Columbia 2011!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:20 pm

obrienfa wrote:
CastleRock wrote:What's your point?


That you can't say certain LSAT/GPA's are boardline with that small of a sampling. Maybe we won't get immediately but we all still have a decent chance looking at medians and whatnot.

You are really going to have a sampling size argument with me regarding LSN? Cause this hasn't been done before.

Well if you really want to get into this argument. What sample size would you suggest is representative of the population as a whole? Not to mention the self-selection bias that takes place on LSN. People who get accepted are more likely to report their decision.

If you really want to go down this road we can. But someone makes a claim, I provide evidence to the contrary of his claim. Then some third person jumps in and says that evidence is no good. Well I have provided the best evidence thus far. So until I see something that suggests I am wrong, I will stick with my opinion.

kbaithx

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:22 pm

bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:
bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:So far from what I have seen it looks mostly like borderline LSATs are getting these requests. Although, I've seen one data point that doesn't fit this profile.


You're crazy to think a 4.0 171 is "borderline". The MEDIAN is 172, meaning that somewhere close to 50% of the class is below that. Median GPA is pretty far from 4.0, so I wouldn't call any of these applicants borderline.

http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/applicants/0910/?lsat2=171&lsatR=true&lsat1=170&lgpa1=3.90&lgpa2=4.33&status=1,3,4,5&type=jd
http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/0910/

Really? Looks like these candidates are pretty borderline for CLS. Maybe you should check the data before you run your mouth.


If they were gunning to increase their numbers then these people would all get in. Showing mixed results doesn't mean that they are "borderline" applicants, just that admission is not guaranteed. Very few outright rejects in this group.

A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.

User avatar
T6Hopeful
Posts: 693
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:30 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby T6Hopeful » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:25 pm

obrienfa wrote:
CastleRock wrote:
Excellence = a Habit wrote:
CastleRock wrote:Looks like they're only asking for grades from those with very high gpas. Are you all reverse splitters?


They asked for grades from a 3.7 as well (T6 Hopeful)

That's still a decent gpa for Columbia (not great admittedly). I'm just curious what these peoples LSATs look like in comparison to their gpas.


I am the 3.7 Habit was talking about. I have a 171 LSAT.

Yeah Habit, you scared the crap out of me there. I was like, THEY DID?!
And I don't know if this has been broken down in the last few pages, but it seemed to me as if all of the requests were regular decisions? Correct me if I'm wrong.

User avatar
Non-Chalant1
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:54 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Non-Chalant1 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:26 pm

CastleRock comes across as one of those people that make people hate lawyers and law school. There's a way to inform someone without talking down to them.

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:26 pm

Non-Chalant1 wrote:CastleRock comes across as one of those people that make people hate lawyers and law school. There's a way to inform someone without talking down to them.

and then there is a way to deal with idiots who choose not to listen.

User avatar
obrienfa
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:05 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby obrienfa » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:28 pm

T6Hopeful wrote:And I don't know if this has been broken down in the last few pages, but it seemed to me as if all of the requests were regular decisions? Correct me if I'm wrong.


I applied regular decision and I think other people mentioned being RD too.

bdubs
Posts: 3729
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby bdubs » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:28 pm

CastleRock wrote:A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.


http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... =3&type=jd

There are a lot of high 16X in here. If you are above one median and below another it doesn't automatically make you borderline.

I agree that a 172 3.81+ is of greater value, but that doesn't mean that everyone below 172 is suddenly out of consideration or that shifting up the GPA median doesn't mean anything to Columbia.

User avatar
arism87
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:46 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby arism87 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:28 pm

Non-Chalant1 wrote:CastleRock comes across as one of those people that make people hate lawyers and law school. There's a way to inform someone without talking down to them.


+1

User avatar
Non-Chalant1
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:54 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Non-Chalant1 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:29 pm

CastleRock wrote:
Non-Chalant1 wrote:CastleRock comes across as one of those people that make people hate lawyers and law school. There's a way to inform someone without talking down to them.

and then there is a way to deal with idiots who choose not to listen.

I mean granted I haven't followed this entire discourse, but from the last page of it (all I've read admittedly in regards to convo) they seemed uninformed and you were right...but man...you were mean about it. Short fuse dude LOL?

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:30 pm

bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.


http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... =3&type=jd

There are a lot of high 16X in here. If you are above one median and below another it doesn't automatically make you borderline.

I agree that a 172 3.81+ is of greater value, but that doesn't mean that everyone below 172 is suddenly out of consideration or that shifting up the GPA median doesn't mean anything to Columbia.

Find where I said that they are out of consideration? I never said they were out of consideration. My whole point is that they want to make sure these applicants maintain that GPA, because they are borderline as far as numbers go.

