ED for Splitters

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
okash
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:47 pm

ED for Splitters

Postby okash » Mon Jul 05, 2010 1:50 pm

I'm looking at a 2.9 gpa and aiming for a 170 LSAT. Solid softs, great work experience (started own company), getting good LOR's. My question is where should us socially inclined college grads be looking for ED? I've been hearing a lot for NU, Penn, Georgetown, etc. Is this right? Anywhere else? Also, am I wasting paper doing ED with NYU?

If all else fails with law school, I guess I'll have to marry well!

Thanks.

sumus romani
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 6:04 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby sumus romani » Mon Jul 05, 2010 1:55 pm

Sorry, but NYU would not be a good use of your ed. Look to NU and V. Look closely at timelines, and you might be in a position to ED at more than one school (in serial order, not simultaneously).

okash
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:47 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby okash » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:07 pm

Thanks. Figured as much for NYU. Strongly considering NU. What about Penn?

User avatar
Encyclopedia Brown
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:25 am

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby Encyclopedia Brown » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:15 pm

NYU might be too much of a reach (it was for me with similar numbers), and even Penn's a little out of your league. UVA, NU, and GULC are places you might consider EDing.

If I were you, with your numbers and work experience, I would ED Northwestern. If you like UVA better, you could ED there first thing (they get back to you within two weeks), and if they don't take you, THEN ED Northwestern. And even then, if NU didn't take you, GULC usually extends its ED deadline into February or March, so you would still have a shot there (if you hadn't heard anything back from them yet). I think this is what the previous poster meant by serially EDing, and it's a good game plan for any big splitter.

My gut feeling is that NU ED will work for you, though.


**Edit to mention that you should probably get higher than a 170 for all of this to work. Doesn't have to be too much higher, but a little couldn't hurt.

User avatar
najumobi
Posts: 1111
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:36 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby najumobi » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:25 pm

okash wrote:I'm looking at a 2.9 gpa and aiming for a 170 LSAT. Solid softs, great work experience (started own company), getting good LOR's. My question is where should us socially inclined college grads be looking for ED? I've been hearing a lot for NU, Penn, Georgetown, etc. Is this right? Anywhere else? Also, am I wasting paper doing ED with NYU?

If all else fails with law school, I guess I'll have to marry well!

Thanks.

for a splitter with WE your ED application would be most effective with Northwestern. you would have about a 50/50 shot at getting in, but you have to get the 170...a 169 would give you no chance.

User avatar
dominkay
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:41 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby dominkay » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:27 pm

Threads like this make me roll my eyes really hard. After you've actually scored in the 98th percentile, you can worry about which top 14 schools you should be applying to. Until then, concentrate on studying for the LSAT.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby D. H2Oman » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:29 pm

dominkay wrote:Threads like this make me roll my eyes really hard. After you've actually scored in the 98th percentile, you can worry about which top 14 schools you should be applying to. Until then, concentrate on studying for the LSAT.



BUt, what makes you think some jackass who couldn't even pull a 3.0 UGPA won't score a 170+!!!

okash
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:47 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby okash » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:35 pm

Thanks everyone for the advice. Going to have to make some big decisions coming up.

@dominkay: Focusing on my LSAT is my top priority. But like most prepared applicants, I'm planning ahead in anticipation. Simply preparing for the LSAT isn't going to get me into my top choices.

@D. H2Oman: word.

User avatar
flyingpanda
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:32 am

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby flyingpanda » Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:13 am

D. H2Oman wrote:
dominkay wrote:Threads like this make me roll my eyes really hard. After you've actually scored in the 98th percentile, you can worry about which top 14 schools you should be applying to. Until then, concentrate on studying for the LSAT.



BUt, what makes you think some jackass who couldn't even pull a 3.0 UGPA won't score a 170+!!!


Anyone with a sub 3.0 deserves to be shot and killed so that his/her inferior genes don't infect future generations.

MOD EDIT: This poster is picking on himself. Settle down and stop clicking "Report."

User avatar
dominkay
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:41 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby dominkay » Tue Jul 06, 2010 8:57 am

flyingpanda wrote:
D. H2Oman wrote:
dominkay wrote:Threads like this make me roll my eyes really hard. After you've actually scored in the 98th percentile, you can worry about which top 14 schools you should be applying to. Until then, concentrate on studying for the LSAT.



