U. of Illinois Law suspends Dean of Admissions

[09042014]

If the real median this year was 163, then the last few years have to have been fudged, too. There's no way to explain such a huge drop otherwise.

What I don't get is how UIUC got their LSN profile to look like their reported medians were at least close to accurate. Illinois apparently rejected tons of people below a 167. This means one of two things: 1) they were rejecting people for the sole purpose of making their median look higher on LSN at the sacrifice of their actual median, or 2) they were somehow manipulating the LSN data.

I generally think that LSN, even though it's self-reported data, is pretty accurate. Sure, a few people can get on there and make accounts and lie, but the majority of people on there tell the truth, which gives you a good enough picture of overall admission trends. If you believe this is accurate, it means that Illinois was rejecting people below their phony median (to make their phony median look more real), and in the process, screwing their real median (as many of these people with 165s and 166s would have been happy to go there if admitted). I was a typical splitter when I applied last year with an LSAT above median, and I got waitlisted. I went to WUSTL instead, but Illinois was my second choice, and if admitted and given a decent scholarship, I may have gone there instead.

I'm really sorry to hear about this. I interviewed with Dean Pless myself trying to get myself off the waitlist last spring. He seemed like a really nice guy. But I have to say, it takes nice guys to pull this kind of stuff off. If you're abrasive and pissing people off, people are much more likely to challenge you. If you're always a stand-up guy, you'll develop a lot of followers that don't want to question you. I don't believe for a second that this is somehow a mistake. Illinois' medians were always fishy given that they outperformed their school's rank and similarly ranked (or higher ranked) schools that gave out similar tuition money.

They could have been reaching for a 168, thinking they could build upon the gains of the last couple years. When the applicant pool wasn't as big as the year before they probably couldn't do it. They rejected a bunch of people like you, who in the past they would have accepted to get that 167 median. Also IUB was handing out much larger scholarships this year.

So UIUC probably over reached, dinged too many splitters, and lost too many other splitters (who they did accept) to the lower T14, WUSTL, IUB, etc etc.

And since their class is a combination of splitters, and reverse splitters, they had too many reverse splitters take the offer and too many splitters reject them.

Even though 163 was the 25% in the past it was also probably pretty close to the 45% too. That's how they build the class. And if you fuck up yeild it could easily become the 50%.

[JCougar]

Here is another thought: if they are willing to do this with admissions stats (which are difficult to fudge without getting caught), what the hell do you guys think is going on with the employment numbers?

Those must be way way way off.

Yes, but you see, deceiving students with deceptive, self-reported employment information is normal. This is EGREGIOUS.

heh. fair, friend, fair.

On the other hand, it is the employment stats that really matter as the whole goal of the 3 year deal is to get a good job, not to be able to brag about the median LSAT score.

True, and I don't think most employers are basing their hiring on the median GPA/LSAT of any respective school.

I think the misrepresentation by the administration of Illinois was more egregious in that it is going to hurt the school's reputation with future applicants (and possibly donors/employers who help the school based on their falsely reported numbers).

While obviously students at the school are justifiably outraged, I doubt this scandal will have a significant impact on the employment prospects of current students.

Actually, I disagree with this now. Earlier in this thread, I had said it's probably not that big of a deal, because I thought it was a 167 rather than a 168 or something.

But a 163 is pretty alarming. I think this will hurt UIUC's relationships with employers, especially if the median has been falsified for years. Biglaw firms are constantly trying to justify their astronomical rates of billing to their clients. The do this partly by selling their associates' grades, and they do this partly by selling the fact that they were from an elite university where the competition is tough. It's definitely going to be harder for Biglaw partners to tell their clients that UIUC grads are "elite" when the news of this story has been blasted all around Chicago for all corporate legal departments to hear. Why would a client want to pay top dollar anymore for a UIUC grad when their class is marginally more competitive than Chicago-Kent?

I really am sorry to hear this, and I'm sorry to people at UIUC who feel betrayed, etc. I could have very well been one of you, as the school was my second choice. The sad thing is, Dean Pless was sacrificing the real median (by rejecting people in the 164-166 range) to make the phony median seem higher.

