never received an update email.</blockquote>

Going by the previous years' posts, there is a standard email which is sent out in the end of January saying that the admission process is on track (or something to that effect).</blockquote>

As far as I am aware Harvard make it explicitly clear that they WILL NOT send us any email at any point in regards to the admission process and therefore we shouls regularly check 'embark'</blockquote>

FYI:

Ref 1: http://www.llm-guide.com/board/130036/6
(See posts from DDM, srsSL)

Ref 2: http://www.llm-guide.com/board/130036/9
(See MJ1989's post)
quote
imnc

@dchatur

You applied twice in 3 years!? Mind sharing what made you reapply? chances of acceptance are low after a recent rejection.

@dchatur

You applied twice in 3 years!? Mind sharing what made you reapply? chances of acceptance are low after a recent rejection.
quote
llmhls

Hey, to let you knwo, when I applied last year we got in january or february an e-mail stating that we should apply for scholarhips etc. and that this does not mean anything for the proces

Hey, to let you knwo, when I applied last year we got in january or february an e-mail stating that we should apply for scholarhips etc. and that this does not mean anything for the proces
quote
paxromana

Hey, to let you knwo, when I applied last year we got in january or february an e-mail stating that we should apply for scholarhips etc. and that this does not mean anything for the proces


Are you by any chance the author of this blog? - http://hlsllm.tumblr.com/

<blockquote>Hey, to let you knwo, when I applied last year we got in january or february an e-mail stating that we should apply for scholarhips etc. and that this does not mean anything for the proces </blockquote>

Are you by any chance the author of this blog? - http://hlsllm.tumblr.com/
quote

Reply to Post

Related Law Schools

Cambridge, Massachusetts 1306 Followers 936 Discussions

Other Related Content

5 Questions for an LL.M. Student – David Lewis Rukiri

Article Mar 26, 2015

Harvard Law School, LL.M., 2014-2015