Why do people here make WUSTL out to be worse than...

[beachbum]

Come on now, a graph of a cycle in progress? There are like 2 rejections on that graph. Surely you can see how silly that is.

Look at last year's graphs for WUSTL, GWU, UIUC, and IU-B and tell me there's a significant difference.

Ok... here's last year's WUSTL graph: http://washu.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/0910/

Sure seems to tell a similar story, no? Also noticed that a lot of the splitters who were WLed (I don't see any that were rejected) turned in their apps late.

I'm not going to include the graphs for Illinois or Indiana (or Minn, for that matter) because they do the exact same thing as WUSTL. And I'll be the first to acknowledge this. But I think WUSTL gets more of the hate for the reasons above.

Here's the graph for GW (last cycle): http://gw.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/0910/

It appears less extreme than WUSTL. It also seems that WUSTL is giving splitters significantly more money than GW, which goes back to my original argument.

I mean, it looks pretty similar to me. Pretty clear LSAT wall with a ton of acceptances up and down in terms of GPA, including some extremely low GPAs (sub-3.0). WUSTL also gives a shitload more money than GWU across the board.

I mean I get the argument, right? Every school's students either fall above, at, or below their GPA median. You're saying WUSTL's "below median" students tend to be more "below median" than other peer schools, implying that they don't really care about anything but their medians (i.e. their ranking), so it doesn't matter to them whether a student is 3.6 or 2.6 if they're gonna bring the median down.

But it just doesn't play out like that in reality. Look at the 25% percentile for GPA for some peer schools:

BU: 3.5
GWU: 3.41
Fordham: 3.37
Emory: 3.37
ND: 3.36
BC: 3.34
WUSTL: 3.3
Minn: 3.3
IU-B: 3.26
UCD: 3.23
UIUC: 3.2

WUSTL is on the lower end, but not noticeably so. It's on par with schools like BC and UCD, neither of which are labeled "splitter-friendly" on these forums. I just don't think these hordes of 170/2.5 slackers that you think are filling the classrooms at WUSTL exist...

That may or may not be true, but we're talking about WUSTL's reputation on TLS. And it seems to me that those types of applicants are disproportionately associated with WUSTL around here.

[MrAnon]

Whether splitters split because they slacked, had medical reasons, or were in engineering programs, in the final analysis student quality of someone with a 2.5 GPA is on the lowest end of the spectrum. Plenty of other people in college were smart enough not to slack, were able to persevere through difficult circumstances or wisely take time off, or were clever enough not to pick a major that would leave them with a C+ average and the only option being law school.

[fatduck]

Come on now, a graph of a cycle in progress? There are like 2 rejections on that graph. Surely you can see how silly that is.

Look at last year's graphs for WUSTL, GWU, UIUC, and IU-B and tell me there's a significant difference.

Ok... here's last year's WUSTL graph: http://washu.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/0910/

Sure seems to tell a similar story, no? Also noticed that a lot of the splitters who were WLed (I don't see any that were rejected) turned in their apps late.

I'm not going to include the graphs for Illinois or Indiana (or Minn, for that matter) because they do the exact same thing as WUSTL. And I'll be the first to acknowledge this. But I think WUSTL gets more of the hate for the reasons above.

Here's the graph for GW (last cycle): http://gw.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/0910/

It appears less extreme than WUSTL. It also seems that WUSTL is giving splitters significantly more money than GW, which goes back to my original argument.

I mean, it looks pretty similar to me. Pretty clear LSAT wall with a ton of acceptances up and down in terms of GPA, including some extremely low GPAs (sub-3.0). WUSTL also gives a shitload more money than GWU across the board.

I mean I get the argument, right? Every school's students either fall above, at, or below their GPA median. You're saying WUSTL's "below median" students tend to be more "below median" than other peer schools, implying that they don't really care about anything but their medians (i.e. their ranking), so it doesn't matter to them whether a student is 3.6 or 2.6 if they're gonna bring the median down.

But it just doesn't play out like that in reality. Look at the 25% percentile for GPA for some peer schools:

BU: 3.5
GWU: 3.41
Fordham: 3.37
Emory: 3.37
ND: 3.36
BC: 3.34
WUSTL: 3.3
Minn: 3.3
IU-B: 3.26
UCD: 3.23
UIUC: 3.2

WUSTL is on the lower end, but not noticeably so. It's on par with schools like BC and UCD, neither of which are labeled "splitter-friendly" on these forums. I just don't think these hordes of 170/2.5 slackers that you think are filling the classrooms at WUSTL exist...

That may or may not be true, but we're talking about WUSTL's reputation on TLS. And it seems to me that those types of applicants are disproportionately associated with WUSTL around here.

