Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
Lady Heather
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:44 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Lady Heather » Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:56 pm

I wanna join!!! Where do I apply?!?! Do you offer fee waivers?

Hi. I'm 171/sub. 3.3.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby 02082010 » Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:39 pm

Lady Heather wrote:I wanna join!!! Where do I apply?!?! Do you offer fee waivers?

Hi. I'm 171/sub. 3.3.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
DoctorNick189
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:21 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby DoctorNick189 » Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:47 pm

2.99/176. Let's do this.

User avatar
Philo38
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:21 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Philo38 » Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:12 pm

Has anybody read Ivey's book on law school admissions? It is interesting, she claims that applying early in the cycle allows for the admisions people to fully consider all of the elements of your application (including a less than desirable transcript) but that later in the cycle they are more and more concerned with thier USNews rankings and the numbers game. Should we take this to mean that it may actually be better for someone with a great LSAT, a mediocre transcript, and mediocre softs, to apply later?

I know everyone will say apply as early as possible but anyway . . . interesting none the less.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby D. H2Oman » Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:16 pm

Philo38 wrote:Has anybody read Ivey's book on law school admissions? It is interesting, she claims that applying early in the cycle allows for the admisions people to fully consider all of the elements of your application (including a less than desirable transcript) but that later in the cycle they are more and more concerned with thier USNews rankings and the numbers game. Should we take this to mean that it may actually be better for someone with a great LSAT, a mediocre transcript, and mediocre softs, to apply later?

I know everyone will say apply as early as possible but anyway . . . interesting none the less.



NO! A late app for splitters=admissions suicide. It's more important for splitters to apply early.

User avatar
Philo38
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:21 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Philo38 » Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:12 pm

Dwaterman86 wrote:
Philo38 wrote:Has anybody read Ivey's book on law school admissions? It is interesting, she claims that applying early in the cycle allows for the admisions people to fully consider all of the elements of your application (including a less than desirable transcript) but that later in the cycle they are more and more concerned with thier USNews rankings and the numbers game. Should we take this to mean that it may actually be better for someone with a great LSAT, a mediocre transcript, and mediocre softs, to apply later?

I know everyone will say apply as early as possible but anyway . . . interesting none the less.



NO! A late app for splitters=admissions suicide. It's more important for splitters to apply early.


I know this is right. But, it still intrigues me a bit, she paints the picture of admissions officers who have a picture of the numbers of that particular cycle later in the game so, it stands to reason, if there is a school that is later in the cycle and realizes that they need to get thier LSAT scores up they would start being more lenient on the GPAs. I guess this could go the other way as well though.

User avatar
nyyankees
Posts: 484
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:50 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby nyyankees » Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:17 pm

Philo38 wrote:
Dwaterman86 wrote:
Philo38 wrote:Has anybody read Ivey's book on law school admissions? It is interesting, she claims that applying early in the cycle allows for the admisions people to fully consider all of the elements of your application (including a less than desirable transcript) but that later in the cycle they are more and more concerned with thier USNews rankings and the numbers game. Should we take this to mean that it may actually be better for someone with a great LSAT, a mediocre transcript, and mediocre softs, to apply later?

I know everyone will say apply as early as possible but anyway . . . interesting none the less.



NO! A late app for splitters=admissions suicide. It's more important for splitters to apply early.


I know this is right. But, it still intrigues me a bit, she paints the picture of admissions officers who have a picture of the numbers of that particular cycle later in the game so, it stands to reason, if there is a school that is later in the cycle and realizes that they need to get thier LSAT scores up they would start being more lenient on the GPAs. I guess this could go the other way as well though.


empirical data > anna ivey

User avatar
Encyclopedia Brown
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:25 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Encyclopedia Brown » Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:18 pm

Speaking of applying early, when will you guys have everything submitted? Where (if anywhere) are you ED'ing?

User avatar
missvik218
Posts: 1103
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:45 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby missvik218 » Tue Oct 20, 2009 11:14 pm

Philo38 wrote:I know this is right. But, it still intrigues me a bit, she paints the picture of admissions officers who have a picture of the numbers of that particular cycle later in the game so, it stands to reason, if there is a school that is later in the cycle and realizes that they need to get thier LSAT scores up they would start being more lenient on the GPAs. I guess this could go the other way as well though.

If the ad comms really fudge up their classes I suppose it COULD go both ways ... but since this is basically a support group I'm going to go ahead and suggest you not test this hypothesis. The earlier the better for us!

User avatar
Splittsburgh
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Splittsburgh » Tue Oct 20, 2009 11:36 pm

I'm in: 176, 3.2.

Basically peppering the t20-YHSB with apps as early as possible. We'll see...

User avatar
Encyclopedia Brown
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:25 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Encyclopedia Brown » Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:28 am

Splittsburgh wrote:I'm in: 176, 3.2.

