Anonymous User wrote:As for backup, look to the 2011-12 announcements which show over 60 honors grads. As for confusion, there is none. Just because every 1L class has a 177 median except Lrw does not mean that the median cumulative GPA is 177. given the distribution, it simply won't work out that way.

Not trying to be combative here, just trying to understand. Why does it not simply work out that way? If you can elaborate a little more on how it doesn't work out that way, maybe with a mathematical explanation.

I was personally curious enough to do a spreadsheet, feel free to correct me if I did something wrong. Say the classes give out grades from 1-5, and the students (A-K) are relatively consistent with their grades, which they tend to be. There is one 1, two 2s, five 3s, two 4s, and one 5 per class.

Student A B C D E F G H I J K

Class 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 5

Class 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 5 4

Class 3 3 3 3 2 1 2 4 5 3 3 4

Class 4 3 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 5 4 4

Class 5 2 1 4 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 5

Total 11 9 14 11 13 14 17 17 18 19 22

Cumulative 2.2 1.8 2.8 2.2 2.6 2.8 3.4 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.4

Ordered 1.8 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.8 2.8 3.4 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.4

median = 2.8, which is pretty close to 3. Why would the cumulative median be higher than the median for each individual class? It seems pretty much the same to me. The only thing different is that the distribution and amount of people at the median are different, but that alone doesn't change the median, nor does it seem to change the fact that a 179, which would be around a 3.5/4, is still at least top 20-25% of the class.

Also, the graduation data is far from an accurate reflection of the cumulative median during 1L year. As you go through law school, the curve generally gets easier, so I'm not surprised that 30% of the class graduated with a 179. However, I highly

highly doubt that 30% of the 1L class has a 179; I think 179=top 20-25% is a better estimation.