I think high-lsat/super-low-gpa people are very over-represented on TLS, and that could be part of the problem. Probably because most people with terrible GPAs and outstanding LSAT scores have some issue that caused their terrible GPA, and so they come here asking about how to write addenda, and what the best application strategies are, etc.

Hate splitters if you want, but hating WUSTL for being a slacker-haven just doesn't seem to be grounded in reality. It's just weird to see otherwise rational people do it, not just people like MrAnon who troll the same boring schtick in every thread.

[TatteredDignity]

I don't have anything very substantive to add to this- I just want to say, as a 2.4/175 who was an idiot/slacker until the age of 23, I'm very grateful that WUSTL has the money to be generous toward people who might do well with a second chance.

[JCougar]

The number one person in our class after first semester is a super splitter. I had a uGPA of 2.95, and his was far lower than mine.

[beachbum]

I think high-lsat/super-low-gpa people are very over-represented on TLS, and that could be part of the problem. Probably because most people with terrible GPAs and outstanding LSAT scores have some issue that caused their terrible GPA, and so they come here asking about how to write addenda, and what the best application strategies are, etc.

Hate splitters if you want, but hating WUSTL for being a slacker-haven just doesn't seem to be grounded in reality. It's just weird to see otherwise rational people do it, not just people like MrAnon who troll the same boring schtick in every thread.

Eh, I personally don't think it's right to hate on splitters. If we accept that schools play the game, we should accept that applicants can play the game, too. As splitters, we knew what we had to do (ace the LSAT), and we proved our worth. And fortunately for us, there's schools like WUSTL who are very receptive to our awesome test-taking abilities.

But still, I do think this (splitter-hatin, or at least hatin on using splitters to game the rankings) goes on, and I think it's a big part of why WUSTL gets a bad rap. I can understand the rationale behind it: if I busted my ass for four years to make it into a respectable law school, I might be a little annoyed that some asshole with a 170 and a shitty GPA (and there are a lot of them on TLS) is getting an offer from a top-20 school. But then I would remember that I need to retake.

[tinlawman]

Whether splitters split because they slacked, had medical reasons, or were in engineering programs, in the final analysis student quality of someone with a 2.5 GPA is on the lowest end of the spectrum. Plenty of other people in college were smart enough not to slack, were able to persevere through difficult circumstances or wisely take time off, or were clever enough not to pick a major that would leave them with a C+ average and the only option being law school.

For what it's worth, I majored in biology and minored in business at a school where the biology dept is not nearly as highly respected as the business school. I took 6 different business classes and got an "A" in all of them while having a "C" average in biology. Not only does that say I should have majored in business (F me ), but it also shows that classes in one field of study can be drastically easier than classes in another field. Because I majored in biology doesn't make me a "student on the lowest end of the spectrum." I would love to go head-to-head with some 3.9/162 student who majored in communications.

[BlueDiamond]

What's WUSTL?

[Hannibal]

What's WUSTL?

It's a new dance move. You lay down for 20 seconds then get up and do a backflip.

[FuManChusco]

Just consider for a moment the type of special person who earns a 2.5 GPA in a U.S. college.

--ImageRemoved--

lol. plus 2.5 is close to being a straw man. there's only one person on LSN below a 2.7 for WUSTL. it's mostly the 2.8-3.0 crowd, and every profile i've clicked so far either was either an engineering degree or had some kind of medical hardship.

haha, my shameful dot on WUSTL's LSN page is fueling this thread.

[seriously????]

Perhaps there's a stigma because the high gpa students massively outnumber the high lsat students...

I would think that high GPA students tend to be the hard working anal types whereas low GPA types tend to be lazy shits who don't give a fuck. I could definitely see the former group being mad at the latter for finding a way into the same position through a lot less work.

yeah, and that's a nerdy/uptight reaction. Splitters paid the price, they can't or rarely get into t14 schools, that is punishment enough. There are several difficult majors out there as well, and many more easy majors, where little work is needed to get high gpas. This way of thinking could go even further and claim that kids who went to non-prestigious UG's or took easy majors should also be shut out from good schools. If you got a high gpa and see splitters in your same law school, then you should be relieved and think you will get better grades than them.
I'm pretty sure splitters can't get into med school, nor phd programs. At least let us get into some form of higher learning, even though we may have partied too hard in our late teens and early twenties and thought our educational system was messed up.

[seriously????]

and further, didn't any of you realize how important standardized tests were in high school? take a kid with a 1250 SAT, lots of strong softs, and an A average vs. a kid with no softs, a B average, but a 1500 on the SAT, who's going to the ivey league? (and yeah, I'm old, so I have no idea what these scores equate to with the modern test.)

