C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
BigZuck
Posts: 10867
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby BigZuck » Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:20 pm

welcometotls.jpeg

User avatar
hephaestus
Posts: 2385
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby hephaestus » Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:21 pm

ohpobrecito wrote:Ceteris. Fucking. Paribus.

:roll: Seriously.

sasquatchsam
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:51 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby sasquatchsam » Sat Aug 31, 2013 4:31 pm

I don't think they would ever intentionally tweak the LSAT to make it less difficult. It would be extremely unfair to a person who took the test under the "old" system if they applied in the same cycle as someone under the less difficult test. There is a reason they try so hard to keep the difficulty constant. If the difficulty changed from test to test, the LSAT would need to be administered once a year and only that test would be valid for that cycle. Or at least I don't see another alternative that would make it close to being fair to the applicants.

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby JCougar » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:05 pm

vuthy wrote:Interesting. So you mean that if given a choice between two hypothetical worlds, one where a 168 was 99th percentile, and the other where a 172 was 99th percentile, they really wouldn't care? I just assumed that, ceteris paribus, they would take the latter. I understand that from an admissions perspective, relative scores are all that matters. But at a minimum, you would think that the higher score keeps alums and, more importantly, donors happier than the lower one.


It's not like 170 isn't already an arbitrary, meaningless number.

Schools want to raise their medians because they want to raise their rankings. And rankings only matter relative to other schools. So if you just flood the applicant pool with more 170s, your competitors are going to look better as well.

To top it off, I'm pretty sure the US News ranking algorithm automatically normalizes and assigns a z-score to each school's value in each category, so you wouldn't even get more absolute points from the median category by doing this. In other words, even your raw US News ranking score wouldn't change.

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby wtrc » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:06 pm

I am fully expecting, on the first day of law school classes, for a kid in the front row to raise his hand and uses the phrase ceteris paribus.

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby JCougar » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:09 pm

wtrcoins3 wrote:I am fully expecting, on the first day of law school classes, for a kid in the front row to raise his hand and uses the phrase ceteris paribus.


Definitely within the range of possibility.

User avatar
longlivetheking
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:15 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby longlivetheking » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:14 pm

wtrcoins3 wrote:I am fully expecting, on the first day of law school classes, for a kid in the front row to raise his hand and uses the phrase ceteris paribus.


Image

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby 20141023 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:29 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Sat Feb 14, 2015 10:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
danquayle
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:12 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby danquayle » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:40 pm

JCougar wrote:
wtrcoins3 wrote:I am fully expecting, on the first day of law school classes, for a kid in the front row to raise his hand and uses the phrase ceteris paribus.


Definitely within the range of possibility.


Cause like, arguendo, why use English when you can use Latin, amirite?

04102014
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:42 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby 04102014 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:44 pm

Expecto patronum?

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby sinfiery » Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:54 pm

vuthy wrote:Interesting. So you mean that if given a choice between two hypothetical worlds, one where a 168 was 99th percentile, and the other where a 172 was 99th percentile, they really wouldn't care? I just assumed that, ceteris paribus, they would take the latter. I understand that from an admissions perspective, relative scores are all that matters. But at a minimum, you would think that the higher score keeps alums and, more importantly, donors happier than the lower one.


shiny things are great, agreed.

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:14 pm

vuthy wrote:Interesting. So you mean that if given a choice between two hypothetical worlds, one where a 168 was 99th percentile, and the other where a 172 was 99th percentile, they really wouldn't care? I just assumed that, ceteris paribus, they would take the latter. I understand that from an admissions perspective, relative scores are all that matters. But at a minimum, you would think that the higher score keeps alums and, more importantly, donors happier than the lower one.


This is credited. I can confirm that people who are intelligent enough to have graduated from a T14 have long ignored the now-disproven idea that an arbitrary number needs to be put into context before it holds significant meaning, and instead understand that the bigger number is indeed always better. Case in point: I was ashamed to reveal my measly 176 LSAT to my friend who got a 1760 on his SAT. Imagine how disappointed I was to learn that he had scored ten times higher than me! Fortunately, I got my revenge yesterday: His 300 in bowling was no match for my 30,000 on PacMan.