[bjsesq]

If the real median this year was 163, then the last few years have to have been fudged, too. There's no way to explain such a huge drop otherwise.

What I don't get is how UIUC got their LSN profile to look like their reported medians were at least close to accurate. Illinois apparently rejected tons of people below a 167. This means one of two things: 1) they were rejecting people for the sole purpose of making their median look higher on LSN at the sacrifice of their actual median, or 2) they were somehow manipulating the LSN data.

I generally think that LSN, even though it's self-reported data, is pretty accurate. Sure, a few people can get on there and make accounts and lie, but the majority of people on there tell the truth, which gives you a good enough picture of overall admission trends. If you believe this is accurate, it means that Illinois was rejecting people below their phony median (to make their phony median look more real), and in the process, screwing their real median (as many of these people with 165s and 166s would have been happy to go there if admitted). I was a typical splitter when I applied last year with an LSAT above median, and I got waitlisted. I went to WUSTL instead, but Illinois was my second choice, and if admitted and given a decent scholarship, I may have gone there instead.

I'm really sorry to hear about this. I interviewed with Dean Pless myself trying to get myself off the waitlist last spring. He seemed like a really nice guy. But I have to say, it takes nice guys to pull this kind of stuff off. If you're abrasive and pissing people off, people are much more likely to challenge you. If you're always a stand-up guy, you'll develop a lot of followers that don't want to question you. I don't believe for a second that this is somehow a mistake. Illinois' medians were always fishy given that they outperformed their school's rank and similarly ranked (or higher ranked) schools that gave out similar tuition money.

They could have been reaching for a 168, thinking they could build upon the gains of the last couple years. When the applicant pool wasn't as big as the year before they probably couldn't do it. They rejected a bunch of people like you, who in the past they would have accepted to get that 167 median. Also IUB was handing out much larger scholarships this year.

So UIUC probably over reached, dinged too many splitters, and lost too many other splitters (who they did accept) to the lower T14, WUSTL, IUB, etc etc.

And since their class is a combination of splitters, and reverse splitters, they had too many reverse splitters take the offer and too many splitters reject them.

Even though 163 was the 25% in the past it was also probably pretty close to the 45% too. That's how they build the class. And if you fuck up yeild it could easily become the 50%.

Thank you. This isn't necessarily indicative of some 5 year number fudging scandal. Like I said, Pless has some serious explaining to do. Two medians being fudged on the high side make me wonder. But the fundamental lack of understanding about statistics itt borders on hilariousness.

[muaythaifighter]

lol you are a tough guy with the name calling. so you are saying it is ok to screw with students' lives because even though he knew of it, he did not want to risk his job? it is understandable that everyone wants to keep their career, but it still makes him culpable because he was aware. i am sorry your moral compass is broken sir.

We already had this debate earlier in the thread. Yes, I think it's ok to admit some students with shitty numbers if your boss tells you you have to. I don't think that's the kind of thing I would take a moral stance on and lose my job over. If you think that makes my moral compass broken oh well.

The point is, bringing up that scandal as proof of Pless' lack of honesty is stupid. He was on the right side of that scandal. That doesn't have anything to do with what he is accused of doing here.

you think it is ok to partake in corruption if your boss tells you to? lol yeah most would not stand up because of their job but it still makes it wrong. now say that with me. being corrupt is wrong even if your boss tells you its ok. say it one more time. there you go.

oh im sorry, i didn't know it was considered being on the right side of something bad if i took no actions even though i was aware of it. yes it does have something to do with it. even if he didn't directly manipulate the data, i bet he knew it was misleading and let it slip by. don't bother responding, you went full retard on this one, even if you went half i would have considered your points.

[Voyager]

Actually, I disagree with this now. Earlier in this thread, I had said it's probably not that big of a deal, because I thought it was a 167 rather than a 168 or something.