[Kabuo]

Ok, just want to chime in here because I'm so sick of the combative type of anti-splitterism. If you are a reverse splitter, well you're probably slightly worse off than a splitter, but I don't judge you. If you have a high GPA and LSAT, bully for you. Why can't we leave it at that? Do the more militant reverse splitters seriously think they're smarter than me because they have a 3.9 and took classes seriously? I barely gave a fuck, and I regret it, but I did study like hell for the LSAT, and I'm glad some schools can respect that. Like someone said above, I pity the fool with the 162/3.9 who thinks he's going to outperform me in law school. Maybe he will, but it won't be because of some fundamental character flaw or stupidity on my part. I fucked around in UG, and I regret it. But a high GPA in a totally different field of study at a totally different school looking down on a low GPA is even stupider than me looking down on a 168 because I got a 172. Let's just never talk about it again.

Also, I just finished my 9 hour drive to St Louis and will be at ASW tomorrow. Yay WUSTL. Or Wash U I guess, now that I'm here.

[Sandro]

Anti splitter people are probably worse than gunners. Their rage that others with lower gpas but who do better on THE BIGGEST part of law school admissions have an advantage over them is very odd.

The best was a guy named T14hopeful , who called everyone with below a 3.5 lazy and assumed he would dominate LS because "half" of his class were these people. He then explained he had no time to study for the LSAT - he was too busy getting a 3.8 !!

[beachbum]

TBF, I think everyone is stupid regardless of numbers and will soon be crushed under my mad law skillz, son. Word to your mother.

[rman1201]

Anti splitter people are probably worse than gunners. Their rage that others with lower gpas but who do better on THE BIGGEST part of law school admissions have an advantage over them is very odd.

The best was a guy named T14hopeful , who called everyone with below a 3.5 lazy and assumed he would dominate LS because "half" of his class were these people. He then explained he had no time to study for the LSAT - he was too busy getting a 3.8 !!

Lol I remember that thread.
After going hard science -> liberal arts, I can say no liberal arts major ever has the right to talk down to anyone not in liberal arts.
Advanced math is hell. Try dealing with foreign TAs with accents so thick you have no idea what they're saying, horrendous handwriting so you can't even make out what they write on the board, classes full of hardcore gunners who make you feel like an idiot, and of course the actual subject of abstract math. Hours and hours of studying a day just to pull a C.
Liberal Arts? I managed a 3.8 each semester with, at most, 15 mins of reading prior to each exam.
The two are just in no way comparable, no matter how much you rocked that Gen Ed class in Algebra and Physical Science.

[fatduck]

Anti splitter people are probably worse than gunners. Their rage that others with lower gpas but who do better on THE BIGGEST part of law school admissions have an advantage over them is very odd.

The best was a guy named T14hopeful , who called everyone with below a 3.5 lazy and assumed he would dominate LS because "half" of his class were these people. He then explained he had no time to study for the LSAT - he was too busy getting a 3.8 !!

Lol I remember that thread.
After going hard science -> liberal arts, I can say no liberal arts major ever has the right to talk down to anyone not in liberal arts.
Advanced math is hell. Try dealing with foreign TAs with accents so thick you have no idea what they're saying, horrendous handwriting so you can't even make out what they write on the board, classes full of hardcore gunners who make you feel like an idiot, and of course the actual subject of abstract math. Hours and hours of studying a day just to pull a C.
Liberal Arts? I managed a 3.8 each semester with, at most, 15 mins of reading prior to each exam.
The two are just in no way comparable, no matter how much you rocked that Gen Ed class in Algebra and Physical Science.

i find it really hard to believe that gunners in law school can possibly be worse than the aspy fucks in my advanced mathematics courses. there's just no way.

[tinlawman]

Anti splitter people are probably worse than gunners. Their rage that others with lower gpas but who do better on THE BIGGEST part of law school admissions have an advantage over them is very odd.

The best was a guy named T14hopeful , who called everyone with below a 3.5 lazy and assumed he would dominate LS because "half" of his class were these people. He then explained he had no time to study for the LSAT - he was too busy getting a 3.8 !!

Lol I remember that thread.
After going hard science -> liberal arts, I can say no liberal arts major ever has the right to talk down to anyone not in liberal arts.
Advanced math is hell. Try dealing with foreign TAs with accents so thick you have no idea what they're saying, horrendous handwriting so you can't even make out what they write on the board, classes full of hardcore gunners who make you feel like an idiot, and of course the actual subject of abstract math. Hours and hours of studying a day just to pull a C.
Liberal Arts? I managed a 3.8 each semester with, at most, 15 mins of reading prior to each exam.
The two are just in no way comparable, no matter how much you rocked that Gen Ed class in Algebra and Physical Science.

What exactly is a gunner? Also, awesome avatar. I saw a couple of your posts in other threads and didn't realize what it was until I just watched that episode again last night.

