Yale 2010

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:58 pm

I would imagine that nearly all of the people with a 178+ LSAT applied to Yale.

User avatar
Pausanias
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Yale 2010

Postby Pausanias » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:02 pm

I wonder if there is any correlation between admit time, and whether Asha and Craig greenlight you, versus the professors. If you were admitted in December, does that mean that no professor ever read your app? Or does it not make a difference? I've heard that professors don't care much about scores, so once it gets past the admissions office it's probably all about the soft factors.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby r6_philly » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:04 pm

from LSAC data

lsat / GPA : number admits/percentage (out of 275)
155-159/3.75-4.33: 1/0.4%
160-164/3.75-4.33: 6/2.2%
160-164/3.50-3.74: 6/2.2%
165-169/3.75-4.33: 37/13.5%
165-169/3.50-3.75: 9/3.3%
165-169/3.25-3.49: 2/0.7%

Total 61/22.2%

Now look at the URM data

AA: 18/9.5%
Asian: 26/13.7%
Mex: 3/1.6%
PR: 1/0.5%
His: 8/4.2%
Total Minority: 56/29.5%
Total URM (minus Asian): 30/15.8%

So 61 admit with less than 170, and 30 URM matriculated. So if you want to draw a unconfirmed conclusion you would say not nearly all the sub 170 admits are URM.

I also want to hypothesize that most sub 170 applicants who were admitted also matriculated (it would seem to me that they must want to attend to apply with their numbers, and maybe they wouldn't be in at H and S. Just guessing though). So if that is true, then most of all 61 sub 170 admits matriculated compare to 30 URM means the other 31 are not URM.

So I think I can reasonably conclude that the cut off is NOT 169/3.75. Maybe they give everyone a quick glance over your files even if you are lower than 165 to see if you deserve full consideration. Maybe they do read everyone's full files. There can't be 30+ best sellers and actors and nobel prize winners who apply every year. Some people must have gotten in with the right experience and right story and right attitude.

Discussion?

BenJ
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby BenJ » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:16 pm

managamy wrote:I would imagine that nearly all of the people with a 178+ LSAT applied to Yale.


I disagree. I think there are plenty of reasons not to apply to Yale, even for highly qualified applicants. There most certainly are 178+s out there who have few or no law school application resources and little guidance. They might assume, due to lay prestige, that Harvard is the better school (or somewhere else, I suppose). They might prefer Stanford because they're from the West Coast. They might only apply to their state school(s) for affordability reasons. They might have families and be unwilling to uproot. They might be legacies at some other highly ranked school that their family expects them to attend. They might simply decide not to apply to law school for whatever reason.

LSN eliminates some of these through selection bias: Obviously, only those applying to law school are on LSN, and those with little information or who are not ambitious and therefore applying only locally will also not be on LSN.

notanumber
Posts: 485
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby notanumber » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:18 pm

managamy wrote:I would imagine that nearly all of the people with a 178+ LSAT applied to Yale.


Applied? Probably. Applied and had a GPA good enough to really qualify? I'm not so sure about that. I know at least two 178+ folk who have a GPA under 3.5. I also know one person with a 179/3.8 who decided to get a Ph.D. instead.

EDIT: I should add, I suspect that many engineers and students from schools/majors without grade inflation might have lower GPAs that make them not terribly competitive at Yale, despite having the logic skills to nail the LSAT. I'm grateful for my fairly "easy" major (although its ease had nothing to do with why I chose it - I'm just lucky)
Last edited by notanumber on Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby r6_philly » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:18 pm

Pausanias wrote:I wonder if there is any correlation between admit time, and whether Asha and Craig greenlight you, versus the professors. If you were admitted in December, does that mean that no professor ever read your app? Or does it not make a difference? I've heard that professors don't care much about scores, so once it gets past the admissions office it's probably all about the soft factors.