But a 163 is pretty alarming. I think this will hurt UIUC's relationships with employers, especially if the median has been falsified for years. Biglaw firms are constantly trying to justify their astronomical rates of billing to their clients. The do this partly by selling their associates' grades, and they do this partly by selling the fact that they were from an elite university where the competition is tough. It's definitely going to be harder for Biglaw partners to tell their clients that UIUC grads are "elite" when the news of this story has been blasted all around Chicago for all corporate legal departments to hear. Why would a client want to pay top dollar anymore for a UIUC grad when their class is marginally more competitive than Chicago-Kent?

I really am sorry to hear this, and I'm sorry to people at UIUC who feel betrayed, etc. I could have very well been one of you, as the school was my second choice. The sad thing is, Dean Pless was sacrificing the real median (by rejecting people in the 164-166 range) to make the phony median seem higher.

I hear you. Fair points. I guess my position is that employers think of the students in terms of class rank, not LSAT scores. And so:

top 5%-10% will do ok

top half will have only made a truly awful investment decision

Bottom half will be utterly, utterly screwed


And all of that was going to happen regardless. So, from that perspective, this will have little impact on hiring.

[muaythaifighter]

lol it is amazing how some of the illinois students here are still supporting pless and the school and telling other angry illinois students to gtfo. lol delusional loyalty at its finest.

[vanwinkle]

PSA: Anyone who starts trolling the other on-topic threads about Illinois gets banned with extreme prejudice. FYI.

[dreakol]

Actually, I disagree with this now. Earlier in this thread, I had said it's probably not that big of a deal, because I thought it was a 167 rather than a 168 or something.

But a 163 is pretty alarming. I think this will hurt UIUC's relationships with employers, especially if the median has been falsified for years. Biglaw firms are constantly trying to justify their astronomical rates of billing to their clients. The do this partly by selling their associates' grades, and they do this partly by selling the fact that they were from an elite university where the competition is tough. It's definitely going to be harder for Biglaw partners to tell their clients that UIUC grads are "elite" when the news of this story has been blasted all around Chicago for all corporate legal departments to hear. Why would a client want to pay top dollar anymore for a UIUC grad when their class is marginally more competitive than Chicago-Kent?

I really am sorry to hear this, and I'm sorry to people at UIUC who feel betrayed, etc. I could have very well been one of you, as the school was my second choice. The sad thing is, Dean Pless was sacrificing the real median (by rejecting people in the 164-166 range) to make the phony median seem higher.

I hear you. Fair points. I guess my position is that employers think of the students in terms of class rank, not LSAT scores. And so:

top 5%-10% will do ok

top half will have only made a truly awful investment decision

Bottom half will be utterly, utterly screwed


And all of that was going to happen regardless.

i dont think this can be said enough

nothing has changed

[Indifferent]

Agreed! What I am saying, however, is that the school is most likely lying about its employment numbers.... not that this scandal will have a huge impact on hiring. I am saying that the employment stats prospective students are using must be way way out of line... probably more so than at other schools.

Well, according to nalp, UI has 126 offices that interview for OCI. That seems to be about on par with Wash U, which boasts 158 offices. Similar schools ranked in the twenties in smaller markets (BU and BC) both have about 150 offices listed. Granted, that does not say anything about whether or not those offices actually HIRE UI students, but it is at least something.

In any event, it seems like almost all law schools inflate their employment numbers, so it's really not a reliable metric of judging whether or not to attend a particular school (especially a school outside of the T14) anyways.

[Voyager]

Agreed! What I am saying, however, is that the school is most likely lying about its employment numbers.... not that this scandal will have a huge impact on hiring. I am saying that the employment stats prospective students are using must be way way out of line... probably more so than at other schools.

Well, according to nalp, UI has 126 offices that interview for OCI. That seems to be about on par with Wash U, which boasts 158 offices. Similar schools ranked in the twenties in smaller markets (BU and BC) both have about 150 offices listed. Granted, that does not say anything about whether or not those offices actually HIRE UI students, but it is at least something.

In any event, it seems like almost all law schools inflate their employment numbers, so it's really not a reliable metric of judging whether or not to attend a particular school (especially a school outside of the T14) anyways.

fair, fair. I am saying that if a school is willing to lie about its admissions stats, its employment numbers are probably even further off than its peer schools.

I appreciate your view into the number of employers showing up to OCI.

