In at IU-Bloomington!!!! Forum

[charlesjd]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats. If they wanted to increase their LSAT median, it would be obvious on LSN, which it is not. Their LSAT range will probably remain the same, maybe the 25th will rise to 157, but it looks similar to last year. GPA on the other hand seems more selective this year. Look at last year, people who got WL this year would not have last year in the 164+ range. So they might be trying to raise their GPA median (similar to UIUC's 3.8 possibly).

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

[letsdoit1982]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats.

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

This is what LSN is showing, but if you navigate back a couple pages in this thread you will see that many people are getting rejected with a 164/165. I think IU wasn't prepared for the influx of applicants that would apply simply because IU jumped up in US News - IU accepted a bunch of people early with decent number, and they didn't realize that they would continue receive applications from people with great LSATs/GPAs.

[charlesjd]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats.

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

This is what LSN is showing, but if you navigate back a couple pages in this thread you will see that many people are getting rejected with a 164/165. I think IU wasn't prepared for the influx of applicants that would apply simply because IU jumped up in US News - IU accepted a bunch of people early with decent number, and they didn't realize that they would continue receive applications from people with great LSATs/GPAs.

That makes sense, so they decided to interview to see how serious applicants are, 40 students were chosen from Chicago, 40 from D.C., and 40 from Indianapolis. Someone talked to Dani and said they were not random and were applicants they were seriously considering to give chairs to.

Also, if a person has the numbers, but is rejected, it may be because they were a horrid writer, committed a crime, or whatever else could go wrong in the app. Also, like I said, it seems like they are GPA conscious this cycle, (there was talk about it earlier) so if those 164 and 165 people had sub 3/ 3.2ish GPA's (i dont know if they do), that may be why, look at LSN

Also, a trend I noticed is a lot of those applicants were admitted to UIUC, and not IU. Does not make sense to me when you look at LSN and the LSAT distribution.

[letsdoit1982]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats.

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

This is what LSN is showing, but if you navigate back a couple pages in this thread you will see that many people are getting rejected with a 164/165. I think IU wasn't prepared for the influx of applicants that would apply simply because IU jumped up in US News - IU accepted a bunch of people early with decent number, and they didn't realize that they would continue receive applications from people with great LSATs/GPAs.

That makes sense, so they decided to interview to see how serious applicants are, 40 students were chosen from Chicago, 40 from D.C., and 40 from Indianapolis. Someone talked to Dani and said they were not random and were applicants they were seriously considering to give chairs to.

Also, if a person has the numbers, but is rejected, it may be because they were a horrid writer, committed a crime, or whatever else could go wrong in the app. Also, like I said, it seems like they are GPA conscious this cycle, (there was talk about it earlier) so if those 164 and 165 people had sub 3/ 3.2ish GPA's (i dont know if they do), that may be why, look at LSN

Also, a trend I noticed is a lot of those applicants were admitted to UIUC, and not IU. Does not make sense to me when you look at LSN and the LSAT distribution.

I noticed the same thing, and I have no idea what is going on this cycle.

On a side note, UIUC has evidently increased their standards also.

[MBZags]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats. If they wanted to increase their LSAT median, it would be obvious on LSN, which it is not. Their LSAT range will probably remain the same, maybe the 25th will rise to 157, but it looks similar to last year. GPA on the other hand seems more selective this year. Look at last year, people who got WL this year would not have last year in the 164+ range. So they might be trying to raise their GPA median (similar to UIUC's 3.8 possibly).

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

This makes me nervous. I'm from the Midwest and would definitely consider IU if admitted. With my numbers, I even thought I had a good chance at a scholarship there. But judging by the recent WLs and their numbers, I could get WLed too.

[manu4ever882001]

...

[crm]

Yeah it doesn't make sense to me either. I was admitted to UIUC with money, but rejected at IUB. Reverse splitter with 25th percentile LSAT, 75th percentile GPA, mind you.

I'm hoping for the reverse. I was rejected at UIUC, so hopefully I'll be admitted to IUB with $$?

