3.92 vs 3.93

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
TunnelVision
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:12 pm

3.92 vs 3.93

Postby TunnelVision » Wed May 09, 2012 10:28 am

I just got my final grades back for this semester and my LSAC gpa will be a 3.92, but I know if I asked this one professor I could probably get an A converted to an A+, but that just brings me up to a 3.93. Is it worth it, or is there really not a difference? Thanks

User avatar
jrthor10
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 10:33 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby jrthor10 » Wed May 09, 2012 10:30 am

The difference is .01.

It matters probably as much as you might think .01 matters.

User avatar
KMaine
Posts: 862
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby KMaine » Wed May 09, 2012 10:32 am

Why are smart people so stupid? Don't bother your professor. I would knock your ass down a letter grade just for being annoying.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby CanadianWolf » Wed May 09, 2012 10:33 am

It'll help at any law school sporting a 3.92 median GPA. :D

User avatar
Band A Long
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:50 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby Band A Long » Wed May 09, 2012 10:33 am

TunnelVision wrote:but I know if I asked this one professor I could probably get an A converted to an A+

Does this mean you know you could get it changed because there is a simple clerical error or missed calculation from an assignment, or because you would grovel in front of him or her and generally offend them? The latter would be pretty sad.

TunnelVision
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:12 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby TunnelVision » Wed May 09, 2012 11:15 am

Haha thanks guys... I didn't know...

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby laxbrah420 » Wed May 09, 2012 11:18 am

CanadianWolf wrote:It'll help at any law school sporting a 3.92 median GPA. :D

why?

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby stillwater » Wed May 09, 2012 11:27 am

laxbrah420 wrote:
CanadianWolf wrote:It'll help at any law school sporting a 3.92 median GPA. :D

why?


It'd pull their median up potentially...even if by .01. Not mindbending stuff.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby CanadianWolf » Wed May 09, 2012 11:29 am

Because law school's try to maintain & raise their median LSAT & GPA numbers. A 3.93 is above a school's median of 3.92 so that is significant. A 3.92 would probably be above all other law schools' GPA median.

User avatar
Br3v
Posts: 4174
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 7:18 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby Br3v » Wed May 09, 2012 11:37 am

Even though it doesn't really matter, if you earned a + and think you can get it why not?

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby laxbrah420 » Wed May 09, 2012 11:39 am

CanadianWolf wrote:Because law school's try to maintain & raise their median LSAT & GPA numbers. A 3.93 is above a school's median of 3.92 so that is significant. A 3.92 would probably be above all other law schools' GPA median.

It's not significant. It's not a contest to see who gets the highest gpa. It's a contest to see who wins the rankings game. .01 change in median *10% of rankings is completely negligible. It matters only if there's a floor, which obviously doesn't come into play here

User avatar
Br3v
Posts: 4174
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 7:18 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby Br3v » Wed May 09, 2012 11:43 am

laxbrah420 wrote:
CanadianWolf wrote:Because law school's try to maintain & raise their median LSAT & GPA numbers. A 3.93 is above a school's median of 3.92 so that is significant. A 3.92 would probably be above all other law schools' GPA median.

It's not significant. It's not a contest to see who gets the highest gpa. It's a contest to see who wins the rankings game. .01 change in median *10% of rankings is completely negligible. It matters only if there's a floor, which obviously doesn't come into play here


Wouldn't that raise the gpa by 0.1?
I'd say that's fairly significant.
Not going to make or break any school, but once again why wouldn't you want the higher gpa all else being equal?

dooood
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:45 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby dooood » Wed May 09, 2012 11:49 am

laxbrah420 wrote:
CanadianWolf wrote:Because law school's try to maintain & raise their median LSAT & GPA numbers. A 3.93 is above a school's median of 3.92 so that is significant. A 3.92 would probably be above all other law schools' GPA median.

It's not significant. It's not a contest to see who gets the highest gpa. It's a contest to see who wins the rankings game. .01 change in median *10% of rankings is completely negligible. It matters only if there's a floor, which obviously doesn't come into play here

You're totally missing the point. It's only negligible if you assume this guy is the very last candidate they consider. Aggregated across an entire admissions class and all else equal, of course they're going to take the 3.93 over the 3.92, because the contest to see who gets the highest GPA bears directly on the contest to see who wins the rankings game.