[NancyBotwin]

lol it is amazing how some of the illinois students here are still supporting pless and the school and telling other angry illinois students to gtfo. lol delusional loyalty at its finest.

Yeah, because ripping on the school even more helps my situation. I'm happy here. If other people want to leave because they're freaked out by this, they are more than welcome to.

[JCougar]

They could have been reaching for a 168, thinking they could build upon the gains of the last couple years. When the applicant pool wasn't as big as the year before they probably couldn't do it. They rejected a bunch of people like you, who in the past they would have accepted to get that 167 median. Also IUB was handing out much larger scholarships this year.

So UIUC probably over reached, dinged too many splitters, and lost too many other splitters (who they did accept) to the lower T14, WUSTL, IUB, etc etc.

And since their class is a combination of splitters, and reverse splitters, they had too many reverse splitters take the offer and too many splitters reject them.

Even though 163 was the 25% in the past it was also probably pretty close to the 45% too. That's how they build the class. And if you fuck up yeild it could easily become the 50%.

That's a good point, but I still find 163 hard to believe given this.

To be fair, WUSTL doubled it's splitter money this year, giving $20K to everyone above 168 in an attempt to raise their median (which was apparently successful, provided we're not lying, too...which I seriously doubt). This probably stole a lot of Illinois' yield. Indiana going crazy with the $120K scholarships probably did a number on Illinois, too. So basically, Illinois had a lot of people 166+ lured away with significantly better scholly offers than last year.

But they weren't exactly stingy with the scholarship money, either. People were getting 90K for being splitters, etc. And I know the median probably goes down pretty quick once you get past the 167 mark, but for it to go down to 163 (the 25th %ile), they would basically have had to been shut out completely 168 and above. When you can offer in-state tuition on top of the schollies they hand out, I just don't believe that.

[anthropologieaddict]

lol it is amazing how some of the illinois students here are still supporting pless and the school and telling other angry illinois students to gtfo. lol delusional loyalty at its finest.

Actually it's just annoying to hear other people complain that are in the same boat as you. I am not supporting Pless or the school, I just think whining is unnecessary since what will come of this as far as rankings impact, job prospects etc is speculative. Once we have past numbers that have been fudged (if this happens) I will be joining in the whine fest. And the bottom line is to keep working or to gtfo. Those are your options here as a 1L. So forgive me if I don't want to bash the school I chose to attend or listen to people whining who have options.

[soj]

They could have been reaching for a 168, thinking they could build upon the gains of the last couple years. When the applicant pool wasn't as big as the year before they probably couldn't do it. They rejected a bunch of people like you, who in the past they would have accepted to get that 167 median. Also IUB was handing out much larger scholarships this year.

So UIUC probably over reached, dinged too many splitters, and lost too many other splitters (who they did accept) to the lower T14, WUSTL, IUB, etc etc.

And since their class is a combination of splitters, and reverse splitters, they had too many reverse splitters take the offer and too many splitters reject them.

Even though 163 was the 25% in the past it was also probably pretty close to the 45% too. That's how they build the class. And if you fuck up yeild it could easily become the 50%.

This. Considering how precariously schools use the numbers game to inflate their medians, it doesn't seem inconceivable that even a slightly bad year can kill your medians. Can't be sure without more info.

[Indifferent]

Actually, I disagree with this now. Earlier in this thread, I had said it's probably not that big of a deal, because I thought it was a 167 rather than a 168 or something.

But a 163 is pretty alarming. I think this will hurt UIUC's relationships with employers, especially if the median has been falsified for years. Biglaw firms are constantly trying to justify their astronomical rates of billing to their clients. The do this partly by selling their associates' grades, and they do this partly by selling the fact that they were from an elite university where the competition is tough. It's definitely going to be harder for Biglaw partners to tell their clients that UIUC grads are "elite" when the news of this story has been blasted all around Chicago for all corporate legal departments to hear. Why would a client want to pay top dollar anymore for a UIUC grad when their class is marginally more competitive than Chicago-Kent?