[RMstratosphere]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats. If they wanted to increase their LSAT median, it would be obvious on LSN, which it is not. Their LSAT range will probably remain the same, maybe the 25th will rise to 157, but it looks similar to last year. GPA on the other hand seems more selective this year. Look at last year, people who got WL this year would not have last year in the 164+ range. So they might be trying to raise their GPA median (similar to UIUC's 3.8 possibly).

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

There is not enough information available on LSN yet this year to make any of those claims.

Use the following link and the data it reports.
I think it is reasonable to assume that numbers from last year will not be that dissimilar to this year.
That being said, last year's full data does not support an accusation of YP.

http://officialguide.lsac.org/SearchRes ... AC1324.pdf

[roguey]

This may sound dumb... but I'm really having a difficult time figuring out what "YP" means.

[charlesjd]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats. If they wanted to increase their LSAT median, it would be obvious on LSN, which it is not. Their LSAT range will probably remain the same, maybe the 25th will rise to 157, but it looks similar to last year. GPA on the other hand seems more selective this year. Look at last year, people who got WL this year would not have last year in the 164+ range. So they might be trying to raise their GPA median (similar to UIUC's 3.8 possibly).

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

There is not enough information available on LSN yet this year to make any of those claims.

Use the following link and the data it reports.
I think it is reasonable to assume that numbers from last year will not be that dissimilar to this year.
That being said, last year's full data does not support an accusation of YP.

http://officialguide.lsac.org/SearchRes ... AC1324.pdf

I agree with you that there is not enough data. I also stated that it really didn't exist last year on LSN, (maybe I didn't, sorry), there were only 2 WL after 164 and one was a really low GPA so basically one person, based only on numbers, who should have been admitted, was WL so technically it matches with the official guide.

I am just trying to say that the possibility exists, and the trend is starting to show up, slowly. They might have solidified the spot they wanted in the rankings and are choosing admits based on interviews and what not now.

[charlesjd]

This may sound dumb... but I'm really having a difficult time figuring out what "YP" means.

yield protection. there is a thread on it if you don't know what it is.

[Kobe_Teeth]

This may sound dumb... but I'm really having a difficult time figuring out what "YP" means.

Yield Protect.

Also, if you look at people who got in last year, a decent amount of 164+ splitters were WL'ed in. So, some of the WL'd people haven't surprised me too much but the rejections have caught my eye.

As soon as I hear, I think actually my numbers will tell a lot about how those applying late in the cycle will fare. I'm a 2.8, 165. If I'm in then 164+ or 165+ is still somewhat of a magic number. If I'm out its time to reassess. (I realize the flaw in that logic I just feel like I'm perfectly placed on the cusp so my numbers and decision could be a good gauge for late applicants)

[charlesjd]

This may sound dumb... but I'm really having a difficult time figuring out what "YP" means.

Yield Protect.

Also, if you look at people who got in last year, a decent amount of 164+ splitters were WL'ed in. So, some of the WL'd people haven't surprised me too much but the rejections have caught my eye.

As soon as I hear, I think actually my numbers will tell a lot about how those applying late in the cycle will fare. I'm a 2.8, 165. If I'm in then 164+ or 165+ is still somewhat of a magic number. If I'm out its time to reassess. (I realize the flaw in that logic I just feel like I'm perfectly placed on the cusp so my numbers and decision could be a good gauge for late applicants)

Where do you see these WL's? I see all green on LSN for 2008-2009. (164+)

[RMstratosphere]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats. If they wanted to increase their LSAT median, it would be obvious on LSN, which it is not. Their LSAT range will probably remain the same, maybe the 25th will rise to 157, but it looks similar to last year. GPA on the other hand seems more selective this year. Look at last year, people who got WL this year would not have last year in the 164+ range. So they might be trying to raise their GPA median (similar to UIUC's 3.8 possibly).

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

There is not enough information available on LSN yet this year to make any of those claims.

Use the following link and the data it reports.
I think it is reasonable to assume that numbers from last year will not be that dissimilar to this year.
That being said, last year's full data does not support an accusation of YP.

http://officialguide.lsac.org/SearchRes ... AC1324.pdf

I agree with you that there is not enough data. I also stated that it really didn't exist last year on LSN, (maybe I didn't, sorry), there were only 2 WL after 164 and one was a really low GPA so basically one person, based only on numbers, who should have been admitted, was WL so technically it matches with the official guide.