I want to add that soft factors are just a list of factors that may or *may not* do anything for your application. I mean a well accomplished prick is still a prick. If an applicants personality doesn't come across as someone they want, no factor (scores or softs) can save you from a reject. My professors constantly tell me how some students are brilliant and accomplished but they wouldn't recommend them for anything. So maybe the professors really want students they want to teach, and I know for a fact that many professors don't like over confident, arrogant, over achievers who thing they *deserve* to be admitted... I think most professors were themselves immature and brilliant at one point and they would probably much prefer maturity in the files they read because they see the value in growing up. (I see this point very well now since I am older lol)

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby booboo » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:19 pm

r6_philly wrote:from LSAC data

lsat / GPA : number admits/percentage (out of 275)
155-159/3.75-4.33: 1/0.4%
160-164/3.75-4.33: 6/2.2%
160-164/3.50-3.74: 6/2.2%
165-169/3.75-4.33: 37/13.5%
165-169/3.50-3.75: 9/3.3%
165-169/3.25-3.49: 2/0.7%

Total 61/22.2%

Now look at the URM data

AA: 18/9.5%
Asian: 26/13.7%
Mex: 3/1.6%
PR: 1/0.5%
His: 8/4.2%
Total Minority: 56/29.5%
Total URM (minus Asian): 30/15.8%

So 61 admit with less than 170, and 30 URM matriculated. So if you want to draw a unconfirmed conclusion you would say not nearly all the sub 170 admits are URM.

I also want to hypothesize that most sub 170 applicants who were admitted also matriculated (it would seem to me that they must want to attend to apply with their numbers, and maybe they wouldn't be in at H and S. Just guessing though). So if that is true, then most of all 61 sub 170 admits matriculated compare to 30 URM means the other 31 are not URM.

So I think I can reasonably conclude that the cut off is NOT 169/3.75. Maybe they give everyone a quick glance over your files even if you are lower than 165 to see if you deserve full consideration. Maybe they do read everyone's full files. There can't be 30+ best sellers and actors and nobel prize winners who apply every year. Some people must have gotten in with the right experience and right story and right attitude.

Discussion?


I know I am a little slow, but I don't get what it is that you are aiming for here...

User avatar
englawyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby englawyer » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:20 pm

booboo wrote:
r6_philly wrote:from LSAC data

lsat / GPA : number admits/percentage (out of 275)
155-159/3.75-4.33: 1/0.4%
160-164/3.75-4.33: 6/2.2%
160-164/3.50-3.74: 6/2.2%
165-169/3.75-4.33: 37/13.5%
165-169/3.50-3.75: 9/3.3%
165-169/3.25-3.49: 2/0.7%

Total 61/22.2%

Now look at the URM data

AA: 18/9.5%
Asian: 26/13.7%
Mex: 3/1.6%
PR: 1/0.5%
His: 8/4.2%
Total Minority: 56/29.5%
Total URM (minus Asian): 30/15.8%

So 61 admit with less than 170, and 30 URM matriculated. So if you want to draw a unconfirmed conclusion you would say not nearly all the sub 170 admits are URM.

I also want to hypothesize that most sub 170 applicants who were admitted also matriculated (it would seem to me that they must want to attend to apply with their numbers, and maybe they wouldn't be in at H and S. Just guessing though). So if that is true, then most of all 61 sub 170 admits matriculated compare to 30 URM means the other 31 are not URM.

So I think I can reasonably conclude that the cut off is NOT 169/3.75. Maybe they give everyone a quick glance over your files even if you are lower than 165 to see if you deserve full consideration. Maybe they do read everyone's full files. There can't be 30+ best sellers and actors and nobel prize winners who apply every year. Some people must have gotten in with the right experience and right story and right attitude.

Discussion?


I know I am a little slow, but I don't get what it is that you are aiming for here...


he is trying to show there are definitely non-URM admits w/ below 25th stats

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:20 pm

Pausanias wrote:I wonder if there is any correlation between admit time, and whether Asha and Craig greenlight you, versus the professors. If you were admitted in December, does that mean that no professor ever read your app? Or does it not make a difference? I've heard that professors don't care much about scores, so once it gets past the admissions office it's probably all about the soft factors.


