We specialize in hard to find items
All Categories
The Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions: Straight Advice on Essays, Resumes, Interviews, and More
Share Tweet
*Price and Stocks may change without prior notice
*Packaging of actual item may differ from photo shown
- Electrical items MAY be 110 volts.
- 7 Day Return Policy
- All products are genuine and original
About The Ivey Guide To Law School Admissions: Straight
Product Description As dean of admissions at the University of Chicago Law School, Anna Ivey decided the fate of thousands of law school applicants. In this book-the first of its kind by a former law school admissions officer-she draws on her expertise to cover topics from the application and the essay to the interview and the recommendations, touching on hot-button issues like how much the LSAT, ethnicity, and age really matter. Offering an insider's advice on how to produce the very best application, this guide gives straight answers to questions such as: • What kind of essay should I write to set me apart from the rest of the pack? • Should I explain my low LSAT score, my D in chemistry, my attention deficit disorder, my time in rehab? • Is law school worth the debt I'll face when I graduate? Full of invaluable examples and anecdotes about real admissions decisions, The Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions is certain to become the new bible for would-be law students everywhere. About the Author ANNA IVEY earned her law degree at the University of Chicago Law School, where she later served as dean of admissions. Ivey now runs a successful admissions counseling firm for college, business school, and law school applicants, helping clients make the most compelling sales pitch for admission. She divides her time between Boston, Massachusetts, and New Orleans, Louisiana. Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 1 Straight Answers: Getting Inside the Head of an Admissions Officer All law school admissions officers face a dilemma. There are certain things they wish they could tell applicants because it would make their own lives so much easier, but they can't say, "In all honesty, we only spend about five minutes on each file, so you'd better cut to the chase," or, "Please, for the love of god, don't make me read another essay about endangered guppies." And they certainly can't say, "Don't bother applying with a 160 LSAT...unless you're a minority and then we'll throw in a scholarship." No one will risk getting fired or sued over that, not to mention the PR disaster that would ensue. So they grumble to themselves, prop open their eyelids with matchsticks, and keep reading thousands upon thousands of essays about endangered guppies, year in and year out. How do I know this? Because that was my daily life when I was dean of admissions at the University of Chicago Law School. I denied so many applicants while thinking, "If only they knew!" Picture this, a typical day for me as an admissions officer (and for just about every other admissions officer): I'm surrounded by hundreds of files stacked on every flat surface in my office. I have, on average, five minutes to read each one and make a decision on its fate. I've already worked my way through more than a thousand files this month, and I've read more than thirty today. I crack open the next one on top of the pile, a file belonging to a woman named Sarah. I scan her application form, her LSAT scores, and her college transcript in less than a minute and conclude that her GPA is just below our GPA median, and that her LSAT score is just above our LSAT median. As dean of admissions, I could easily write an "A" for accept or a "D" for deny at the top of Sarah's file based on this hard data alone, so the fate of her application depends entirely on the remaining four minutes I spend scanning the "soft stuff" of her application: her essay, her recommendations, her résumé, and her addendum. Four minutes, maybe less. That's it. Most applicants go horribly wrong here-not because the soft stuff of their files suggests that they can't handle law school or reveals them to be arrogant jerks (although that happens, too, from time to time). They go wrong because they have failed to persuade me that I should choose them over thousands of other applicants with acceptable numbers who I know could succeed at my law school. Sarah fails because she didn't w