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby laxbrah420 » Wed May 09, 2012 11:52 am

dooood wrote:
laxbrah420 wrote:
CanadianWolf wrote:Because law school's try to maintain & raise their median LSAT & GPA numbers. A 3.93 is above a school's median of 3.92 so that is significant. A 3.92 would probably be above all other law schools' GPA median.

It's not significant. It's not a contest to see who gets the highest gpa. It's a contest to see who wins the rankings game. .01 change in median *10% of rankings is completely negligible. It matters only if there's a floor, which obviously doesn't come into play here

You're totally missing the point. It's only negligible if you assume this guy is the very last candidate they consider. Aggregated across an entire admissions class and all else equal, of course they're going to take the 3.93 over the 3.92, because the contest to see who gets the highest GPA bears directly on the contest to see who wins the rankings game.

No, that doesn't make any sense. A 3.93 vs a 3.92, in the worst case can cause a .01 median shift, which seems very unlikely. Should a .01 median shift occur, 10% *.01 = .001 (not .1 br3v) which is negligible for the rankings.

User avatar
Band A Long
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:50 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby Band A Long » Wed May 09, 2012 11:59 am

laxbrah420 wrote:No, that doesn't make any sense. A 3.93 vs a 3.92, in the worst case can cause a .01 median shift, which seems very unlikely. Should a .01 median shift occur, 10% *.01 = .001 (not .1 br3v) which is negligible for the rankings.

You're thinking about this too hard. It's not a question of which is better. A 3.93 is > than a 3.92. Admittedly miniscule, but still objectively a better GPA. The question is, "is it worth complaining about?" The answer is — yes if it's an easy fix than do it but if it's going to be a turn off for someone important (or, even worse, a LoR writer), then no.

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby laxbrah420 » Wed May 09, 2012 12:04 pm

Band A Long wrote:
laxbrah420 wrote:No, that doesn't make any sense. A 3.93 vs a 3.92, in the worst case can cause a .01 median shift, which seems very unlikely. Should a .01 median shift occur, 10% *.01 = .001 (not .1 br3v) which is negligible for the rankings.

You're thinking about this too hard. It's not a question of which is better. A 3.93 is > than a 3.92. Admittedly miniscule, but still objectively a better GPA. The question is, "is it worth complaining about?" The answer is — yes if it's an easy fix than do it but if it's going to be a turn off for someone important (or, even worse, a LoR writer), then no.

lolwut
My point is that it's actually not better.
1.000001 =1.001 if you round to the nearest integer.

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby Ruxin1 » Wed May 09, 2012 12:04 pm

worry about getting a 170+ and not this menial shit bro

dooood
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:45 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby dooood » Wed May 09, 2012 12:06 pm

laxbrah420 wrote:
dooood wrote:
laxbrah420 wrote:
CanadianWolf wrote:Because law school's try to maintain & raise their median LSAT & GPA numbers. A 3.93 is above a school's median of 3.92 so that is significant. A 3.92 would probably be above all other law schools' GPA median.

It's not significant. It's not a contest to see who gets the highest gpa. It's a contest to see who wins the rankings game. .01 change in median *10% of rankings is completely negligible. It matters only if there's a floor, which obviously doesn't come into play here

You're totally missing the point. It's only negligible if you assume this guy is the very last candidate they consider. Aggregated across an entire admissions class and all else equal, of course they're going to take the 3.93 over the 3.92, because the contest to see who gets the highest GPA bears directly on the contest to see who wins the rankings game.

No, that doesn't make any sense. A 3.93 vs a 3.92, in the worst case can cause a .01 median shift, which seems very unlikely. Should a .01 median shift occur, 10% *.01 = .001 (not .1 br3v) which is negligible for the rankings.

That's based on the assumption that the aggregation of accepting 3.92s over 3.93s and 3.54s over 3.53s across an entire admissions class only results in a .01 drop in total. The admissions process occurs over the period of 7 months and is not based on a single candidate. The point is there's nowhere to draw the line. If the admissions committee says, "oh what the hell it's only one point" over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over, that aggregates into a huge difference.

Also, even if your math was sound, your argument assumes that admissions committees are rational beings. Even if they acknowledged that a .01 difference would have no bearing on the overall ranking, they would want to be able to boast a 3.93 median over a 3.92, just because it makes their school look more elite.

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby laxbrah420 » Wed May 09, 2012 12:10 pm

Just a quick question... do you know what a median is?