If the last sentence is true, I got the green light before my file got past the admissions office to the professors. It was more than two months from completion to phone call, though.

Re the 178+ discussion, I can see that Yale isn't the first choice for all of them. But I would imagine that all of them would apply so that they had the option if their top choice didn't come through for some unexpected reason or if something changed in their personal situation in the meantime. It's not hard to find the USNWR rankings and see that Yale is #1; someone who took the trouble to prepare for the LSAT (virtually necessary for scoring so well) surely would have taken the trouble to look at the rankings.

User avatar
tomhobbes
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby tomhobbes » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:23 pm

You can find that even among the top applicants on LSN, a fair number haven't applied to Yale.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby r6_philly » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:24 pm

BenJ wrote:
managamy wrote:I would imagine that nearly all of the people with a 178+ LSAT applied to Yale.


I disagree. I think there are plenty of reasons not to apply to Yale, even for highly qualified applicants. There most certainly are 178+s out there who have few or no law school application resources and little guidance. They might assume, due to lay prestige, that Harvard is the better school (or somewhere else, I suppose). They might prefer Stanford because they're from the West Coast. They might only apply to their state school(s) for affordability reasons. They might have families and be unwilling to uproot. They might be legacies at some other highly ranked school that their family expects them to attend. They might simply decide not to apply to law school for whatever reason.

LSN eliminates some of these through selection bias: Obviously, only those applying to law school are on LSN, and those with little information or who are not ambitious and therefore applying only locally will also not be on LSN.


I disagree with this. When I came back to school, I would have been content going to Temple law because that's local and that's what I knew. But my recommenders asked me to apply to all the top schools because they think I would be a great candidate and they think I would thrive in the best schools. On top of that I am in a state school, and I didn't know that Yale had a law school this time last year.

I think you have to get help from so many people along the way from a college junior to a law school applicant. if a student is apt enough to get a 178, someone would have pointed the way to Yale. Some of your reaons seem solid, but I think the other parts are unlikely.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby r6_philly » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:31 pm

tomhobbes wrote:You can find that even among the top applicants on LSN, a fair number haven't applied to Yale.


They are dreading over the 250, and they feel like they deserve a fee waiver lol

Well I personally think that Yale probably doesn't fit the career needs of a lot of top applicants as well as H and S. The road to $$$ is probably better through the other top schools.

BenJ
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby BenJ » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:38 pm

Okay, there are 51 178+s on LSN for the 2009-2010 cycle. There may be a few more after the February LSAT, but the February LSAT crowd is unusual in any case because their scores cannot count towards Harvard or Stanford admission, adding extra pressure on them to apply at Yale. I'll ignore them.

Of the 180s, 8 of 15 applied to Yale. Two of these only "intend to apply", but I assume they will apply. One 180 reported no applications; I discounted that person entirely. A few of the 180s were extreme splitters and likely would have been rejected from Yale regardless, but I didn't take that into account.

Of the 179s, 11 of 14 applied to Yale. Again, this includes extreme splitters and those who only "intend to apply".

Of the 178s, 13 of 21 applied to Yale. Ditto on previous.

There are people who applied to other schools in September or October who have not applied to Yale; they're clearly not stalling on their 250s. Some of the non-applicants look to have specific reasons. One was accepted into UCLA ED very early; another from Idaho applied only to Harvard and BYU (obviously Mormon). Others had more normal circumstances: They got Hamiltons or Darrows or got into Harvard or Stanford early on and just chose never to apply to Yale. The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.

I suppose you could do a similar analysis of last cycle's 178+s to eliminate the possibility of stalling, but I doubt it accounts for more than one or two 178+s on LSN who reported not even intending to apply to Yale.
Last edited by BenJ on Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:40 pm

BenJ wrote:Okay, there are 51 178+s for the 2009-2010 cycle. There may be a few more after the February LSAT, but the February LSAT crowd is unusual in any case because their scores cannot count towards Harvard or Stanford admission, adding extra pressure on them to apply at Yale. I'll ignore them.