[rman1201]

Also TBF, Poli Sci majors don't get enough credit here. That does seem like one of the tougher LA majors (at least if you go into Comparative Politics). I'll be the first to admit my beloved Psych degree is hands down one of the easiest majors though (With Biopsych/Neuroscience exceptions)

Edit:
Generally a gunner is someone who tries too hard, 'guns' to be the top of the class, and makes an ass of themselves in the process by questioning/discussing with the professor on every single thing.
And thanks, it was the most obscure avatar I could think of (awesome show though)

[09042014]

Also TBF, Poli Sci majors don't get enough credit here. That does seem like one of the tougher LA majors (at least if you go into Comparative Politics). I'll be the first to admit my beloved Psych degree is hands down one of the easiest majors though (With Biopsych/Neuroscience exceptions)

Are you fucking kidding me?

[Grizz]

and further, didn't any of you realize how important standardized tests were in high school? take a kid with a 1250 SAT, lots of strong softs, and an A average vs. a kid with no softs, a B average, but a 1500 on the SAT, who's going to the ivey league? (and yeah, I'm old, so I have no idea what these scores equate to with the modern test.)

Today? Neither.

[Blindmelon]

To drive the point home, here are some schools' 19-30 US News rankings versus their ordinal Big Law placement rankings.

WUSTL 19/24 (-5)
Minnesota 22/35 (-13)
Indiana 27/50+ (-23)
UC Davis 28/39 (-11)
UNC 28/48 (-20)

It seems a bit ignorant to say WUSTL's placement ranking is so much worse than its USN ranking, when other schools ranked right behind it appear to "game the rankings" to a much larger extent.

BC/BU Biglaw Placement: 34.6%
WUSTL: 27.5%
Minnesota 19.4%.

Difference between BU/BC and WUSTL - BU/BC up by 7.1%.
Difference between WUSTL and Minnesota - 8.1%.

So 8.1% difference makes WUSTL massively better than Minnesota, but 7.1% difference is only slight?

Also, using your "basic math", BU/BC place 26% better than WUSTL! WOWZA!!! So you're telling me, BU/BC >>>> WUSTL >>>>>> Minnesota?

I agree!

[framboozer]

and further, didn't any of you realize how important standardized tests were in high school? take a kid with a 1250 SAT, lots of strong softs, and an A average vs. a kid with no softs, a B average, but a 1500 on the SAT, who's going to the ivey league? (and yeah, I'm old, so I have no idea what these scores equate to with the modern test.)

That's EXACTLY my older bro. 1500 on the SAT when it was out of 1600. No studying or prep for it at all. He was content to coast with B's. But no Ivy League for him.

Anyway, I can't explain why I find this thread so fascinating. I guess it's just a very relevant issue. I definitely had a much higher opinion of WUSTL before coming to TLS, and after reading this, a lot of that respect is coming back.

[FuManChusco]

To drive the point home, here are some schools' 19-30 US News rankings versus their ordinal Big Law placement rankings.

WUSTL 19/24 (-5)
Minnesota 22/35 (-13)
Indiana 27/50+ (-23)
UC Davis 28/39 (-11)
UNC 28/48 (-20)

It seems a bit ignorant to say WUSTL's placement ranking is so much worse than its USN ranking, when other schools ranked right behind it appear to "game the rankings" to a much larger extent.

BC/BU Biglaw Placement: 34.6%
WUSTL: 27.5%
Minnesota 19.4%.

Difference between BU/BC and WUSTL - BU/BC up by 7.1%.
Difference between WUSTL and Minnesota - 8.1%.

So 8.1% difference makes WUSTL massively better than Minnesota, but 7.1% difference is only slight?

Also, using your "basic math", BU/BC place 26% better than WUSTL! WOWZA!!! So you're telling me, BU/BC >>>> WUSTL >>>>>> Minnesota?

I agree!

lulz.

[romothesavior]

The most legitimate complaint about WUSTL that I hear on TLS is that our NLJ placement lags our ranking. IMO, if you want to say we're overrated, then that's a legit argument. However, I'll add two things to this: 1) we've never been much of a biglaw school, but our numbers have been trending upward relative to our peers over the past 5-10 years, and 2) we aren't the only school in the T20-30 that lags behind our NLJ placement, and the lag isn't even that great (+5). Like Attorney pointed out, plenty of our "peers" do even worse compared to their ranking, so why are we the school that gets singled out for this the most?

And if you want to criticize us for our things like our student body strength or giving out too much scholarship money, then... cool story bro?

If you can get good scholly money to go to WUSTL and it is a school that can help you accomplish your goals, consider going here. If you have cheaper/better options elsewhere, consider choosing those. Be realistic about your odds and your job prospects before coming here (or any other school for that matter). It is really as simple as that.

/thread, because it is kinda ridiculous that we've spent 5 pages on a topic that comes up over and over and over when there are plenty of other schools that we can say the same types of stuff about. Go piss on Emory or IUB or ND for a change.