I am just trying to say that the possibility exists, and the trend is starting to show up, slowly. They might have solidified the spot they wanted in the rankings and are choosing admits based on interviews and what not now.

While I agree that the possibility exists I reject the notion that a trend is beginning to emerge. You just simply can't make that claim without evidence and there is, admittedly, not enough evidence yet. I'm not saying that in three months it won't turn out to be the case that IUB was YPing this cycle. However, I am saying that it is the case that we can't possibly know at this point.

[charlesjd]

I know we had this conversation earlier, but I was just look at IU's LSN graph, and I feel they do YP to an extent. WL are starting to appear at 167+ and it turning into a pretty obvious fence. You would think anyone who applies somewhat early and has a 165+ would get an awesome scholarship based on last years information, but that is not the case. 164 is the magic median number that they like. I am guessing they might have had problems with that last year (admitting a lot of 165+ and then they left, possibly hurting IU, when they could have admitted 155-159 who would have stayed) and increased stats for USNWR. If you look at the stats:

165-169: 236 194 (most likely to leave, one can easily go to UIUC, ND, BC, BU, Emory, possibly WashU, even Iowa, etc)
160-164: 567 195 (likely to stay and receive scholarships, makes sense)
155-159: 758 77 (extremely likely to stay, where else would they go? (Most likely not high enough to reach a better school than IU)

Since they admitted so many 165-169 range students, if A LOT of them left, that would hurt their stats. If they wanted to increase their LSAT median, it would be obvious on LSN, which it is not. Their LSAT range will probably remain the same, maybe the 25th will rise to 157, but it looks similar to last year. GPA on the other hand seems more selective this year. Look at last year, people who got WL this year would not have last year in the 164+ range. So they might be trying to raise their GPA median (similar to UIUC's 3.8 possibly).

I am just speculating... anyone feel free to criticize this.

There is not enough information available on LSN yet this year to make any of those claims.

Use the following link and the data it reports.
I think it is reasonable to assume that numbers from last year will not be that dissimilar to this year.
That being said, last year's full data does not support an accusation of YP.

http://officialguide.lsac.org/SearchRes ... AC1324.pdf

I agree with you that there is not enough data. I also stated that it really didn't exist last year on LSN, (maybe I didn't, sorry), there were only 2 WL after 164 and one was a really low GPA so basically one person, based only on numbers, who should have been admitted, was WL so technically it matches with the official guide.

I am just trying to say that the possibility exists, and the trend is starting to show up, slowly. They might have solidified the spot they wanted in the rankings and are choosing admits based on interviews and what not now.

While I agree that the possibility exists I reject the notion that a trend is beginning to emerge. You just simply can't make that claim without evidence and there is, admittedly, not enough evidence yet. I'm not saying that in three months it won't turn out to be the case that IUB was YPing this cycle. However, I am saying that it is the case that we can't possibly know at this point.

I agree 100% with you. I am just speculating.

[roguey]

Thank you for the definition of YP

[RMstratosphere]

I agree 100% with you. I am just speculating.

Fair enough and I appreciate your willingness to reconcile the point. I don't mean to be a dick about it, but I have seen these types of threads run away before. Just trying to save us all the hassle from someone else cherry picking your original thread.

[letsdoit1982]

This just one more reason why US News pisses me off. If there was no such thing as those arbitrary rankings, schools would have no reason to yield protect and could simply accept/deny and offer money without any repercussions.

rant/

[charlesjd]

I agree 100% with you. I am just speculating.

Fair enough and I appreciate your willingness to reconcile the point. I don't mean to be a dick about it, but I have seen these types of threads run away before. Just trying to save us all the hassle from someone else cherry picking your original thread.

Makes sense, it is just weird how this cycle is turning out with IU. People have spoken to admissions, and unless their lying, admissions has said things I would have never expected such as their alleged concern with high GPAs this cycle and applicants getting dinged who should be getting scholarships. More holistic this year? Who knows, I need to get off this forum for a while, it's driving me nuts!