BUt, what makes you think some jackass who couldn't even pull a 3.0 UGPA won't score a 170+!!!


Anyone with a sub 3.0 deserves to be shot and killed so that his/her inferior genes don't infect future generations.


It actually has nothing to do with his GPA. I would be rolling my eyes just as hard if he had a 3.8 and was asking this question. 170+ is a rare score, statistically speaking.

User avatar
balzern
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 2:27 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby balzern » Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:08 am

dominkay wrote:
flyingpanda wrote:
D. H2Oman wrote:
dominkay wrote:Threads like this make me roll my eyes really hard. After you've actually scored in the 98th percentile, you can worry about which top 14 schools you should be applying to. Until then, concentrate on studying for the LSAT.



BUt, what makes you think some jackass who couldn't even pull a 3.0 UGPA won't score a 170+!!!


Anyone with a sub 3.0 deserves to be shot and killed so that his/her inferior genes don't infect future generations.


It actually has nothing to do with his GPA. I would be rolling my eyes just as hard if he had a 3.8 and was asking this question. 170+ is a rare score, statistically speaking.


+1 Wait until you have the ACTUAL REAL DEAL score before you start making hypos.

User avatar
dominkay
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:41 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby dominkay » Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:21 am

balzern wrote:+1 Wait until you have the ACTUAL REAL DEAL score before you start making hypos.


He didn't even give us PT scores! "I'm aiming for a 170" -- who isn't?

User avatar
bgdddymtty
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby bgdddymtty » Tue Jul 06, 2010 10:24 am

The "wait until you've actually earned the LSAT score" thing is credited, but realize that even if you score a 170 you won't be in that good of a position. That UGPA/LSAT combo won't make you a splitter at any of the T14 that offer ED. You'll just be a guy with a median-ish LSAT and a <5th percentile GPA. You can definitely get in via ED as a splitter (as a UVA ED 0L super-splitter, I know of what I speak), but you'll need to get that LSAT a point or two above the 170 mark to have a realistic shot.

sumus romani
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 6:04 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby sumus romani » Tue Jul 06, 2010 10:45 am

bgdddymtty wrote:The "wait until you've actually earned the LSAT score" thing is credited, but realize that even if you score a 170 you won't be in that good of a position. That UGPA/LSAT combo won't make you a splitter at any of the T14 that offer ED. You'll just be a guy with a median-ish LSAT and a <5th percentile GPA. You can definitely get in via ED as a splitter (as a UVA ED 0L super-splitter, I know of what I speak), but you'll need to get that LSAT a point or two above the 170 mark to have a realistic shot.



I understand that we are talking hypotheticals here, but with a 170 and 3.0, an applicant definitely has a "realistic shot" of admission to a t14 with ED (and does not have to get a 172 to have a "realistic shot"). There are millions of 3.8s out there, but only, whatever, I guess around 2,000 or so 170+s. If you take a look at lawschoolnumbers, you see that tons of applicants get in to t14 schools with 170 and 3.0, often after riding waitlists. Once you get below 3.0, things get grim. But from 3.0 on up, an applicant definitely has a "realistic shot", though not a sure thing.

Also, this idea that a 170 is "median-ish" (and somehow this is not impressive) is just not accurate. Penn, Virginia and NW have a median of 170, and they sometimes accept people in this range. But Michigan's, Georgetown's and Duke's is 169. Cornell's is 167. Setting Berkeley aside, 170 and 3.0 has a realistic shot at these schools, though V and NW are better bets.

User avatar
flyingpanda
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:32 am

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby flyingpanda » Tue Jul 06, 2010 10:47 am

See my LSN profile for reference, kthx

User avatar
bgdddymtty
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby bgdddymtty » Tue Jul 06, 2010 3:28 pm

sumus romani wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:The "wait until you've actually earned the LSAT score" thing is credited, but realize that even if you score a 170 you won't be in that good of a position. That UGPA/LSAT combo won't make you a splitter at any of the T14 that offer ED. You'll just be a guy with a median-ish LSAT and a <5th percentile GPA. You can definitely get in via ED as a splitter (as a UVA ED 0L super-splitter, I know of what I speak), but you'll need to get that LSAT a point or two above the 170 mark to have a realistic shot.