Biglaw firms that normally hire UIUC candidates aren't going to stop hiring them because the admissions office was reporting that the school's median was relatively more competitive than it was. I doubt more than 25% of UIUC students go to biglaw firms, and most of those people are being hired because they are in the top 25% at a good regional school (Illinois will not cease to be considered a good regional school after this scandal) rather than because they had stellar LSAT scores coming in. And I doubt the hiring practices of non-biglaw firms will be affected, since those firms typically hire from a pre-determined pool of schools (typically those attended by the name partners). Not to mention non-biglaw hiring is determined a lot more on the personality of the candidate and his or her connections to the firm (obviously, a firm filled with UIUC grads is not going to stop hiring UIUC grads).

Obviously there are cases on the periphery, and this could affect some employers, but I doubt the affect is anything more than marginal on the CURRENT class. A precipitous drop in the rankings and less qualified students applying to the school in future years, however, may have a real impact on employment prospects.

[CanadianWolf]

I agree with the point made above by Indifferent that a significant decline in USNews rank is likely to lead to lower quality applicants which is likely to adversely affect employment prospects.

[JoeFish]

But I have anecdotal evidence! All 5 1Ls here whose LSATs I know were over 168!!! Maybe we're the only 5...

No, but to be serious...
I'm pretty upset on some grounds, but here's how I'm trying to handle it:
1. I'm figuring that Desert Fox's analysis is right. It appears as though they were playing with fire - we always knew they did that, balancing the splitters and reverse-splitters so that 51% were at or above one or the other, but far fewer than 25% were above both. Every school does this to some extent, right?
2. I'm trying to imagine what would happen if I came here and they said "Well, our medians are a little down this year, 163 and 3.7, but we're super awesome in other ways like diversity and awards and stuff." I'd've been pretty annoyed, because a non-trivial reason as to why I picked UIUC over IUB was because I wanted to be with a "smarter" student body, but not outraged.
3. In light of #2, I'm trying to keep separate my feelings about the numbers themselves and my feelings about the lack of administrative integrity.
4. I really like all of my professors, and I've made some really good friends here, so I'm'a just keep chugging along and trying to kick butt when tests roll around. Despite how uncool this situation is, it won't change my day-to-day life.

So, ultimately, what the hell are we going to do? I'll absolutely voice my displeasure with the administration - just in case they don't already know how unacceptable this is - but both before this and after this, any options any of us 1Ls will have are based on 3 things: grades, grades, and being a special snowflake grades. So, once more into the breach, or what have you.

5. Profit

[Sapientia]

.

[Helmholtz]

Biglaw firms that normally hire UIUC candidates aren't going to stop hiring them because the admissions office was reporting that the school's median was relatively more competitive than it was. I doubt more than 25% of UIUC students go to biglaw firms, and most of those people are being hired because they are in the top 25% at a good regional school (Illinois will not cease to be considered a good regional school after this scandal) rather than because they had stellar LSAT scores coming in.

I'm not sure. It will be interesting to see how the school rebounds after this. But seriously, Baylor Law now has more impressive admissions numbers than Illinois. UIUC might be losing the chance to get the same quality of candidates they have in the past, and I wouldn't be completely surprised if employers start to notice this. Frankly, I would be way too scared to matriculate if I was applying, if not just because of all the uncertainty in the air now.

edit: Missed the last part of your post; I guess we don't actually disagree. My bad.

[dreakol]

But I have anecdotal evidence! All 5 1Ls here whose LSATs I know were over 168!!! Maybe we're the only 5...

No, but to be serious...
I'm pretty upset on some grounds, but here's how I'm trying to handle it:
1. I'm figuring that Desert Fox's analysis is right. It appears as though they were playing with fire - we always knew they did that, balancing the splitters and reverse-splitters so that 51% were at or above one or the other, but far fewer than 25% were above both. Every school does this to some extent, right?
2. I'm trying to imagine what would happen if I came here and they said "Well, our medians are a little down this year, 163 and 3.7, but we're super awesome in other ways like diversity and awards and stuff." I'd've been pretty annoyed, because a non-trivial reason as to why I picked UIUC over IUB was because I wanted to be with a "smarter" student body, but not outraged.
3. In light of #2, I'm trying to keep separate my feelings about the numbers themselves and my feelings about the lack of administrative integrity.
4. I really like all of my professors, and I've made some really good friends here, so I'm'a just keep chugging along and trying to kick butt when tests roll around. Despite how uncool this situation is, it won't change my day-to-day life.

