List of Class of 2013 GPA and LSAT Medians Forum

[whymeohgodno]

Trying to get a handle on what this median business may mean for my cycle.

If I have a 170/3.75, do I have a better shot at NYU (3.71/172) or Chicago (3.78/171)? I'm below both medians at Chicago, which common wisdom says means that I'm an autoreject, but I'm seemingly closer to the overall median index there.

Thoughts?

Either way you will need strong softs to be viable at Chicago or NYU. Do you have a top UG, difficult major, or any prestigious awards or jobs?

I have a top UG (non-HYP Ivy), two social science majors (plus an honors thesis), and your usual array of summer internships. I am a cancer survivor (age 18) and and I wrote about what I learned from that experience in my personal statement, for what that's worth. Viable?

Only thing there that matters is cancer survivor. That could be used as a very powerful personal statement.

UG+Majors aren't impressive. Thesis doesn't matter. Internship is an average soft.

[ajmanyjah]

Learn quickly that USNWR is not the answer to all questions.

yup.

Quality Assessment (weighted by .40): Peer Assessment Score (.25) Assessment Score by Lawyers/Judges (.15)
Selectivity (weighted by .25) 
Median LSAT Scores (.125): Median Undergrad GPA (.10), Acceptance Rate (.025)
Placement Success (weighted by .20): at graduation (.04 weight ) and nine months after graduation (.14 weight)
Bar Passage Rate (.02)
Faculty Resources (weighted by .15) 
Expenditures Per Student The average instruction, library, and supporting services (.0975) are measured, as are all other items, including financial aid (.015). 
Student/Faculty Ratio (.03)
Library Resources (.0075) The total number of volumes and titles in the school's law library
Overall Rank: Data were standardized about their means, and standardized scores were weighted, totaled, and rescaled so that the top school received 100; others received their percentage of the top score. 

if you know this as an adcomm, it's not hard to game

I cannot believe bar passage rate is THAT unimportant in the rankings. Shocking.

[IAFG]

I cannot believe bar passage rate is THAT unimportant in the rankings. Shocking.

eh if it were more important it would unfairly penalize schools in states with very difficult bar exams (CA) and reward schools in states with very easy ones.

[Kswizzie]

I cannot believe bar passage rate is THAT unimportant in the rankings. Shocking.

eh if it were more important it would unfairly penalize schools in states with very difficult bar exams (CA) and reward schools in states with very easy ones.

They could do it relative to state avg. but that would be too smart for them

[bk1]

I cannot believe bar passage rate is THAT unimportant in the rankings. Shocking.

I can't believe it's THAT important.

[BruceWayne]

Learn quickly that USNWR is not the answer to all questions.

yup.

Quality Assessment (weighted by .40): Peer Assessment Score (.25) Assessment Score by Lawyers/Judges (.15)
Selectivity (weighted by .25) 
Median LSAT Scores (.125): Median Undergrad GPA (.10), Acceptance Rate (.025)
Placement Success (weighted by .20): at graduation (.04 weight ) and nine months after graduation (.14 weight)
Bar Passage Rate (.02)
Faculty Resources (weighted by .15) 
Expenditures Per Student The average instruction, library, and supporting services (.0975) are measured, as are all other items, including financial aid (.015). 
Student/Faculty Ratio (.03)
Library Resources (.0075) The total number of volumes and titles in the school's law library
Overall Rank: Data were standardized about their means, and standardized scores were weighted, totaled, and rescaled so that the top school received 100; others received their percentage of the top score. 

if you know this as an adcomm, it's not hard to game

The fact that selectivity is weighed that much more than lawyer judge assessment score (the best stat US News tracks in terms of estimating placement and prestige in the legal community--the people who will actually be hiring you!) is really telling of how useful using overall rank is in determining strength of school--at least within narrow bands like 4 spots. The fact that selectivity is weighed more than lawyer/judge assessment at all is ridiculous; I wonder what the rankings would look like if you just ranked according to lawyer/judge prestige score?

[ajmanyjah]

I cannot believe bar passage rate is THAT unimportant in the rankings. Shocking.

I can't believe it's THAT important.

Yes because passing the bar is totally irrelevant to the law as a field, and therefore, to legal education. I assume you also think passing the medical boards to be a useless measure of med school education.

[bk1]

Yes because passing the bar is totally irrelevant to the law as a field, and therefore, to legal education. I assume you also think passing the medical boards to be a useless measure of med school education.

I highly doubt that school quality is directly causally related to bar passage rates.

[sundance95]

UC Davis' bar passage rate (89%) is 2nd in California only to 4th behind Stanford (95%), UCLA (91%) and USC (90%). Loyola tied with Cal for 3rd at 87%. (Source: wikipedia articles for each school).