The fact that they want fall grades suggests they arent out of consideration.

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:32 pm

Non-Chalant1 wrote:
CastleRock wrote:
Non-Chalant1 wrote:CastleRock comes across as one of those people that make people hate lawyers and law school. There's a way to inform someone without talking down to them.

and then there is a way to deal with idiots who choose not to listen.

I mean granted I haven't followed this entire discourse, but from the last page of it (all I've read admittedly in regards to convo) they seemed uninformed and you were right...but man...you were mean about it. Short fuse dude LOL?

You have been on this forum as long as I have, so you should know what its like when you are dealing with posters who are unwilling to listen to well thought out reasoning. But then again, you don't have any posts, so maybe you havent dealt with people like this as much.

Simply put, I have a short fuse with people who refuse to listen to reason.

User avatar
arism87
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:46 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby arism87 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:33 pm

CastleRock wrote:
bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.


http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... =3&type=jd

There are a lot of high 16X in here. If you are above one median and below another it doesn't automatically make you borderline.

I agree that a 172 3.81+ is of greater value, but that doesn't mean that everyone below 172 is suddenly out of consideration or that shifting up the GPA median doesn't mean anything to Columbia.

Find where I said that they are out of consideration? I never said they were out of consideration. My whole point is that they want to make sure these applicants maintain that GPA, because they are borderline as far as numbers go.

The fact that they want fall grades suggests they arent out of consideration.


If that's the case, why send them to 4.0s? I mean even the worst semester in the world will still leave a GPA over the 75th, no? (I haven't done the math, but it just seems that way)

bdubs
Posts: 3729
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby bdubs » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:33 pm

CastleRock wrote:
bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.


http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... =3&type=jd

There are a lot of high 16X in here. If you are above one median and below another it doesn't automatically make you borderline.

I agree that a 172 3.81+ is of greater value, but that doesn't mean that everyone below 172 is suddenly out of consideration or that shifting up the GPA median doesn't mean anything to Columbia.

Find where I said that they are out of consideration? I never said they were out of consideration. My whole point is that they want to make sure these applicants maintain that GPA, because they are borderline as far as numbers go.

The fact that they want fall grades suggests they arent out of consideration.


Using the word borderline implies they are on the border of acceptance or denial.

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:34 pm

bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:
bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.


http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... =3&type=jd

There are a lot of high 16X in here. If you are above one median and below another it doesn't automatically make you borderline.

I agree that a 172 3.81+ is of greater value, but that doesn't mean that everyone below 172 is suddenly out of consideration or that shifting up the GPA median doesn't mean anything to Columbia.

Find where I said that they are out of consideration? I never said they were out of consideration. My whole point is that they want to make sure these applicants maintain that GPA, because they are borderline as far as numbers go.

The fact that they want fall grades suggests they arent out of consideration.


Using the word borderline implies they are on the border of acceptance or denial.

Exactly, at about a 50% chance. Which is pretty much exactly what the evidence suggests.

50% chance does not equal out of consideration.

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:36 pm

arism87 wrote:
CastleRock wrote:
bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.


http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... =3&type=jd

There are a lot of high 16X in here. If you are above one median and below another it doesn't automatically make you borderline.

I agree that a 172 3.81+ is of greater value, but that doesn't mean that everyone below 172 is suddenly out of consideration or that shifting up the GPA median doesn't mean anything to Columbia.

Find where I said that they are out of consideration? I never said they were out of consideration. My whole point is that they want to make sure these applicants maintain that GPA, because they are borderline as far as numbers go.

The fact that they want fall grades suggests they arent out of consideration.


If that's the case, why send them to 4.0s? I mean even the worst semester in the world will still leave a GPA over the 75th, no? (I haven't done the math, but it just seems that way)

Because someone who tanks in the fall in likely to tank in the winter. This is not that uncommon for fourth years. They quit caring.

User avatar
arism87
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:46 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby arism87 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:37 pm

Because someone who tanks in the fall in likely to tank in the winter. This is not that uncommon for fourth years. They quit caring.


Ah, wasn't thinking about 2 semesters. So the school reports final grades? Good to know. (I'm not even in UG anymore, just curious)

ETA: Fourth years huh, I thought calling people that was a UVA thing lol
Last edited by arism87 on Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dany
Posts: 11580
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Dany » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:38 pm

NO ONE KNOWS WHY THEY REQUEST THE FALL GRADES.

Can we drop this?

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:39 pm

arism87 wrote:
Because someone who tanks in the fall in likely to tank in the winter. This is not that uncommon for fourth years. They quit caring.


Ah, wasn't thinking about 2 semesters. So the school reports final grades? Good to know. (I'm not even in UG anymore, just curious)

ETA: Fourth years huh, I thought calling people that was a UVA thing lol

I'm canadian, no such thing as the fresman through senior thing here.

