Admissions process:
錄取流程：

What does the admissions process of Cornell Law consist of, and how is an application rated?
康奈爾的錄取流程組成是什么樣的，申請(qǐng)如何被評(píng)價(jià)？

We have always used what some schools now call “full-file review”. This means that every part of the application is reviewed and taken into consideration during our selection process. This is nothing new to us. We have always done it because our general goal is to find students who will thrive both academically and as individuals in our community. Because law school applicants come from all walks of life and have very different academic and personal backgrounds, to do anything else would not give us the background we need to make good decisions.
我們采用很多學(xué)校采用的“全材料審理”，即申請(qǐng)材料的每一部分都會(huì)被審核并作為選拔過(guò)程的考慮依據(jù)。這并不是新鮮的事物。我們這樣做，因?yàn)槲覀兊闹饕繕?biāo)是找出能夠在學(xué)術(shù)上和社會(huì)實(shí)踐中都發(fā)達(dá)的學(xué)生。因?yàn)榉▽W(xué)院申請(qǐng)者來(lái)自各行各業(yè)，且有不同的學(xué)術(shù)與個(gè)人背景，做其他的任何事情不能給我們做決定所需的背景。

Does Cornell Law have an approximate hierarchy on what is most valuable for admissions: GPA, LSAT, etc?
康奈爾法學(xué)院有錄取最重要的指標(biāo)大概的分級(jí)嗎，比如GPA，LSAT？

It’s never as simple as a number and it’s different in different situations. For example, if someone has already shown that they are a great student through their work in a rigorous academic setting, the LSAT will be less important to us. On the other hand, if someone wasn’t the greatest student when they went to college ten years ago, we’ll be more interested in other indicia of probable academic success, like success in a job, a major accomplishment, or a high-end LSAT. We’re basically looking at everything that will help us predict an applicant’s ability to thrive academically and as a member of our community.
這不像數(shù)字那樣簡(jiǎn)單，而且在不同情況下也不一樣。比如，有的學(xué)生已經(jīng)通過(guò)嚴(yán)格的學(xué)術(shù)成就證明了他們的能力，那LSAT對(duì)我們來(lái)說(shuō)，就不是那么重要了。另一方面，如果這個(gè)申請(qǐng)者十年前上大學(xué)的時(shí)候，不是最優(yōu)秀的學(xué)生，我們會(huì)對(duì)其他的學(xué)術(shù)成功的指標(biāo)更感興趣，比如在工作中的成功，一個(gè)重要的成績(jī)，或者高端的LSAT分?jǐn)?shù)?；旧?，我們尋找指標(biāo)，幫我們?cè)u(píng)估這個(gè)學(xué)生未來(lái)的學(xué)術(shù)成就和作為我們一員的資格。


Is there any advantage to applying to the early admissions program?
如果早申請(qǐng)的話(huà)，有什么優(yōu)勢(shì)嗎？

The main advantage is that if an applicant gets into their dream school, they can instantly stop worrying and get on with the logistics of attendance. Unlike in the undergraduate situation, there is no selection edge that goes along with applying early decision/admission.
最主要的優(yōu)勢(shì)是，如果一個(gè)申請(qǐng)者進(jìn)入了他的理想學(xué)校，他就能立即停止擔(dān)心，并開(kāi)始準(zhǔn)備入學(xué)事宜。不像本科錄取，我們沒(méi)有早申請(qǐng)的額外選拔階段。

LSAT score:
LSAT分?jǐn)?shù)：
Many schools have adopted the policy of considering an applicant’s highest LSAT score when rating his or her application. What is Cornell’s view on multiple LSAT scores?
當(dāng)評(píng)價(jià)申請(qǐng)的時(shí)候，很多學(xué)校采取了考慮最高一次LSAT成績(jī)的政策?？的螤柺窃趺纯创啻纬煽?jī)的呢？