Of the 180s, 8 of 15 applied to Yale. Two of these only "intend to apply", but I assume they will apply. One 180 reported no applications; I discounted that person entirely. A few of the 180s were extreme splitters and likely would have been rejected from Yale regardless, but I didn't take that into account.

Of the 179s, 11 of 14 applied to Yale. Again, this includes extreme splitters and those who only "intend to apply".

Of the 178s, 13 of 21 applied to Yale. Ditto on previous.

There are people who applied to other schools in September or October who have not applied to Yale; they're clearly not stalling on their 250s. Some of the non-applicants look to have specific reasons. One was accepted into UCLA ED very early; another from Idaho applied only to Harvard and BYU (obviously Mormon). Others had more normal circumstances: They got Hamiltons or Darrows or got into Harvard or Stanford early on and just chose never to apply to Yale. The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.


Thanks for doing the research. I'll buy your conclusions.

User avatar
tomhobbes
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby tomhobbes » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:41 pm

BenJ wrote:Okay, there are 51 178+s on LSN for the 2009-2010 cycle. There may be a few more after the February LSAT, but the February LSAT crowd is unusual in any case because their scores cannot count towards Harvard or Stanford admission, adding extra pressure on them to apply at Yale. I'll ignore them.

Of the 180s, 8 of 15 applied to Yale. Two of these only "intend to apply", but I assume they will apply. One 180 reported no applications; I discounted that person entirely. A few of the 180s were extreme splitters and likely would have been rejected from Yale regardless, but I didn't take that into account.

Of the 179s, 11 of 14 applied to Yale. Again, this includes extreme splitters and those who only "intend to apply".

Of the 178s, 13 of 21 applied to Yale. Ditto on previous.

There are people who applied to other schools in September or October who have not applied to Yale; they're clearly not stalling on their 250s. Some of the non-applicants look to have specific reasons. One was accepted into UCLA ED very early; another from Idaho applied only to Harvard and BYU (obviously Mormon). Others had more normal circumstances: They got Hamiltons or Darrows or got into Harvard or Stanford early on and just chose never to apply to Yale. The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.


You, sir, are a gentleman, a scholar, and a fanatic.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby r6_philly » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:45 pm

BenJ wrote: The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.


I would agree with you that many people who have the choice at H/S would not want to go to Yale for a variety of reasons. Also it may be sort of intimidating to apply to a school who publicly say they don't really care about your 178 as much. Back to the data I presented, 101 admits had LSAT of 175+ while 48 had less than 169 and below. So many applicants may not feel confident enough to apply because who wants to waste $100 when they don't think they will get in. Also because H and S admit earlier, they may not feel the need to apply to Yale now since they got H or S or CC with money. Why spoil the cycle with a reject? (especially for a school which may be the least attractive to them anyway).

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:46 pm

tomhobbes wrote:
BenJ wrote:Okay, there are 51 178+s on LSN for the 2009-2010 cycle. There may be a few more after the February LSAT, but the February LSAT crowd is unusual in any case because their scores cannot count towards Harvard or Stanford admission, adding extra pressure on them to apply at Yale. I'll ignore them.

Of the 180s, 8 of 15 applied to Yale. Two of these only "intend to apply", but I assume they will apply. One 180 reported no applications; I discounted that person entirely. A few of the 180s were extreme splitters and likely would have been rejected from Yale regardless, but I didn't take that into account.

Of the 179s, 11 of 14 applied to Yale. Again, this includes extreme splitters and those who only "intend to apply".

Of the 178s, 13 of 21 applied to Yale. Ditto on previous.

There are people who applied to other schools in September or October who have not applied to Yale; they're clearly not stalling on their 250s. Some of the non-applicants look to have specific reasons. One was accepted into UCLA ED very early; another from Idaho applied only to Harvard and BYU (obviously Mormon). Others had more normal circumstances: They got Hamiltons or Darrows or got into Harvard or Stanford early on and just chose never to apply to Yale. The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.