Basically peppering the t20-YHSB with apps as early as possible. We'll see...

Just wanted to say I love your username.

User avatar
xanderdellus
Posts: 156
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:58 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby xanderdellus » Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:54 am

169 and below 3 (in 1997). I have two graduate degrees (3.8 and 4.0) and have worked as a professional actor, director and acting teacher.

Most of my apps are in Berkley and Columbia (fee waiver) and a spattering all the way down to UTenn. Debating some lower ranked schools and hoping for $$. Also debating a retake to see if I can grab a point or two. Just sent in GWU for ED.

finalaspects
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:21 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby finalaspects » Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:47 am

I myself applied to about 15 schools. Most of them in the top 15. Low chances with my 3.1/168 but what the hell.

ED to UCLA.

Hopefully working my ass off to become Director of IT, and my upward trending GPA while working throughout my entire collegiate life will pull through.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby 02082010 » Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:47 pm

Philo38 wrote:Has anybody read Ivey's book on law school admissions? It is interesting, she claims that applying early in the cycle allows for the admisions people to fully consider all of the elements of your application (including a less than desirable transcript) but that later in the cycle they are more and more concerned with thier USNews rankings and the numbers game. Should we take this to mean that it may actually be better for someone with a great LSAT, a mediocre transcript, and mediocre softs, to apply later?

I know everyone will say apply as early as possible but anyway . . . interesting none the less.


You're misunderstanding the point she was trying to make. How'd you do on the LSAT? :wink:

But seriously, she was trying to say that early in the application season school don't have to worry as much about medians, and are therefore more likely to accept splitters that they like via LORs, PS, etc. Later in the application season, school are extremely worried about medians and although they may like a splitter they come across and may be tempted by her 174 there will at best WL her bc they don't want their median GPA to drop from 3.76 to 3.69 because they admitted a 3.1.

tree33
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:36 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby tree33 » Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:48 pm

Philo38 wrote:
Dwaterman86 wrote:
Philo38 wrote:Has anybody read Ivey's book on law school admissions? It is interesting, she claims that applying early in the cycle allows for the admisions people to fully consider all of the elements of your application (including a less than desirable transcript) but that later in the cycle they are more and more concerned with thier USNews rankings and the numbers game. Should we take this to mean that it may actually be better for someone with a great LSAT, a mediocre transcript, and mediocre softs, to apply later?

I know everyone will say apply as early as possible but anyway . . . interesting none the less.



NO! A late app for splitters=admissions suicide. It's more important for splitters to apply early.


I know this is right. But, it still intrigues me a bit, she paints the picture of admissions officers who have a picture of the numbers of that particular cycle later in the game so, it stands to reason, if there is a school that is later in the cycle and realizes that they need to get thier LSAT scores up they would start being more lenient on the GPAs. I guess this could go the other way as well though.


I honestly just don't see how a late app could be beneficial as a result of adcomms realizing late in the cycle that they need a couple more high LSAT scores. Based on past history, most of us will wind up on several waitlists. Maybe I'm not completely familiar with how the processes work in admissions offices, but if they did need some more high LSAT scores, why not just pull them off the waitlist? I suppose there is a possibility that a school that would've outright dinged you earlier could be scrambling for a high LSAT, but this seems extremely unlikely.

User avatar
NancyBotwin
Posts: 1085
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:43 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby NancyBotwin » Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:58 pm

missvik218 wrote:YAY me too!! 3.02/169


We have almost identical numbers!

I'm applying to 20 schools, mostly in the top 30 with a few lower ones because I'm afraid of not getting in anywhere. I've gotten 7 good (and several not-so-good) fee waivers so far - UVA, Minn, UCLA, BU, W&M, Colorado, and Northwestern (not using the UCLA one, though - I don't want to live in LA).

I also have 5 years of work experience both during/after undergrad, and a huge upward trend.

Woo splitters!

User avatar
Philo38
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:21 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Philo38 » Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:05 pm

hopefulundergrad wrote:
Philo38 wrote:Has anybody read Ivey's book on law school admissions? It is interesting, she claims that applying early in the cycle allows for the admisions people to fully consider all of the elements of your application (including a less than desirable transcript) but that later in the cycle they are more and more concerned with thier USNews rankings and the numbers game. Should we take this to mean that it may actually be better for someone with a great LSAT, a mediocre transcript, and mediocre softs, to apply later?

I know everyone will say apply as early as possible but anyway . . . interesting none the less.


You're misunderstanding the point she was trying to make. How'd you do on the LSAT? :wink:

But seriously, she was trying to say that early in the application season school don't have to worry as much about medians, and are therefore more likely to accept splitters that they like via LORs, PS, etc. Later in the application season, school are extremely worried about medians and although they may like a splitter they come across and may be tempted by her 174 there will at best WL her bc they don't want their median GPA to drop from 3.76 to 3.69 because they admitted a 3.1.