The American Bar Association, as part of its accreditation function, now asks law schools to use the highest LSAT score when computing their entering class LSAT median (and 25th/75th percentiles). This doesn’t affect how we review files, it only affects how we report to the ABA. If a person has taken the test multiple times, we look at all the scores and try to assess which is the most representative. If an applicant gives us reason to think a particular score is unreliable, we will take that into account. Remember, an LSAT score (despite appearances) is not some precise radar-like measure of an applicant’s ability to succeed in law school. It’s actually fairly mushy. Score differences of as much as 5-6 points don’t really make a big difference in the predictive validity of the test for any given individual.
美國(guó)律師協(xié)會(huì)現(xiàn)在請(qǐng)求法學(xué)院用最高的LSAT成績(jī)，當(dāng)他們計(jì)算LSAT中段成績(jī)的時(shí)候。這個(gè)并不影響我們的材料審核，只會(huì)影響我們給律師協(xié)會(huì)的報(bào)告。如果申請(qǐng)人參加了多次考試，我們會(huì)看所有成績(jī)，并試圖找出最有代表性的成績(jī)。如果申請(qǐng)人給我們?cè)蚴刮覀冋J(rèn)為某次分?jǐn)?shù)不可靠，我們也會(huì)把這點(diǎn)納入考慮。記住，LSAT分?jǐn)?shù)（不同于表象）不是精確衡量申請(qǐng)人在法學(xué)院成功能力的指標(biāo)。實(shí)際上，他相當(dāng)模糊。相差5到6分的分?jǐn)?shù)，并不是什么很大的區(qū)別。

Undergraduate GPA:
本科GPA：
How much will an upward grade trend positively influence the likelihood of admissions?
上升趨勢(shì)的本科成績(jī)對(duì)錄取成功率有多大影響？
(Laughing): a positive trend is always better than a negative one. But seriously, (and I know you may be tired of hearing this) it depends. We need to know what’s behind the trend. Was it because the applicant started taking easier or fewer classes? Was it because the applicant changed schools? Etc. Clearly if it reflects harder work, more focus, more maturity, or more facility, we’re going to view that in a positive way.
（笑）：一個(gè)上升的趨勢(shì)當(dāng)然好過(guò)一個(gè)下降的趨勢(shì)。但是，認(rèn)真地說(shuō)（我知道你可能都聽(tīng)煩了）看情況而定。我們需要知道這種趨勢(shì)的背后原因。是因?yàn)樯暾?qǐng)人選了更少的課程或者更容易的課程？是因?yàn)樯暾?qǐng)人轉(zhuǎn)學(xué)了嗎？等等。無(wú)疑地，如果這個(gè)趨勢(shì)反映了更努力的工作，更專(zhuān)心，更成熟，或者更熟練，我們會(huì)把這個(gè)看做正面的因素。

In what situations should an applicant include an addendum to explain periods of sub-par academic performance?
在什么情況下，申請(qǐng)者應(yīng)該準(zhǔn)備一份附錄，以解釋低水平的學(xué)術(shù)表現(xiàn)的時(shí)期？
I’d recommend including one for any period of obvious underperformance that can be explained by some external factor, like sickness or some other personal circumstance.
我建議如果有任何明顯的表現(xiàn)不好的時(shí)期，都應(yīng)該準(zhǔn)備相應(yīng)的解釋?zhuān)f(shuō)明是外部原因?qū)е碌?，比如生病或者其他的個(gè)人情況。

Applicants often wonder whether poor grades in their last semester after an early offer of admission could lead to the revoking of the offer. Can you shed some light on this matter?
申請(qǐng)人經(jīng)常擔(dān)心最后一學(xué)期的差成績(jī)導(dǎo)致之前的offer被收回，你可以闡述一下這個(gè)問(wèn)題嗎？
We wouldn’t do that unless it involved an issue of academic integrity, like an F received because of plagiarism. In cases where we need more evidence of an ability to succeed academically or where the applicant is making the case for giving positive weight to a strong upward trend, we’ll sometimes wait on a decision until we receive more up-to-date grades. So applicants who haven’t received a decision should always provide grade updates as they become available.
我們不會(huì)這么做，除非是因?yàn)閷W(xué)術(shù)道德的問(wèn)題，比如因?yàn)樽鞅椎昧艘粋€(gè)F。當(dāng)我們需要更多證據(jù)來(lái)判斷學(xué)生學(xué)術(shù)能力的情況下，或者申請(qǐng)者在努力爭(zhēng)取明顯的上升成績(jī)的時(shí)候，我們有時(shí)候會(huì)等到有最新成績(jī)的時(shí)候再做出決定。所以，沒(méi)有收到?jīng)Q定的申請(qǐng)人，應(yīng)該持續(xù)提供最新的成績(jī)。