[Vincent Vega]

This just one more reason why US News pisses me off. If there was no such thing as those arbitrary rankings, schools would have no reason to yield protect and could simply accept/deny and offer money without any repercussions.

rant/

If not for the rankings, schools might not give out nearly as many scholarships. Who knows? All I know is that the rankings have their good and bad consequences.

[RMstratosphere]

This just one more reason why US News pisses me off. If there was no such thing as those arbitrary rankings, schools would have no reason to yield protect and could simply accept/deny and offer money without any repercussions.

rant/

If not for the rankings, schools might not give out nearly as many scholarships. Who knows? All I know is that the rankings have their good and bad consequences.

Agreed 100%. Without rankings there is no incentive for IU-B to throw money at applicants like Halibut or myself.

[Kobe_Teeth]

This may sound dumb... but I'm really having a difficult time figuring out what "YP" means.

Yield Protect.

Also, if you look at people who got in last year, a decent amount of 164+ splitters were WL'ed in. So, some of the WL'd people haven't surprised me too much but the rejections have caught my eye.

As soon as I hear, I think actually my numbers will tell a lot about how those applying late in the cycle will fare. I'm a 2.8, 165. If I'm in then 164+ or 165+ is still somewhat of a magic number. If I'm out its time to reassess. (I realize the flaw in that logic I just feel like I'm perfectly placed on the cusp so my numbers and decision could be a good gauge for late applicants)

Where do you see these WL's? I see all green on LSN for 2008-2009. (164+)

jmcvey (165, 2.8 ) and Profit (165, 2.68 and URM!) and mulliganstew (166, 2.85)
They're green because they're WL-ed then accepted. If you click on their profiles it gives the extra info.
So, they do WL 164+, it just seems that those people get picked off the WL first.

Also, I only clicked on 5 names and 3 of them were WL'd in. I also sorta knew which ones I was looking for.

[mommamia]

I interviewed in Indy, but have not heard anything yet.

[charlesjd]

This may sound dumb... but I'm really having a difficult time figuring out what "YP" means.

Yield Protect.

Also, if you look at people who got in last year, a decent amount of 164+ splitters were WL'ed in. So, some of the WL'd people haven't surprised me too much but the rejections have caught my eye.

As soon as I hear, I think actually my numbers will tell a lot about how those applying late in the cycle will fare. I'm a 2.8, 165. If I'm in then 164+ or 165+ is still somewhat of a magic number. If I'm out its time to reassess. (I realize the flaw in that logic I just feel like I'm perfectly placed on the cusp so my numbers and decision could be a good gauge for late applicants)

Where do you see these WL's? I see all green on LSN for 2008-2009. (164+)

jmcvey (165, 2.8 ) and Profit (165, 2.68 and URM!) and mulliganstew (166, 2.85)
They're green because they're WL-ed then accepted. If you click on their profiles it gives the extra info.
So, they do WL 164+, it just seems that those people get picked off the WL first.

Also, I only clicked on 5 names and 3 of them were WL'd in. I also sorta knew which ones I was looking for.

Ah ok.

[Bankhead]

IU 1L here:

1. IU admits a small class of around 200 students. Therefore, they can afford to be selective. This year I'm sure they can afford to be extra selective because of the increase in rankings which I'm sure has led to an influx of applications.

2. IU admits holistically. This is evident by the personal interviews they do every year. They really do pride themselves on having a diverse class. And I don't mean just URMs.

3. Yield protection - See #2. I'm sure that they can tell to some extent when applicants are using IU as a safety net or are just applying because its a now T25. If you can show a natural connection to the school, or some reason for wanting to attend I'm sure you could get in with a higher LSAT. 10-15% of our class, this year, has a 170+. I doubt they would be turning away 167+ simply because they have a 167+, but who knows.

Or perhaps they aren't trying to be holistic at all. Maybe IU realizes they are not going to be able to raise their LSAT median above what it currently is, so they are denying 167+'s so they can boost their USNWR ranking by focusing on raising their GPA and acceptance --> matric rate (which would be served by admitting lower LSAT's who are more likely to attend).

Personally, I got in off the waitlist last year in June with a large scholarship. My LSAT was I think at the median and my GPA was well below. Did not send a LOCI or show any other continued interest. Good luck everyone.