Nola
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:45 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Nola » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:40 pm

I think you are all a bunch of whiny tools. My LSAT was pretty far below the medium for Michigan and most people told me I didn't have a shot. I was one of the first admits to Michigan a few weeks ago. Personal Statements do matter and so do other non-numbers based criteria. Otherwise there would be 0 rejects with high LSATs but as we all know people with 180's get rejected all the time.

I wish you all luck in the admissions process. When you all get a little older, enter the real world, and mature you'll realize how pointless your blathering on TLS was.

Class dismissed.

User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby acrossthelake » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:40 pm

bdubs wrote:
CastleRock wrote:A waitlist is just a soft rejection for most applicants. Pull your head out of your ass. If they want to increase numbers they wont accept people with numbers lower than their medians. These applicants have LSATs lower than median. To CLS an applicant with 172/3.81+ is more valuable to their numbers than any of these applicants.

Edit: Not to mention that if you knew anything about CLS, you would know it values LSAT considerably higher than gpa.


http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... =3&type=jd

There are a lot of high 16X in here. If you are above one median and below another it doesn't automatically make you borderline.

I agree that a 172 3.81+ is of greater value, but that doesn't mean that everyone below 172 is suddenly out of consideration or that shifting up the GPA median doesn't mean anything to Columbia.


Hmmmm, there aren't really very 16X in there when you take out the URMs, who really shouldn't be used as examples since their cycles work differently. If you take them out, you're left with:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/doubleentendres
Rejected at UChi, 'pending' at NYU, so yeah borderline for CCN.
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/ndgrad05
Reverse splitter, 3.9+ GPA with WE.
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/threewindows
Early Decision, Reverse splitter, 3.99 GPA, and the ED is perfect for borderline
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/parker09
Ivy undergrad, WE, and WL->R @ Stanford & HLS makes me think she/he had good softs.

Anyway, having < 172 LSAT basically means that one needs something else to compensate: WE, 3.9+ GPA, Early Decision, or some other soft in order to tilt one into acceptance category. Without these (Straight out of undergrad, GPA not high enough, regular decision, mediocre softs), yeah, the numbers in isolation are borderline. Anyway, too late for it to matter.
Last edited by acrossthelake on Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
arism87
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 7:46 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby arism87 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:42 pm

Nola wrote:I think you are all a bunch of whiny tools. My LSAT was pretty far below the medium for Michigan and most people told me I didn't have a shot. I was one of the first admits to Michigan a few weeks ago. Personal Statements do matter and so do other non-numbers based criteria. Otherwise there would be 0 rejects with high LSATs but as we all know people with 180's get rejected all the time.

I wish you all luck in the admissions process. When you all get a little older, enter the real world, and mature you'll realize how pointless your blathering on TLS was.

Class dismissed.


Totally unnecessary and unhelpful but thanks

ETA: This convo really isn't dissimilar from your own posts...

User avatar
Dany
Posts: 11580
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby Dany » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:44 pm

arism87 wrote:
Nola wrote:I think you are all a bunch of whiny tools. My LSAT was pretty far below the medium for Michigan and most people told me I didn't have a shot. I was one of the first admits to Michigan a few weeks ago. Personal Statements do matter and so do other non-numbers based criteria. Otherwise there would be 0 rejects with high LSATs but as we all know people with 180's get rejected all the time.

I wish you all luck in the admissions process. When you all get a little older, enter the real world, and mature you'll realize how pointless your blathering on TLS was.

Class dismissed.


Totally unnecessary and unhelpful but thanks

+1

4102011
Posts: 1724
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby 4102011 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:44 pm

Man, this is only slightly better than the NYC-bashing that was going on in the NYU thread earlier this week.

Let's all just be nice and chill until we start freaking out about vomit-colored envelopes in January <3

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby WestOfTheRest » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:44 pm

Nola wrote:I think you are all a bunch of whiny tools. My LSAT was pretty far below the medium for Michigan and most people told me I didn't have a shot. I was one of the first admits to Michigan a few weeks ago. Personal Statements do matter and so do other non-numbers based criteria. Otherwise there would be 0 rejects with high LSATs but as we all know people with 180's get rejected all the time.

I wish you all luck in the admissions process. When you all get a little older, enter the real world, and mature you'll realize how pointless your blathering on TLS was.

Class dismissed.

Thanks for providing an anecdote from a more holistic school.

Image

User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Columbia 2011!

Postby acrossthelake » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:45 pm

dulcatis wrote:Man, this is only slightly better than the NYC-bashing that was going on in the NYU thread earlier this week.

Let's all just be nice and chill until we start freaking out about vomit-colored envelopes in January <3


Its vomit-coloured? Ewwwwww




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”