You, sir, are a gentleman, a scholar, and a fanatic.


Those efforts have to constitute a substantial soft, no? :)

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby booboo » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:52 pm

BenJ wrote:Okay, there are 51 178+s on LSN for the 2009-2010 cycle. There may be a few more after the February LSAT, but the February LSAT crowd is unusual in any case because their scores cannot count towards Harvard or Stanford admission, adding extra pressure on them to apply at Yale. I'll ignore them.

Of the 180s, 8 of 15 applied to Yale. Two of these only "intend to apply", but I assume they will apply. One 180 reported no applications; I discounted that person entirely. A few of the 180s were extreme splitters and likely would have been rejected from Yale regardless, but I didn't take that into account.

Of the 179s, 11 of 14 applied to Yale. Again, this includes extreme splitters and those who only "intend to apply".

Of the 178s, 13 of 21 applied to Yale. Ditto on previous.

There are people who applied to other schools in September or October who have not applied to Yale; they're clearly not stalling on their 250s. Some of the non-applicants look to have specific reasons. One was accepted into UCLA ED very early; another from Idaho applied only to Harvard and BYU (obviously Mormon). Others had more normal circumstances: They got Hamiltons or Darrows or got into Harvard or Stanford early on and just chose never to apply to Yale. The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.

I suppose you could do a similar analysis of last cycle's 178+s to eliminate the possibility of stalling, but I doubt it accounts for more than one or two 178+s on LSN who reported not even intending to apply to Yale.


Let's assume there are 160000 administrations of the LSAT in the June 2009 - February 2010 cycle. I believe the LSAT claims 30% of it's administrations are retakes (or 30% of it's unique test takers retake the exam, but for simplicity's sake we will assume the former, while admitting that the latter could mean those that take the examination three times can skew this a bit [but hopefully not enough to ruin this demonstration]) which gives us a total unique LSAT test taker value of approximately 125000. A 178+ is a 99.8% score, meaning .002 applicants score at this level or above. This equates to approximately 250 scorers, which means the LSN information would represent only 20% of all scorers with a 178+.

BenJ
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby BenJ » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:57 pm

managamy wrote:
tomhobbes wrote:
BenJ wrote:Okay, there are 51 178+s on LSN for the 2009-2010 cycle. There may be a few more after the February LSAT, but the February LSAT crowd is unusual in any case because their scores cannot count towards Harvard or Stanford admission, adding extra pressure on them to apply at Yale. I'll ignore them.

Of the 180s, 8 of 15 applied to Yale. Two of these only "intend to apply", but I assume they will apply. One 180 reported no applications; I discounted that person entirely. A few of the 180s were extreme splitters and likely would have been rejected from Yale regardless, but I didn't take that into account.

Of the 179s, 11 of 14 applied to Yale. Again, this includes extreme splitters and those who only "intend to apply".

Of the 178s, 13 of 21 applied to Yale. Ditto on previous.

There are people who applied to other schools in September or October who have not applied to Yale; they're clearly not stalling on their 250s. Some of the non-applicants look to have specific reasons. One was accepted into UCLA ED very early; another from Idaho applied only to Harvard and BYU (obviously Mormon). Others had more normal circumstances: They got Hamiltons or Darrows or got into Harvard or Stanford early on and just chose never to apply to Yale. The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.


You, sir, are a gentleman, a scholar, and a fanatic.


Those efforts have to constitute a substantial soft, no? :)


Should I submit this as an addendum to my application? :lol:

The point about GPAs is definitely true; while the 178+/3.9+ crowd mostly applied to Yale, the percentage applying to Yale dropped significantly as the GPA declined (although plenty of serious splitters applied to Yale, and some people with high GPAs did not).

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:58 pm

Does anyone else find it ironic and amusing that we're engaging in an intensive numbers-crunching exercise in the thread of the school that arguably is the least numbers-crunching of all?