Some undergraduate institutions or majors seem to be known for inflating or deflating their students’ grades. Is this possible inflation or deflation taken into consideration by the admissions committee?
一些本科學(xué)?；蛘邔?zhuān)業(yè)會(huì)把學(xué)生分打得很高或很低。這種抬分或者壓分的現(xiàn)象會(huì)納入錄取委員會(huì)的考慮嗎？
It’s hard to do this in a formal way. The Law School Admission Council gives us information that allows us to see a particular institution’s grading curve for graduates who have applied to law school, so we can usually get a rough imputed institutional “class rank” for applicants. However, when it comes to particular majors, we usually don’t get much hard and reliable information, unless it’s from a department whose grading curve is so out of line with the rest of the institution that its graduates would otherwise be disadvantaged.
這個(gè)很難通過(guò)正式的途徑評(píng)判。法學(xué)院錄取委員會(huì)會(huì)提供一些信息，讓我們了解到特定學(xué)校的評(píng)分曲線(xiàn)，這樣我們就可以大概估算申請(qǐng)者在這個(gè)學(xué)校的排名。但是如果具體到專(zhuān)業(yè)或者課程，我們通常沒(méi)有相關(guān)的可靠信息。如果某個(gè)系的評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和其他學(xué)校大相徑庭，他的畢業(yè)生就有可能會(huì)被低估。

How do you evaluate the transcripts of applicants from lesser-known or lower-tier undergraduate programs? Perhaps a weighting system and/or putting more weight upon the LSAT?
你們?cè)趺丛u(píng)價(jià)從稍差的學(xué)校來(lái)的申請(qǐng)者的成績(jī)單？會(huì)給他們的成績(jī)加權(quán)嗎或者把重心放到LSAT上？
We take every applicant on his or her own terms. Our sense is that there are strong students everywhere and our job is to identify them. As you can probably tell from my answers to the other questions, we strongly resist formulaic approaches to this kind of issue because they don’t account for the massive number of variables that can be involved in evaluating an applicant’s potential.
我們根據(jù)每個(gè)申請(qǐng)者自己的情況來(lái)判定。我們的常識(shí)是哪里都有很優(yōu)秀的學(xué)生，而我們的工作就是找出他們。你也可以從我對(duì)其他的問(wèn)題的回答中判斷出來(lái)，我們強(qiáng)烈抵制公式化的評(píng)審，因?yàn)樗麄儾荒芸剂吭谠u(píng)價(jià)學(xué)生潛力過(guò)程中的大量變數(shù)。

Personal Statement:
個(gè)人陳述：
The personal statement seems to be the part of the application that a student can most independently influence. Can you offer students any advice regarding writing the personal statement?
個(gè)人陳述似乎是整個(gè)申請(qǐng)中，學(xué)生最能夠做主的部分了。你能給學(xué)生一些建議，如何寫(xiě)個(gè)人陳述嗎？
I always advise students to treat the personal statement as if they were being offered a half-hour interview. You aren’t going to be able to cover everything, so pick something about yourself that you would want the interviewer to remember and that isn’t obvious from some other part of your application. Also, resist the urge to resort to contrivances that you think will help you stand out from the crowd. For example, don’t write your personal statement in rhyming couplets, or present yourself as a restaurant menu. You never want to make the reader of your application decide whether to admit you in spite of your personal statement.
我經(jīng)常建議學(xué)生把個(gè)人陳述看成是半個(gè)小時(shí)的面試。你不可能面面俱到，所以請(qǐng)選擇你最希望面試官記住的事情并且是你申請(qǐng)其他部分體現(xiàn)不出來(lái)的事情。同時(shí)，請(qǐng)克制采取某些你認(rèn)為能使你申請(qǐng)突出的手段。比如不要把你的個(gè)人陳述寫(xiě)成押韻的詩(shī)詞，或者把你自己用餐館菜單的形式展現(xiàn)出來(lái)。你永遠(yuǎn)不希望錄取委員會(huì)在不考慮你個(gè)人陳述的情況下，決定是否錄取你。

How do you view personal statements that briefly mention Cornell Law, but could be sent to other schools with a few adjustments?
你怎么看待一篇個(gè)人陳述，大概提到了康奈爾法學(xué)院，但是也可以在稍作修改后發(fā)到其他學(xué)校？
I don’t have a set view on it. If it’s a good personal statement, it will be good regardless of whether it mentions our law school. The same would be true if it’s a bad personal statement.
我對(duì)這個(gè)沒(méi)有特定的觀點(diǎn)。如果是一篇好的個(gè)人陳述，不管提沒(méi)提我們學(xué)校，都是好的文章。如果是不好的文章，不管提沒(méi)提我們都是不好的。