Yeah, I guess I'm focusing also on the fact that I have weak softs. I'm not going to apply late obviously but just because it's intesting, I figure if near the end of the cycle some schools need to improve thier GPA median, and other need to improve thier LSAT median, the schools that need to improve thier LSAT median are more likely to overlook my lack of softs and low GPA and hone in on the 171.

beakerboy
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:19 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby beakerboy » Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:25 pm

2.8, then 9 years of engineering work, then a 175.

Pipe dreams of Berkeley/Stanford, but I'll apply anywhere I get a fee waiver, as well as schools in Canada. Not sure if I want to deal with getting a degree and then do the equivalency to come back to Canada.

Lady Heather
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:44 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Lady Heather » Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:49 am

Encyclopedia Brown wrote:Speaking of applying early, when will you guys have everything submitted? Where (if anywhere) are you ED'ing?

I hope to have all of my applications in this weekend. I keep waiting for [every one of] my LORs to get processed and hoping for a fee waiver (or five). I'm nauseous that I haven't applied already. :(

User avatar
ontologyfail
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:53 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby ontologyfail » Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:50 am

174, 3.4 here, going with the over 75th/under 25th definition of splitter. 3 yrs WE, grad degree. Currently agonizing over my PS and additional essays, even though I know they rarely make a difference. The downside of turning everything in early is that it just makes our wait times that much longer. If last year was any indication, I'll be spending most of the spring and summer waiting to hear back from schools that waitlisted me :?

oneforship
Posts: 1004
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby oneforship » Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:47 am

hopefulundergrad wrote:they don't want their median GPA to drop from 3.76 to 3.69 because they admitted a 3.1.


That's not [necessarily] how medians work; lucky for you, no math section on the LSAT.

175/3.16 here.

Lady Heather
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:44 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Lady Heather » Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:23 am

oneforship wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:they don't want their median GPA to drop from 3.76 to 3.69 because they admitted a 3.1.


That's not [necessarily] how medians work; lucky for you, no math section on the LSAT.

This. Median is not the same as mean. The median is defined as the middle value in a set or distribution. The mean is defined as the average of a numerical set. Example:

Yale has a GPA median of 3.90. The middle 50% GPA of students attending Yale had a 3.81-3.97 UGPA. Yale could accept someone with a 2.0 GPA and it would not affect the median unless Yale accepted A LOT of people with 2.0 GPAs. As a matter of fact, so long as the GPA for the middle 50% of people attending Yale remained 3.81-3.97, 25% of people attending Yale could actually have a 2.0 UGPA without changing the median.

Does this make sense? There's a reason why I don't tutor anyone in anything: I am not a good teacher.

User avatar
Tangerine Gleam
Posts: 1349
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:28 am

Despite OP's cutoffs, I definitely am a splitter at a lot of my targets using the 25/75 rule.

3.5x/172, applying to most of the T14.

Laboring over my PS all week...my personal app deadline is 5 or 6 days away!

Good luck everyone...

philly5
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:45 am

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby philly5 » Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:41 am

I'm in the same range as Desert Fox...
2.85/175 (starting off as a mech eng. major killed me, finished with a psych degree)
5 years work experience, mostly in pro-sports marketing.

I got a Columbia fee waiver, so why not. Hoping for GULC and applying to mostly T14. And what do ya'll consider "safety schools"?

No Yankees fans! GO PHILLIES!

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Splitters Unite! - Official 2010 Splitter Thread

Postby 02082010 » Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:59 am

Lady Heather wrote:
oneforship wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:they don't want their median GPA to drop from 3.76 to 3.69 because they admitted a 3.1.


That's not [necessarily] how medians work; lucky for you, no math section on the LSAT.

This. Median is not the same as mean. The median is defined as the middle value in a set or distribution. The mean is defined as the average of a numerical set. Example:

Yale has a GPA median of 3.90. The middle 50% GPA of students attending Yale had a 3.81-3.97 UGPA. Yale could accept someone with a 2.0 GPA and it would not affect the median unless Yale accepted A LOT of people with 2.0 GPAs. As a matter of fact, so long as the GPA for the middle 50% of people attending Yale remained 3.81-3.97, 25% of people attending Yale could actually have a 2.0 UGPA without changing the median.

Does this make sense? There's a reason why I don't tutor anyone in anything: I am not a good teacher.


Does a 3.1 and 3.76 even average to a 3.69?

If a school has admitted 50 students and then 26th highest GPA (roughly median, I don't know whether schools average the two middle GPAs if they have an even number of students) is 3.76 and then the school admits one more person with a 3.1 and now the 26th highest (and true median) GPA is a 3.69.

That was the point I was trying to make.




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