But of course vuthy is right that you need higher scores to keep alums (and especially those donors, who just can't enough non-contextual big numbers!) happy. That's why Cooley, where bigger numbers have always led to fantastic results, is switching to a 10,000 point scale. Imagine how blown away employers will be to see a GPA of 7,600! That puny 3.7 from Michigan won't stand a chance.

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Yukos » Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:31 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:But of course vuthy is right that you need higher scores to keep alums (and especially those donors, who just can't enough non-contextual big numbers!) happy. That's why Cooley, where bigger numbers have always led to fantastic results, is switching to a 10,000 point scale. Imagine how blown away employers will be to see a GPA of 7,600! That puny 3.7 from Michigan won't stand a chance.


Credited post, but I think Cooley will more likely use the Phoenix School of Law model and switch to pure pass/fail so no one can transfer out.

User avatar
longlivetheking
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:15 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby longlivetheking » Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:33 pm

you guys are mean as fuck.

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Yukos » Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:34 pm

Piling on well past the point that it stopped being funny is a treasured TLS tradition.

User avatar
jingosaur
Posts: 2214
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jingosaur » Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:58 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
This is credited. I can confirm that people who are intelligent enough to have graduated from a T14 have long ignored the now-disproven idea that an arbitrary number needs to be put into context before it holds significant meaning, and instead understand that the bigger number is indeed always better. Case in point: I was ashamed to reveal my measly 176 LSAT to my friend who got a 1760 on his SAT. Imagine how disappointed I was to learn that he had scored ten times higher than me! Fortunately, I got my revenge yesterday: His 300 in bowling was no match for my 30,000 on PacMan.

But of course vuthy is right that you need higher scores to keep alums (and especially those donors, who just can't enough non-contextual big numbers!) happy. That's why Cooley, where bigger numbers have always led to fantastic results, is switching to a 10,000 point scale. Imagine how blown away employers will be to see a GPA of 7,600! That puny 3.7 from Michigan won't stand a chance.



Blatant 176 humblebrag.

User avatar
longlivetheking
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:15 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby longlivetheking » Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:38 pm

jingosaur wrote:
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
This is credited. I can confirm that people who are intelligent enough to have graduated from a T14 have long ignored the now-disproven idea that an arbitrary number needs to be put into context before it holds significant meaning, and instead understand that the bigger number is indeed always better. Case in point: I was ashamed to reveal my measly 176 LSAT to my friend who got a 1760 on his SAT. Imagine how disappointed I was to learn that he had scored ten times higher than me! Fortunately, I got my revenge yesterday: His 300 in bowling was no match for my 30,000 on PacMan.

But of course vuthy is right that you need higher scores to keep alums (and especially those donors, who just can't enough non-contextual big numbers!) happy. That's why Cooley, where bigger numbers have always led to fantastic results, is switching to a 10,000 point scale. Imagine how blown away employers will be to see a GPA of 7,600! That puny 3.7 from Michigan won't stand a chance.



Blatant 176 humblebrag.


how can he be bragging when 1760 > 176? ITS TEN TIMES LOWER DUDE.

(that turned out funnier in my head tbh)

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4165
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Clearly » Sat Aug 31, 2013 11:39 pm

sasquatchsam wrote:I don't think they would ever intentionally tweak the LSAT to make it less difficult. It would be extremely unfair to a person who took the test under the "old" system if they applied in the same cycle as someone under the less difficult test. There is a reason they try so hard to keep the difficulty constant. If the difficulty changed from test to test, the LSAT would need to be administered once a year and only that test would be valid for that cycle. Or at least I don't see another alternative that would make it close to being fair to the applicants.

The thing is, that's not how it works. The difficulty is set via the data gathered from experimental sections. If you look at the drop in high scores relative to low scores recently, you'll see essentially dumber experimental data coming in eventually, which suggests that the test will get easier, or at the least, the percentiles and curve will shift down.