I actually think that is rather impressive given the reasonable assumption that nearly all Davis and Loyola grads take the California bar exam, but it doesn't make them better schools, nor does it make their grads any more likely to be hired. I agree that the ranking metric that makes the most sense from a prospective student's perspective are judge/lawyer prestige survey, because they likely correlate highest with actually getting hired, and at better jobs. However, if you used that as a metric alone, then USNWR could not plausibly contend that the rankings serve any purpose besides perpetuating the status quo. Then again, they do that already, so one wonders-what's the point at all?

Edit: Forgot about Pepperdine; they also have a 89% passage rate, tying them with UC Davis for 2nd 4th.

Edit: Lawl, forgot UCLA (91%) AND USC (90%).

[GettingReady2010]

Yes because passing the bar is totally irrelevant to the law as a field, and therefore, to legal education. I assume you also think passing the medical boards to be a useless measure of med school education.

I highly doubt that school quality is directly causally related to bar passage rates.

I would probably agree with you on this. It's a combination of the quality/depth of preparation certain schools give for the bar and the caliber of the students.

[bk1]

I would probably agree with you on this. It's a combination of the quality/depth of preparation certain schools give for the bar and the caliber of the students.

Yeah, though I'm not so sure about the former considering that the ABA has guidelines that strictly regulate law school curriculum, which is why it doesn't vary much from school to school. I would expect it to be based on student caliber as you noted, higher UGPA/LSAT candidates are more likely to be those with more motivation, and percent with jobs or expecting jobs. Feeling like you won't get a job has got to be great demotivator to studying for the bar or paying for a BarBri course.

[sundance95]

Yes because passing the bar is totally irrelevant to the law as a field, and therefore, to legal education. I assume you also think passing the medical boards to be a useless measure of med school education.

I highly doubt that school quality is directly causally related to bar passage rates.

I would probably agree with you on this. It's a combination of the quality/depth of preparation certain schools give for the bar and the caliber of the students.

The 'quality/depth of preparation certain schools give for the bar,' isn't very distinguishable from 'school quality,' don't you think? Your contention re the passage rates being due to 'the caliber of the students' at various schools is belied by the above data.

Again, I don't think Pepperdine and Davis' bar passage rates make it better than Boalt, but there must be something else going on besides 'the caliber of the students.'

[bk1]

The 'quality/depth of preparation certain schools give for the bar,' isn't very distinguishable from 'school quality,' don't you think? Your contention re the passage rates being due to 'the caliber of the students' at various schools is belied by the above data.

Again, I don't think Pepperdine and Davis' bar passage rates make it better than Boalt, but there must be something else going on besides 'the caliber of the students.'

"Depth of bar prep" is a type or factor of school quality. School quality means anything that makes the school worth going to, or not going to, whether that be job prospects, weather, bar prep, etc. However, most of us will agree that most of the quality factors should not be considered (weather, bar passage rates, etc) because they pale in comparison to the important ones (job prospects, reach, cost).

[sundance95]

In a related point, one has to wonder whether the reason Boalt is behind UCLA, USC, and Davis is because of their unique admissions outlook. It's somewhat embarrassing that Boalt has only the 3rd highest bar passage rate among the UCs.

[sundance95]

"Depth of bar prep" is a type or factor of school quality. School quality means anything that makes the school worth going to, or not going to, whether that be job prospects, weather, bar prep, etc. However, most of us will agree that most of the quality factors should not be considered (weather, bar passage rates, etc) because they pale in comparison to the important ones (job prospects, reach, cost).

I agree, especially on reach and job prospects. My only point is that one would hope to see a strong correlation to bar passage rates as well. I do think it should be weighted more heavily than 2% for USNWR ranking.

[bk1]

In a related point, one has to wonder whether the reason Boalt is behind UCLA, USC, and Davis is because of their unique admissions outlook. It's somewhat embarrassing that Boalt has only the 3rd highest bar passage rate among the UCs.

If it's a single year I wouldn't treat it as such a big deal considering it could be an aberration.

[sundance95]

In a related point, one has to wonder whether the reason Boalt is behind UCLA, USC, and Davis is because of their unique admissions outlook. It's somewhat embarrassing that Boalt has only the 3rd highest bar passage rate among the UCs.

If it's a single year I wouldn't treat it as such a big deal considering it could be an aberration.

Take a 5 year average?

Edit: I see that you are referring to Boalt's as a potential aberration, not to bar passage as a component of the USNWR. Someone could do the research to find out if its an aberration or not, but that's about as much work as I'm willing to put in.

[im_blue]

Trying to get a handle on what this median business may mean for my cycle.

If I have a 170/3.75, do I have a better shot at NYU (3.71/172) or Chicago (3.78/171)? I'm below both medians at Chicago, which common wisdom says means that I'm an autoreject, but I'm seemingly closer to the overall median index there.