Could an applicant significantly improve his or her chances of admission by drafting a personal statement specifically for Cornell?
申請(qǐng)者是否能顯著增加錄取率，如果他為康奈爾專(zhuān)門(mén)寫(xiě)了一個(gè)個(gè)人陳述？
I don’t think so. A specific connection with our law school is not really what we’re after. We’re looking to get to know more about the person who’s applying so we can make an informed decision about his or her potential.
我不這么認(rèn)為。和學(xué)校有特定聯(lián)系，并不是我們追求的事情。我們希望能夠了解申請(qǐng)人的潛力，這樣我們才能做出信息充分的決定。

What is the admission committee’s view on diversity statements?
錄取委員會(huì)怎么看待多樣性陳述（Diversity Statement）？
We have offered the option for many, many years. Remember, we’ve always been a so-called “full-file-review” school and are, within reason, looking at the fullest possible range of information in making our decisions.
我們提供這一選擇很多年了。記住，我們一直被陳祚“全材料審理”的學(xué)校。由于這個(gè)原因，我們會(huì)考察盡可能多的信息，以做出決定。

Letters of Recommendation:
推薦信：
Applicants often have difficulty choosing and approaching potential recommenders. Can you offer some general advice regarding letters of recommendation?
申請(qǐng)人經(jīng)常在選擇和接近推薦人的時(shí)候存在困難。你能提供一些關(guān)于推薦信的大致建議嗎？
If you are still in school or are a recent graduate, get letters from teachers who know your work the best. Give them a copy of your resume, and maybe even of your transcript. They often don’t have the full context of your situation. Also be sure to give them plenty of time. If you’ve been out of school for awhile and recommendations from teachers are a challenge, try to get recommendations for people who know your work well enough to be able to relate it to your odds of success in a rigorous academic environment.
如果你還在學(xué)?；蛘呒磳厴I(yè)，請(qǐng)從對(duì)你的課業(yè)最了解的老師那要推薦信。給他們一份你的簡(jiǎn)歷，甚至可以包括成績(jī)單。他們通常對(duì)你的情況沒(méi)有全盤(pán)的了解。同時(shí)，請(qǐng)確定給他們充足的時(shí)間。如果你已經(jīng)從學(xué)校出來(lái)很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間，很難要到推薦信了，請(qǐng)從對(duì)你的工作了解足夠多的人那要推薦信，因?yàn)樗軌蛟u(píng)價(jià)你在嚴(yán)格的學(xué)術(shù)環(huán)境里的成功率。

Does the admissions committee come across letters of recommendation that actually hurt an applicant’s chances of admission? If so, what sort of letter should be avoided?
錄取委員會(huì)是否見(jiàn)過(guò)對(duì)申請(qǐng)人產(chǎn)生損害的推薦信？如果有的話(huà)，哪類(lèi)推薦信是應(yīng)該避免的？
We definitely see these every year. If a recommender tells you they can’t write you a recommendation, or would prefer not to, don’t insist!!! You really wouldn’t believe what can happen.
我們每年都會(huì)見(jiàn)到這種推薦信。如果一個(gè)推薦人說(shuō)他不能幫你寫(xiě)推薦信，或者不愿意寫(xiě)，不要堅(jiān)持?。。∧阏娴牟粫?huì)相信會(huì)發(fā)生什么事情。

International Law Program and Joint Degree:
Cornell puts a lot of emphasis on the strength of their international law program and also the joint J.D. and Master en Droit. What is the acceptance rate of Cornell Law School students who apply for this program and what unique opportunities are available to them?
This unique program will receive around 100 applications from U.S. applicants in a typical year. We’re able to admit 2-4, depending on the year. Acceptance requires not only a strong academic and personal background, but also fluency in French. This is because after two years at Cornell, participants in this program spend the next two years at the University of Paris I (Pantheon-Sorbonne) in French law classes. At the conclusion of the degree, participants have the academic credentials necessary to become members of the Bar in both the U.S. and in France. This is just one of the very large number of opportunities to study overseas offered by our international legal studies program.
Because Cornell Law School stresses their strength in international law, does the Cornell admissions process taken into account whether an applicant says he or she wants to do international law when applying?
It’s true that we’re known for our strength in international legal studies and comparative law, but we’re also known for the richness and breadth of our overall curriculum. Whether or not an applicant is interested in international law, we still use the same standards that we apply to every applicant.