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:58 pm

People who haven't been on TLS yet today are going to log in and assume that there's a huge new batch of decisions, seeing the sudden jump in pages.

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby booboo » Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:59 pm

You pointing it out is funny. Hehe.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:02 pm

booboo wrote:You pointing it out is funny. Hehe.


Why? :?

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby booboo » Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:05 pm

managamy wrote:
booboo wrote:You pointing it out is funny. Hehe.


Why? :?


I meant that as you were right, and not an affront to you. Didn't realize it could have been read that way.

Yale is (at least within T14) the most holistic school. They just have the luxury of receiving the best applications by the best candidates (plus, it helps that the best applications are usually accompanied by great softs AND great numbers.).

BenJ
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm

Re: Yale 2010

Postby BenJ » Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:10 pm

booboo wrote:
BenJ wrote:Okay, there are 51 178+s on LSN for the 2009-2010 cycle. There may be a few more after the February LSAT, but the February LSAT crowd is unusual in any case because their scores cannot count towards Harvard or Stanford admission, adding extra pressure on them to apply at Yale. I'll ignore them.

Of the 180s, 8 of 15 applied to Yale. Two of these only "intend to apply", but I assume they will apply. One 180 reported no applications; I discounted that person entirely. A few of the 180s were extreme splitters and likely would have been rejected from Yale regardless, but I didn't take that into account.

Of the 179s, 11 of 14 applied to Yale. Again, this includes extreme splitters and those who only "intend to apply".

Of the 178s, 13 of 21 applied to Yale. Ditto on previous.

There are people who applied to other schools in September or October who have not applied to Yale; they're clearly not stalling on their 250s. Some of the non-applicants look to have specific reasons. One was accepted into UCLA ED very early; another from Idaho applied only to Harvard and BYU (obviously Mormon). Others had more normal circumstances: They got Hamiltons or Darrows or got into Harvard or Stanford early on and just chose never to apply to Yale. The data simply do not back up the assertion that the lion's share of 178+s apply to Yale.

I suppose you could do a similar analysis of last cycle's 178+s to eliminate the possibility of stalling, but I doubt it accounts for more than one or two 178+s on LSN who reported not even intending to apply to Yale.


Let's assume there are 160000 administrations of the LSAT in the June 2009 - February 2010 cycle. I believe the LSAT claims 30% of it's administrations are retakes (or 30% of it's unique test takers retake the exam, but for simplicity's sake we will assume the former, while admitting that the latter could mean those that take the examination three times can skew this a bit [but hopefully not enough to ruin this demonstration]) which gives us a total unique LSAT test taker value of approximately 125000. A 178+ is a 99.8% score, meaning .002 applicants score at this level or above. This equates to approximately 250 scorers, which means the LSN information would represent only 20% of all scorers with a 178+.


If you extrapolate out from the LSN figures, only around 160 178+s apply to Yale (and, also by LSN, around 10%, or 16, of those have sub-3.5 GPAs, making them very probable rejects, although I'll ignore that).

In order to maintain its 75th percentile at 177, Yale must matriculate at least 50 178+s: a little under a third of all of the 178+s who apply, or a little over a third of all 178+s who apply with >3.5 GPAs, assuming all sub-3.5 GPAs are rejected (not necessarily true, but it shows that around 33% of competitive 178+s must matriculate).

Yale's yield, however, is not 100%--it's only about 80%, the remainder containing people who get Hamiltons or Darrows or other big scholarships, who are admitted but get in ED somewhere else, who decide not to go to law school, who just prefer some other school for whatever reason, etc. So they have to admit around 63 178+s to matriculate 50 of them. That means almost 40% of 178+s must be admitted, or else more than 40% of the >3.5 GPA 178+s. This is without pointing out that the yield among the highest-level applicants is likely to be lower: A 168 admitted to Yale will almost certainly have no competitive options, but a 179 admitted might have a Darrow and a Hamilton and Harvard and Stanford admissions to consider.

And now I think the numbers have reached a point where so much vagueness has been introduced that nothing more can be discerned.




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