ETA: QFPofnotunderstandingmath
(or economics/decision making really)
dooood wrote:That's based on the assumption that the aggregation of accepting 3.92s over 3.93s and 3.54s over 3.53s across an entire admissions class only results in a .01 drop in total. The admissions process occurs over the period of 7 months and is not based on a single candidate. The point is there's nowhere to draw the line. If the admissions committee says, "oh what the hell it's only one point" over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over, that aggregates into a huge difference.

Also, even if your math was sound, your argument assumes that admissions committees are rational beings. Even if they acknowledged that a .01 difference would have no bearing on the overall ranking, they would want to be able to boast a 3.93 median over a 3.92, just because it makes their school look more elite.
Last edited by laxbrah420 on Wed May 09, 2012 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Band A Long
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:50 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby Band A Long » Wed May 09, 2012 12:13 pm

laxbrah420 wrote:
Band A Long wrote:
laxbrah420 wrote:No, that doesn't make any sense. A 3.93 vs a 3.92, in the worst case can cause a .01 median shift, which seems very unlikely. Should a .01 median shift occur, 10% *.01 = .001 (not .1 br3v) which is negligible for the rankings.

You're thinking about this too hard. It's not a question of which is better. A 3.93 is > than a 3.92. Admittedly miniscule, but still objectively a better GPA. The question is, "is it worth complaining about?" The answer is — yes if it's an easy fix than do it but if it's going to be a turn off for someone important (or, even worse, a LoR writer), then no.

lolwut
My point is that it's actually not better.
1.000001 =1.001 if you round to the nearest integer.

Explain how a 3.93 isn't a higher GPA than a 3.92. Please.

User avatar
Br3v
Posts: 4174
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 7:18 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby Br3v » Wed May 09, 2012 12:16 pm

laxbrah420 wrote:Just a quick question... do you know what a median is?


Image

dooood
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:45 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby dooood » Wed May 09, 2012 2:54 pm

laxbrah420 wrote:Just a quick question... do you know what a median is?

ETA: QFPofnotunderstandingmath
(or economics/decision making really)
dooood wrote:That's based on the assumption that the aggregation of accepting 3.92s over 3.93s and 3.54s over 3.53s across an entire admissions class only results in a .01 drop in total. The admissions process occurs over the period of 7 months and is not based on a single candidate. The point is there's nowhere to draw the line. If the admissions committee says, "oh what the hell it's only one point" over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over, that aggregates into a huge difference.

Also, even if your math was sound, your argument assumes that admissions committees are rational beings. Even if they acknowledged that a .01 difference would have no bearing on the overall ranking, they would want to be able to boast a 3.93 median over a 3.92, just because it makes their school look more elite.

Not understanding economics/decision-making? I know that admissions officers care about crafting a class containing students with the highest stats possible. Accepting students with (even marginally) lower stats, if done enough times, lowers the median (see I do know what that means). Ceteris paribus, why the f would an adcom ever accept the 3.92 over the 3.93? Quit poisoning this thread with your crap.

OP, if it's because of a computational error, then point it out politely. If not, I'd probably let it go, as your GPA is already pretty kickass.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby stillwater » Wed May 09, 2012 3:00 pm

dooood wrote: Ceteris paribus, why the f would an adcom ever accept the 3.92 over the 3.93? Quit poisoning this thread with your crap.


Take it easy, Cicero.

dooood
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:45 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby dooood » Wed May 09, 2012 3:39 pm

stillwater wrote:
dooood wrote: Ceteris paribus, why the f would an adcom ever accept the 3.92 over the 3.93? Quit poisoning this thread with your crap.


Take it easy, Cicero.

It didn't seem to go through when I wrote it in English. Also, try being a little quicker on your feet with your quips next time so you don't have to stealth edit your poasts.

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: 3.92 vs 3.93

Postby laxbrah420 » Wed May 09, 2012 3:48 pm

dooood wrote:
stillwater wrote:
dooood wrote: Ceteris paribus, why the f would an adcom ever accept the 3.92 over the 3.93? Quit poisoning this thread with your crap.


Take it easy, Cicero.

It didn't seem to go through when I wrote it in English. Also, try being a little quicker on your feet with your quips next time so you don't have to stealth edit your poasts.

It was to show me that he knows economics.
Yet, still doesn't understand rational agents or medians




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: iwoeps and 5 guests