Thoughts?

Either way you will need strong softs to be viable at Chicago or NYU. Do you have a top UG, difficult major, or any prestigious awards or jobs?

I have a top UG (non-HYP Ivy), two social science majors (plus an honors thesis), and your usual array of summer internships. I am a cancer survivor (age 18) and and I wrote about what I learned from that experience in my personal statement, for what that's worth. Viable?

Sure, I think your Ivy UG and potentially strong PS about surviving cancer could help your slim chances at Chicago or NYU. I would go with NYU since you're above their GPA median and they accept more applicants in your range.

[bk1]

My major problem with these scores is that it is a piss-poor attempt to assess by proxy. As you note, that number should be the most meaningful, since it measures the opinions of the people who do the hiring for firms and clerkships, yes? Then - and this is a crazy thought, here - WHY NOT JUST USE THE PUBLICLY REPORTED DATA ON ACTUAL FIRM AND CLERKSHIP PLACEMENT?

In my opinion, this is the greatest flaw in the USNWR ranking system. For all practical purposes, we don't care about spending per student, we don't care about how many people they turned away. We care about the quality of incoming students (LSAT/GPA), the quality of legal education (barely noted at all), and - above all else - the relative placement power of the schools. USNWR does a great job of the first concern, a lackluster job of the second concern, and practically no job at all of the most important concern.

Let's not get crazy here.

[JusticeHarlan]

The fact that selectivity is weighed that much more than lawyer judge assessment score (the best stat US News tracks in terms of estimating placement and prestige in the legal community--the people who will actually be hiring you!) is really telling of how useful using overall rank is in determining strength of school--at least within narrow bands like 4 spots. The fact that selectivity is weighed more than lawyer/judge assessment at all is ridiculous; I wonder what the rankings would look like if you just ranked according to lawyer/judge prestige score?

I would agree with you, except for one major problem: the professional assessment score is subject to serious abnormalities, such as self-selection and lack of normalization across the country. For example: let's say 50 judges from Iowa fill out the survey, and only one judge from Hawai'i fills it out? This is hyperbolic, but it illustrates the point - without a regular rate of return across regions, the numbers simply do not compare to one another, and the averages will reflect that. For another example: what does a judge in Florida have to say about the difference between Seattle and Washington? Aren't the odds that said judge knows precisely as many people from those schools as you and I know? In short: at some point, in some circumstances, isn't that number just reflecting the public perception USNWR helps create?

My major problem with these scores is that it is a piss-poor attempt to assess by proxy. As you note, that number should be the most meaningful, since it measures the opinions of the people who do the hiring for firms and clerkships, yes? Then - and this is a crazy thought, here - WHY NOT JUST USE THE PUBLICLY REPORTED DATA ON ACTUAL FIRM AND CLERKSHIP PLACEMENT?

In my opinion, this is the greatest flaw in the USNWR ranking system. For all practical purposes, we don't care about spending per student, we don't care about how many people they turned away. We care about the quality of incoming students (LSAT/GPA), the quality of legal education (barely noted at all), and - above all else - the relative placement power of the schools. USNWR does a great job of the first concern, a lackluster job of the second concern, and practically no job at all of the most important concern.

Pretty much what Nightrunner said. For those who haven't seen it, here's Brian Leiter's letter to US News on their rankings. He makes similar claims about the reputation rankings being an "echo chamber" and being suspect for response rate aberrations (particularly for practitioners ratings).

[im_blue]

Updated:

Minnesota 3.71 / 167..............(+.07, 0)
Fordham 3.62 / 166...............(-.02, 0)

[timertimer61]

Updated:

Minnesota 3.71 / 167..............(+.07, 0)
Fordham 3.62 / 166...............(-.02, 0)

i thought fordham's was supposed to rise since they cut the PT in half?

[im_blue]

Updated:

Minnesota 3.71 / 167..............(+.07, 0)
Fordham 3.62 / 166...............(-.02, 0)

i thought fordham's was supposed to rise since they cut the PT in half?

That's for FT only. PT numbers are 3.52 / 164 compared to 3.42 / 163 last year.

[timertimer61]

Updated:

Minnesota 3.71 / 167..............(+.07, 0)
Fordham 3.62 / 166...............(-.02, 0)

i thought fordham's was supposed to rise since they cut the PT in half?

That's for FT only. PT numbers are 3.52 / 164 compared to 3.42 / 163 last year.

yea but what is the median for combined? i wouldnt imagine it to make it that much higher than last years, no?

[St.Remy]

yea but what is the median for combined? i wouldnt imagine it to make it that much higher than last years, no?

That information isn't out yet, and is only significant for ranking purposes. If you are planning to apply to Fordham this cycle, whether full or part-time, the relevant information is already present on this thread.