Location:
地理位置：
What are the advantage and disadvantages to being approximately 200 miles from the major legal center in the country?
離這個(gè)國(guó)家主要的法律中心只有200英里的距離，是怎樣的優(yōu)勢(shì)和劣勢(shì)呢？
The good thing is that we’re just a 4 hour drive from NYC. The bad thing is that we’re a 4 hour drive from NYC. We have a lot of students who consider themselves “city people” and are worried about what it will be like in Ithaca. I can assure you that they have no problem adjusting. Remember, Cornell University has 19,000 students, a very large number of whom are graduate and professional students from around the world. In that kind of environment, there is always something to do and/or a group you can relate to. More importantly, our “city people” graduates routinely end up telling us that since law is essentially an urban profession, they really appreciate the opportunity they’ve had to spend several years enjoying Ithaca’s non-urban lifestyle before re-engaging urban life as a lawyer.
好處是，我們開(kāi)車(chē)到紐約市只需要4個(gè)小時(shí)。壞處是我們里紐約有4個(gè)小時(shí)的車(chē)程。我們很多學(xué)生自認(rèn)為是“城里人”并且擔(dān)心伊薩卡（康奈爾大學(xué)所在城市）的情況。我可以向你保證他們沒(méi)有任何適應(yīng)的問(wèn)題。記住，康奈爾有19000名學(xué)生，其中很多是從世界各地來(lái)的研究生。在這種環(huán)境下，你永遠(yuǎn)可以找到志同道合的人。更重要的是，我們的“城里人”畢業(yè)生，告訴我們由于法律行業(yè)主要是在大城市工作。他們很高興有機(jī)會(huì)能夠在伊薩卡這樣的非城市的條件下，生活數(shù)年，再返回城市并成為一名律師。

Given Ithaca’s reputation for being somewhat isolated and quiet, what does the law school do to ensure that the students have activities to participate in outside of the realm of law?
因?yàn)橐了_卡一直被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)比較孤立和安靜的城市，作為一個(gè)法學(xué)院，怎么保障學(xué)生有足夠的法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)外的活動(dòng)參與呢？
I addressed the size and diversity of Cornell University in a previous answer. This definitely spills over to the city of Ithaca, which is constantly rated as one of the most desirable and interesting small cities in the country. So, the law school doesn’t have to do a lot to ensure that students have a life outside the walls of the law school. It happens naturally because the opportunities are there and because we admit students who will definitely take advantage of those opportunities.
我在上一個(gè)回答里提到了康奈爾的學(xué)生數(shù)量和多樣性。這明確地超過(guò)了伊薩卡這個(gè)城市的范疇。即使伊薩卡本身，也一直被評(píng)為最令人向往和感興趣的小城市。所以，法學(xué)院本身并不做太多的工作讓學(xué)生參加學(xué)業(yè)外的活動(dòng)。這些都是自然發(fā)生的事情，因?yàn)閷W(xué)生有很多機(jī)會(huì)，而且我們錄取的學(xué)生都是善于利用這些機(jī)會(huì)的人。

The law school ranking by US News:
US News法學(xué)院排名：
Since 1996, US News has ranked the Cornell Law School Program from as low as thirteenth to as high as tied for tenth with the latest ranking being twelfth in the nation (tied with Duke University). What is your opinion of the US News ranking of law schools in general and the ranking of Cornell Law School in particular? Have rankings influenced admissions decisions as a whole to become more numbers focused?
自1996年以來(lái)，US News將康納爾法學(xué)院最低排到過(guò)13名，最高排進(jìn)前10，最新的排名是12名（和Duke平齊）。你怎么看待US New的排名，以及對(duì)康奈爾的排名？這個(gè)排名是否影響了錄取決定？
I try to think of the U.S. News rankings much like I think of the LSAT score. It’s ok as a rough guide, but unfortunately, it is scored in such a way that it is viewed by applicants and others as if it had scalpel-like precision. When an applicant chooses a law school based on the fact that it is ranked one or two spots above another school that would better fit their needs, that choice is a bad thing. The U.S. News ranking is simply not that precise. I was the Dean of Admissions here before U.S. News started doing rankings, and I definitely remember feeling more flexibility to take academic risks on promising applicants who, for example, had found themselves late in life or who hadn’t had all the advantages that most of our applicants have had. The U.S. News rankings have changed that somewhat. Unfortunately, what they have influenced much more are educational decisions being made by the academic leaders of some law schools. Many Deans are now fairly unabashed about “gaming” the rankings through actions that are rankings-driven at best and ethically bankrupt at worst.
我對(duì)US News的排名和對(duì)LSAT分?jǐn)?shù)的看法類(lèi)似。它可以作為一個(gè)粗略的指導(dǎo)，但不幸地，很多申請(qǐng)者把排名看得如同外科手術(shù)般的精準(zhǔn)。如果一個(gè)申請(qǐng)者選擇了一個(gè)法學(xué)院，僅因?yàn)檫@個(gè)法學(xué)院比另一個(gè)學(xué)校在排名上靠前1,2位，那么這個(gè)決定是一個(gè)很不好的決定。US News的排名沒(méi)有那么準(zhǔn)確。在US News開(kāi)始排名之前，我就是錄取委員會(huì)的主任了。我清楚地記得，以前學(xué)生在選擇學(xué)術(shù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)時(shí)，更加靈活。他們中的一些在后來(lái)的生活中找到了自己，而其他一些人沒(méi)有。但是US News從某種程度上改變了這一狀況。不幸的是，他們影響更多的是，一些法學(xué)院的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)作出的決定。很多主任幾乎是厚臉皮地玩排名的“游戲”，雖然他們獲得了很好的排名，但在道德上，他們一無(wú)是處。