I understand that we are talking hypotheticals here, but with a 170 and 3.0, an applicant definitely has a "realistic shot" of admission to a t14 with ED (and does not have to get a 172 to have a "realistic shot"). There are millions of 3.8s out there, but only, whatever, I guess around 2,000 or so 170+s. If you take a look at lawschoolnumbers, you see that tons of applicants get in to t14 schools with 170 and 3.0, often after riding waitlists. Once you get below 3.0, things get grim. But from 3.0 on up, an applicant definitely has a "realistic shot", though not a sure thing.

Also, this idea that a 170 is "median-ish" (and somehow this is not impressive) is just not accurate. Penn, Virginia and NW have a median of 170, and they sometimes accept people in this range. But Michigan's, Georgetown's and Duke's is 169. Cornell's is 167. Setting Berkeley aside, 170 and 3.0 has a realistic shot at these schools, though V and NW are better bets.

I should have used a different adjective than "realistic." Maybe "better-than-average." But the point still stands. The median is the median for a reason. It doesn't matter that there are only 2,000 or so 170's. It matters that nearly all of those 2,000 are applying to T14 schools. And nearly all of them have better grades. I don't subscribe to the "numbers are all that matter" dogma that pervades TLS, but they definitely matter a lot. Having one number in the middle and one number at the bottom gives one a shot, but it's an average one.

Another important point about medians and the LSAT: at any given T14 school, a significant portion of those who get in with below-median LSAT scores are minorities. This means that the non-minority LSAT medians at these schools may actually be higher than the reported medians.

I did speak out of turn in that I thought that UVA, NW, P, and NYU were the only T14's that offer ED. My mistake there. As far as getting in off of the waitlist goes, I only know about UVA, but I know that the waitlist here has been essentially shut out for the last two cycles in large part due to the deluge of applications ITE. I'd imagine that other T14's have been in the same boat. Any admission plan that involves "get in from the waitlist" right now is, it seems, a fool's errand.

EDIT: Also, OP stated that his GPA is 2.9, not 3.0. By your own admission, this distinction matters quite a bit.

User avatar
im_blue
Posts: 3276
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 3:53 am

Re: ED for Splitters

Postby im_blue » Tue Jul 06, 2010 4:27 pm

sumus romani wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:The "wait until you've actually earned the LSAT score" thing is credited, but realize that even if you score a 170 you won't be in that good of a position. That UGPA/LSAT combo won't make you a splitter at any of the T14 that offer ED. You'll just be a guy with a median-ish LSAT and a <5th percentile GPA. You can definitely get in via ED as a splitter (as a UVA ED 0L super-splitter, I know of what I speak), but you'll need to get that LSAT a point or two above the 170 mark to have a realistic shot.



I understand that we are talking hypotheticals here, but with a 170 and 3.0, an applicant definitely has a "realistic shot" of admission to a t14 with ED (and does not have to get a 172 to have a "realistic shot"). There are millions of 3.8s out there, but only, whatever, I guess around 2,000 or so 170+s. If you take a look at lawschoolnumbers, you see that tons of applicants get in to t14 schools with 170 and 3.0, often after riding waitlists. Once you get below 3.0, things get grim. But from 3.0 on up, an applicant definitely has a "realistic shot", though not a sure thing.

Also, this idea that a 170 is "median-ish" (and somehow this is not impressive) is just not accurate. Penn, Virginia and NW have a median of 170, and they sometimes accept people in this range. But Michigan's, Georgetown's and Duke's is 169. Cornell's is 167. Setting Berkeley aside, 170 and 3.0 has a realistic shot at these schools, though V and NW are better bets.

1) Huge difference between a 2.9 and a 3.0.

2) Georgetown's FT median is 170, which leaves Michigan, Duke, and Cornell with sub-170 medians. Michigan and Duke don't particularly like splitters, especially the sub-3.0 variety, and Cornell doesn't offer ED.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ferrisjso, Smeag91 and 3 guests