So, ultimately, what the hell are we going to do? I'll absolutely voice my displeasure with the administration - just in case they don't already know how unacceptable this is - but both before this and after this, any options any of us 1Ls will have are based on 3 things: grades, grades, and being a special snowflake grades. So, once more into the breach, or what have you.

5. Profit

why would you think IUB students were dumber in the first place?

[CanadianWolf]

If the only other choices were similiar law schools--such as Indiana &/or WashUStL--then not much is lost since it is likely that all offered scholarships & Illinois probably will continue to offer better employment prospects.

P.S. Why hasn't anyone raised the issue that a "3" looks very similiar to an incomplete "8" ?

[tennisking88]

Frankly, I would be way too scared to matriculate if I was applying, if not just because of all the uncertainty in the air now.

Yep. Even with numbers below 163/3.71, enrolling next year would be a huge gamble. This could get very ugly for quite a while for Illinois.

[JoeFish]

why would you think IUB students were dumber in the first place?

I didn't mean that, although I pretty much said it. To clarify: I just meant their reported LSAT scores were lower and, even knowing that they were throwing $$$$ at everyone, I guessed - apparently incorrectly, it seems - that they would continue to be so. Hence the (admittedly ambiguous) quotations around "smarter".

[anthropologieaddict]

lol it is amazing how some of the illinois students here are still supporting pless and the school and telling other angry illinois students to gtfo. lol delusional loyalty at its finest.

Actually it's just annoying to hear other people complain that are in the same boat as you. I am not supporting Pless or the school, I just think whining is unnecessary since what will come of this as far as rankings impact, job prospects etc is speculative. Once we have past numbers that have been fudged (if this happens) I will be joining in the whine fest. And the bottom line is to keep working or to gtfo. Those are your options here as a 1L. So forgive me if I don't want to bash the school I chose to attend or listen to people whining who have options.

I'll redact my prior statements and agree with that. I guess we can't really be pissed off until we know that we chose to attend this school under completely false pretenses, which at the moment we don't know for sure. However, I find it hard to believe that this is a first time thing.

I definitely don't mean to imply that I am sure that this is a first time thing either. I just guess I would like to know one way or the other before I start flipping out. And either way, as Joe said, it does not really affect my daily life. (except for possible profits. lol.)

[Indifferent]

Biglaw firms that normally hire UIUC candidates aren't going to stop hiring them because the admissions office was reporting that the school's median was relatively more competitive than it was. I doubt more than 25% of UIUC students go to biglaw firms, and most of those people are being hired because they are in the top 25% at a good regional school (Illinois will not cease to be considered a good regional school after this scandal) rather than because they had stellar LSAT scores coming in.

I'm not sure. It will be interesting to see how the school rebounds after this. But seriously, Baylor Law now has more impressive admissions numbers than Illinois. UIUC might be losing the chance to get the same quality of candidates they have in the past, and I wouldn't be completely surprised if employers start to notice this. Frankly, I would be way too scared to matriculate if I was applying, if not just because of all the uncertainty in the air now.

edit: Missed the last part of your post; I guess we don't actually disagree. My bad.

Yeah, the main point I was trying to make is that most employers are going to judge the quality of candidates on just that: how well students that join the firm from the school end up doing. If UIUC has consistently given an employer stellar candidates at a certain class percentile, it is doubtful the firm is going to care when they learn these people scored a 163 on their LSAT rather than a 168. But, as you said, if this does reflect as badly on the integrity of the school (as some argue it should), the school won't be able to pull in the same type of quality candidates.

I was just saying that 1Ls should not think the world is crumbling around them and drop out. But if I were a 0L considering Illinois, I would probably think twice. It's a really unfortunate event in any case, and I really hope the school is not too adversely affected by this. While I did (and do) hold Pless in high regard, I think the University made the right decision removing him.