Waitlist:
候補(bǔ)名單：
Many applicants view the waitlist as dreaded territory. At Cornell, how likely is it that a waitlist spot will turn into an offer of admission?
許多申請(qǐng)者將候補(bǔ)名單看做是一個(gè)令人懼怕的領(lǐng)域。在康奈爾，候補(bǔ)名單上的位置有多大可能性轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)檎降匿浫∧兀?/em>
One thing about our waiting list that is different from most is that we offer interviews to everyone on the list. This gives us a real close-up view of the people on the list and this enriches our decision-making. For the last several years, our yield on initial offers has been very strong, which hasn’t left much room for applicants on our waiting list. This isn’t something we try to make happen, but sometimes it does. The anecdotal evidence at Cornell is that students who come in off the waiting list often do very well.
我們和其他大部分學(xué)校不同的地方是，我們會(huì)給候補(bǔ)名單上的每個(gè)人提供面試的機(jī)會(huì)。這可以讓我們和名單上的人近距離接觸，并豐富我們做決定所需的信息。在過(guò)去幾年里，接受我們錄取的人非常多，導(dǎo)致沒(méi)有多少空位給候補(bǔ)名單上的學(xué)生。這不是我們想讓他發(fā)生的事情，但確實(shí)發(fā)生了。一個(gè)軼聞或證據(jù)是，很多從候補(bǔ)名單中進(jìn)入康納爾的學(xué)生都非常優(yōu)秀。

How does Cornell view letters of continued interest (LOCI) that are sent to the admissions committee by applicants on the waitlist?
康奈爾怎么看待LOCI（候補(bǔ)名單上的申請(qǐng)者發(fā)給錄取委員會(huì)表明錄取意愿的信）呢？
We prefer applicants who stay active in the process. If we don’t hear from someone after they’ve been placed on our waiting list, we make an assumption that they’ve decided to attend elsewhere.
我們希望申請(qǐng)者在這個(gè)過(guò)程中保持活躍。如果我們很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間沒(méi)有聽(tīng)到候補(bǔ)者的反饋，我們會(huì)假設(shè)他已經(jīng)去了別的學(xué)校。

Transfer applicants:
轉(zhuǎn)學(xué)生：
What do you look for in transfer students? Is academic success in the first year of law school the only important factor?
你們?cè)趺纯创D(zhuǎn)學(xué)的學(xué)生呢？第一年的學(xué)術(shù)成就是唯一的指標(biāo)嗎？
First year academic success and a couple of strong recommendations are the main factors. But, we’re also interested in other aspects of the applicant’s background that will make him or her a valuable member of the community.
第一年的學(xué)術(shù)成就和幾封強(qiáng)有力的推薦信是主要指標(biāo)。但是，我們也對(duì)申請(qǐng)人的其他背景感興趣，只要這些背景能使他成為我們有價(jià)值的一員。

以上的文章內(nèi)容招生官揭秘法學(xué)院錄取流程及標(biāo)準(zhǔn)就是小編最近整理出來(lái)的，大家可以互相討論吐槽發(fā)表自己的觀點(diǎn)哦~！查看更多招生 揭秘 法學(xué)院 錄取 流程 標(biāo)準(zhǔn) Admissions 相關(guān)文章請(qǐng)?jiān)L問(wèn)學(xué)校百科網(wǎng)