User avatar
longlivetheking
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:15 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby longlivetheking » Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:36 am

Clearly wrote:
sasquatchsam wrote:I don't think they would ever intentionally tweak the LSAT to make it less difficult. It would be extremely unfair to a person who took the test under the "old" system if they applied in the same cycle as someone under the less difficult test. There is a reason they try so hard to keep the difficulty constant. If the difficulty changed from test to test, the LSAT would need to be administered once a year and only that test would be valid for that cycle. Or at least I don't see another alternative that would make it close to being fair to the applicants.

The thing is, that's not how it works. The difficulty is set via the data gathered from experimental sections. If you look at the drop in high scores relative to low scores recently, you'll see essentially dumber experimental data coming in eventually, which suggests that the test will get easier, or at the least, the percentiles and curve will shift down.

when would we see the test become easier?

User avatar
altoid99
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:04 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby altoid99 » Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:39 am

Aaaand the second -3 drop in median LSAT brought to you by the University of Tennessee. Interestingly, the other -3 (Nebraska) is also ranked 61st. The fact that UT increased its class size by 38, which no doubt contributed to the dramatic decline in their median, I think shows that they cared much more about $$$ than maintaining medians this cycle. They're certainly not the only ones.

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Nova » Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:48 am

Good work so far Altoid

User avatar
cannibal ox
Posts: 2931
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cannibal ox » Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:49 am

Nova wrote:Good work so far Altoid


This.

sasquatchsam
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:51 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby sasquatchsam » Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:52 am

Clearly wrote:
sasquatchsam wrote:I don't think they would ever intentionally tweak the LSAT to make it less difficult. It would be extremely unfair to a person who took the test under the "old" system if they applied in the same cycle as someone under the less difficult test. There is a reason they try so hard to keep the difficulty constant. If the difficulty changed from test to test, the LSAT would need to be administered once a year and only that test would be valid for that cycle. Or at least I don't see another alternative that would make it close to being fair to the applicants.

The thing is, that's not how it works. The difficulty is set via the data gathered from experimental sections. If you look at the drop in high scores relative to low scores recently, you'll see essentially dumber experimental data coming in eventually, which suggests that the test will get easier, or at the least, the percentiles and curve will shift down.


Has there been a drop in the percentiles? My understanding was that the drop was simply in the percentage of individuals applying with 170+ scores. The percentiles have remained fairly constant (within .1%) but the total number of test takers has decreased and of those scoring 170+ a greater percentage have self-selected not to apply.
Last edited by sasquatchsam on Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Motivator9
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2013 12:03 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Motivator9 » Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:58 am

altoid99 wrote:Aaaand the second -3 drop in median LSAT brought to you by the University of Tennessee. Interestingly, the other -3 (Nebraska) is also ranked 61st. The fact that UT increased its class size by 38, which no doubt contributed to the dramatic decline in their median, I think shows that they cared much more about $$$ than maintaining medians this cycle. They're certainly not the only ones.


They don't have much to lose because they're still the best option by far in the state outside of Vandy. And, their in state tuition is a good bargain for the school's placement.

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Yukos » Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:11 am

Motivator9 wrote:
altoid99 wrote:Aaaand the second -3 drop in median LSAT brought to you by the University of Tennessee. Interestingly, the other -3 (Nebraska) is also ranked 61st. The fact that UT increased its class size by 38, which no doubt contributed to the dramatic decline in their median, I think shows that they cared much more about $$$ than maintaining medians this cycle. They're certainly not the only ones.


They don't have much to lose because they're still the best option by far in the state outside of Vandy. And, their in state tuition is a good bargain for the school's placement.


Yeah I actually don't have a problem with state flagships lowering standards and keeping class sizes steady. It means less students going to TTTs and more students paying public school prices. TBH, schools like UT probably had artificially high medians just because of the applicant bubble, and their numbers are returning to normal now.

It's the TTTTs who are going from 150 medians to 145 that are the real problem.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests