Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby cahwc12 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:19 pm

jvincent11 wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:LOL at 4 years of sacrifice and dedication. How about you spend 6 months of sacrifice and dedication and just get a 170+, and have excellent options?


(1) Not everybody is capable of 170+, or else the LSAT would be a pretty bad test. Similarly, not everyone is capable of graduating with a 3.94. There is a reason law schools request academic transcripts. GPA can say a lot about a person - it can also say nothing. Same goes for the LSAT.

(2) I have a range of 167-173 and a high of 176. Can't really help if on test day I fall on the lower end of my range, or miss 170 by 1 question.

Don't act like the LSAT is a tell all test and discount a 3.94 GPA just because you are a splitter.


There is a big difference between deciding not to put the effort in and not being capable of it. There is also a notable difference between not achieving a 170 due to lack of effort, and just having some bad luck on test day and falling short. If you fell below your range, you should retake.

Not everyone will decide to put the effort in to get 170+, just as not everyone will decide to put in the effort for a 3.94. That doesn't mean that most of them aren't capable. I can look back at my grades in undergrad and pinpoint exact situations that cost me my grades and decisions I made that resulted in lower grades. It wasn't because I wasn't capable of a 4.0, but rather because of my immaturity and poor study habits at various times.

User avatar
052220151
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:58 am

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby 052220151 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:28 pm

Retake, bro.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:37 pm

cahwc12 wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:LOL at 4 years of sacrifice and dedication. How about you spend 6 months of sacrifice and dedication and just get a 170+, and have excellent options?


(1) Not everybody is capable of 170+, or else the LSAT would be a pretty bad test. Similarly, not everyone is capable of graduating with a 3.94. There is a reason law schools request academic transcripts. GPA can say a lot about a person - it can also say nothing. Same goes for the LSAT.

(2) I have a range of 167-173 and a high of 176. Can't really help if on test day I fall on the lower end of my range, or miss 170 by 1 question.

Don't act like the LSAT is a tell all test and discount a 3.94 GPA just because you are a splitter.


There is a big difference between deciding not to put the effort in and not being capable of it. There is also a notable difference between not achieving a 170 due to lack of effort, and just having some bad luck on test day and falling short. If you fell below your range, you should retake.

Not everyone will decide to put the effort in to get 170+, just as not everyone will decide to put in the effort for a 3.94. That doesn't mean that most of them aren't capable. I can look back at my grades in undergrad and pinpoint exact situations that cost me my grades and decisions I made that resulted in lower grades. It wasn't because I wasn't capable of a 4.0, but rather because of my immaturity and poor study habits at various times.


Maybe you were capable but were too immature. Still, most people are not capable of 3.9+ in undergrad, or at least where I went to undergrad.

Every school below NYU has a lower 25th below 167. The idea that it's 170 or bust is just wrong. Maybe in previous years. Not anymore.
Last edited by jvincent11 on Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
WokeUpInACar
Posts: 5513
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:11 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby WokeUpInACar » Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:39 pm

jvincent11 wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:LOL at 4 years of sacrifice and dedication. How about you spend 6 months of sacrifice and dedication and just get a 170+, and have excellent options?


(1) Not everybody is capable of 170+, or else the LSAT would be a pretty bad test. Similarly, not everyone is capable of graduating with a 3.94. There is a reason law schools request academic transcripts. GPA can say a lot about a person - it can also say nothing. Same goes for the LSAT.

(2) I have a range of 167-173 and a high of 176. Can't really help if on test day I fall on the lower end of my range, or miss 170 by 1 question.

Don't act like the LSAT is a tell all test and discount a 3.94 GPA just because you are a splitter.

1) Most people who are capable of a 3.9+ are capable of 170+

2) You can take it 3 times. If you haven't maxed out your retakes you cannot use this excuse.

3) I don't believe the LSAT tells all. I just believe that people don't study hard enough, or study incorrectly, or don't take it as many times as they can, and then get stubborn about being unable to retake. The fact that you PTed so high makes it even more ludicrous that you won't retake. Scoring at the high end of your range could literally be worth over a hundred thousand dollars. No school would be off the table for you! I just can't fathom why you would settle when you have an opportunity to do so much better.

User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby Rahviveh » Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:13 pm

jvincent11 wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:LOL at 4 years of sacrifice and dedication. How about you spend 6 months of sacrifice and dedication and just get a 170+, and have excellent options?


(1) Not everybody is capable of 170+, or else the LSAT would be a pretty bad test. Similarly, not everyone is capable of graduating with a 3.94. There is a reason law schools request academic transcripts. GPA can say a lot about a person - it can also say nothing. Same goes for the LSAT.

(2) I have a range of 167-173 and a high of 176. Can't really help if on test day I fall on the lower end of my range, or miss 170 by 1 question.

Don't act like the LSAT is a tell all test and discount a 3.94 GPA just because you are a splitter.


Yeah, you can help it. If that's your test range you should re-take again if you get a 167. This happens all the time and the second time around is usually easier with less anxiety.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:22 pm

WokeUpInACar wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:LOL at 4 years of sacrifice and dedication. How about you spend 6 months of sacrifice and dedication and just get a 170+, and have excellent options?


(1) Not everybody is capable of 170+, or else the LSAT would be a pretty bad test. Similarly, not everyone is capable of graduating with a 3.94. There is a reason law schools request academic transcripts. GPA can say a lot about a person - it can also say nothing. Same goes for the LSAT.

(2) I have a range of 167-173 and a high of 176. Can't really help if on test day I fall on the lower end of my range, or miss 170 by 1 question.

Don't act like the LSAT is a tell all test and discount a 3.94 GPA just because you are a splitter.

1) Most people who are capable of a 3.9+ are capable of 170+

2) You can take it 3 times. If you haven't maxed out your retakes you cannot use this excuse.

3) I don't believe the LSAT tells all. I just believe that people don't study hard enough, or study incorrectly, or don't take it as many times as they can, and then get stubborn about being unable to retake. The fact that you PTed so high makes it even more ludicrous that you won't retake. Scoring at the high end of your range could literally be worth over a hundred thousand dollars. No school would be off the table for you! I just can't fathom why you would settle when you have an opportunity to do so much better.


It's not a question of capability. When I took in December I was not capable, but after 2 more months of prep I now am. I don't know if this was clear but I did retake in February and am anxiously awaiting my score (actually it probably was clear, typical neurotic LSAT waiter). My range is 167-173. My gut feeling is that I got 10 wrong. Could easily be 8, could easily be 12. Not sure how to describe it other than, for me at least, it's just a matter of being fortunate that I scored on the better side of my range. As for prep is concerned, it's impossible to know for sure, but I am almost certain I prepared close to as best as I could. I took TestMasters for 2 months, and then spent 2 months taking practice tests. Say what you want about TestMasters, the course is effective.

Theoretically I can take the exam again in June, but if I score a 168 and get into NYU, Penn, Duke, or Cornell (I want to work in NY) I will be quite satisfied.

User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby Rahviveh » Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:32 pm

jvincent11 wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:
WokeUpInACar wrote:LOL at 4 years of sacrifice and dedication. How about you spend 6 months of sacrifice and dedication and just get a 170+, and have excellent options?


(1) Not everybody is capable of 170+, or else the LSAT would be a pretty bad test. Similarly, not everyone is capable of graduating with a 3.94. There is a reason law schools request academic transcripts. GPA can say a lot about a person - it can also say nothing. Same goes for the LSAT.

(2) I have a range of 167-173 and a high of 176. Can't really help if on test day I fall on the lower end of my range, or miss 170 by 1 question.

Don't act like the LSAT is a tell all test and discount a 3.94 GPA just because you are a splitter.

1) Most people who are capable of a 3.9+ are capable of 170+

2) You can take it 3 times. If you haven't maxed out your retakes you cannot use this excuse.

3) I don't believe the LSAT tells all. I just believe that people don't study hard enough, or study incorrectly, or don't take it as many times as they can, and then get stubborn about being unable to retake. The fact that you PTed so high makes it even more ludicrous that you won't retake. Scoring at the high end of your range could literally be worth over a hundred thousand dollars. No school would be off the table for you! I just can't fathom why you would settle when you have an opportunity to do so much better.


It's not a question of capability. When I took in December I was not capable, but after 2 more months of prep I now am. I don't know if this was clear but I did retake in February and am anxiously awaiting my score (actually it probably was clear, typical neurotic LSAT waiter). My range is 167-173. My gut feeling is that I got 10 wrong. Could easily be 8, could easily be 12. Not sure how to describe it other than, for me at least, it's just a matter of being fortunate that I scored on the better side of my range. As for prep is concerned, it's impossible to know for sure, but I am almost certain I prepared close to as best as I could. I took TestMasters for 2 months, and then spent 2 months taking practice tests. Say what you want about TestMasters, the course is effective.

Theoretically I can take the exam again in June, but if I score a 168 and get into NYU, Penn, Duke, or Cornell (I want to work in NY) I will be quite satisfied.


If that's the case you will probably crack 170. But if you score on the LOW end of your range, you need to retake. It's not a question of being satisfied. You are leaving money and potentially better employment prospects on the table (HYS) if you don't score higher. I agree that not everyone can score 170+. You are not one of those people.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:43 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote: If that's the case you will probably crack 170. But if you score on the LOW end of your range, you need to retake. It's not a question of being satisfied. You are leaving money and potentially better employment prospects on the table (HYS) if you don't score higher. I agree that not everyone can score 170+. You are not one of those people.


You are absolutely right. After I wrote my last post I thought about it some more. Since I am set on working in new york if I get into NYU or Penn I will probably go there, but if not I will probably retake because while Duke and Cornell are amazing schools part of me would feel like I could have done better. I get one more chance I might as well take it. And if I do poorly I could always just apply early next cycle. The problem is I already took a gap year and my dad was really mad about that so if I put off another year of going he will flip. He says I'm just wasting away. I completely disagree with him and he doesn't understand how important it is to go to the very best school, but it is soooo annoying to deal with.

User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby cahwc12 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:58 pm

jvincent11 wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote: If that's the case you will probably crack 170. But if you score on the LOW end of your range, you need to retake. It's not a question of being satisfied. You are leaving money and potentially better employment prospects on the table (HYS) if you don't score higher. I agree that not everyone can score 170+. You are not one of those people.


You are absolutely right. After I wrote my last post I thought about it some more. Since I am set on working in new york if I get into NYU or Penn I will probably go there, but if not I will probably retake because while Duke and Cornell are amazing schools part of me would feel like I could have done better. I get one more chance I might as well take it. And if I do poorly I could always just apply early next cycle. The problem is I already took a gap year and my dad was really mad about that so if I put off another year of going he will flip. He says I'm just wasting away. I completely disagree with him and he doesn't understand how important it is to go to the very best school, but it is soooo annoying to deal with.


I think you should definitely take another year off before law school.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:07 pm

cahwc12 wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote: If that's the case you will probably crack 170. But if you score on the LOW end of your range, you need to retake. It's not a question of being satisfied. You are leaving money and potentially better employment prospects on the table (HYS) if you don't score higher. I agree that not everyone can score 170+. You are not one of those people.


You are absolutely right. After I wrote my last post I thought about it some more. Since I am set on working in new york if I get into NYU or Penn I will probably go there, but if not I will probably retake because while Duke and Cornell are amazing schools part of me would feel like I could have done better. I get one more chance I might as well take it. And if I do poorly I could always just apply early next cycle. The problem is I already took a gap year and my dad was really mad about that so if I put off another year of going he will flip. He says I'm just wasting away. I completely disagree with him and he doesn't understand how important it is to go to the very best school, but it is soooo annoying to deal with.


I think you should definitely take another year off before law school.


I imagine that's assuming I get a sub 170 and/or rejected from NYU?

doing_it_in_a_car
Posts: 147
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby doing_it_in_a_car » Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:15 pm

jvincent11 wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote: If that's the case you will probably crack 170. But if you score on the LOW end of your range, you need to retake. It's not a question of being satisfied. You are leaving money and potentially better employment prospects on the table (HYS) if you don't score higher. I agree that not everyone can score 170+. You are not one of those people.


You are absolutely right. After I wrote my last post I thought about it some more. Since I am set on working in new york if I get into NYU or Penn I will probably go there, but if not I will probably retake because while Duke and Cornell are amazing schools part of me would feel like I could have done better. I get one more chance I might as well take it. And if I do poorly I could always just apply early next cycle. The problem is I already took a gap year and my dad was really mad about that so if I put off another year of going he will flip. He says I'm just wasting away. I completely disagree with him and he doesn't understand how important it is to go to the very best school, but it is soooo annoying to deal with.


My parents were also pretty upset that I took a gap year instead of going straight through. They also don't comprehend just how bad the job market for law grads is right now. But I'm really enjoying this time, and I believe it will maximize the chances of my splitter app when I do apply. I'm gaining good experience and connections with my job, and I'm also distancing myself from my lower-end GPA.

Stay strong - continue educating yourself, perhaps try to educate your dad as well, and make your own decision.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:37 pm

doing_it_in_a_car wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote: If that's the case you will probably crack 170. But if you score on the LOW end of your range, you need to retake. It's not a question of being satisfied. You are leaving money and potentially better employment prospects on the table (HYS) if you don't score higher. I agree that not everyone can score 170+. You are not one of those people.


You are absolutely right. After I wrote my last post I thought about it some more. Since I am set on working in new york if I get into NYU or Penn I will probably go there, but if not I will probably retake because while Duke and Cornell are amazing schools part of me would feel like I could have done better. I get one more chance I might as well take it. And if I do poorly I could always just apply early next cycle. The problem is I already took a gap year and my dad was really mad about that so if I put off another year of going he will flip. He says I'm just wasting away. I completely disagree with him and he doesn't understand how important it is to go to the very best school, but it is soooo annoying to deal with.


My parents were also pretty upset that I took a gap year instead of going straight through. They also don't comprehend just how bad the job market for law grads is right now. But I'm really enjoying this time, and I believe it will maximize the chances of my splitter app when I do apply. I'm gaining good experience and connections with my job, and I'm also distancing myself from my lower-end GPA.

Stay strong - continue educating yourself, perhaps try to educate your dad as well, and make your own decision.


Parents just don't understand

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jW3PFC86UNI

User avatar
goldenflash19
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby goldenflash19 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:59 pm

As a fellow reverse splitter, I sort-of wish this was true, but it's not. Great GPA's are a dime-a-dozen. Great LSATs are not, especially this cycle.

For me at least, it's nice knowing that the sky is the limit with a retake. We can really improve our options, but normal splitters cannot, so we are relatively fortunate.

On a side-note, the decision to take a gap year has been one of the best I ever made. Being able to get WE, travel, and study a new language is something I never would have been able to experience had I rushed off to school. I definitely plan on at least one, maybe a couple more, years off. Best of luck!

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:39 am

True that. Gap year = best choice ever. However, having a lot of free time isn't necessarily good when you are waiting for your lsat score

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby Dr. Dre » Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:43 am

jvincent11 wrote: not everybody is capable of getting a 170 and even the people who are don't always produce their best on the actual test. I don't know what I got on my test hoping for the best but all I know is I will be damn proud of a 167 if that's my score.

'with an attitude like that no shit you wont be able to score 170+

when you study, study for 170+ nothin lower. Dont give me this crap that ppl arent capable of 170+....its all about studying and how you study. dont be happy with a 167 right now. i have 167 and am not happy. lukily for me im AA URM. retake.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Sat Mar 02, 2013 8:32 am

Dr. Dre wrote:
jvincent11 wrote: not everybody is capable of getting a 170 and even the people who are don't always produce their best on the actual test. I don't know what I got on my test hoping for the best but all I know is I will be damn proud of a 167 if that's my score.

'with an attitude like that no shit you wont be able to score 170+

when you study, study for 170+ nothin lower. Dont give me this crap that ppl arent capable of 170+....its all about studying and how you study. dont be happy with a 167 right now. i have 167 and am not happy. lukily for me im AA URM. retake.


That's not my attitude approaching the test. Based on my PTs I know I am quite capable, but the opinion on this site seems to be that anyone can get a 170 if they study enough. That is false.

User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby cahwc12 » Sat Mar 02, 2013 9:39 am

jvincent11 wrote:True that. Gap year = best choice ever. However, having a lot of free time isn't necessarily good when you are waiting for your lsat score


How exactly are you defining gap year? Why would you have "a lot of free time" if you're working full-time, traveling, etc?

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby jvincent11 » Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:13 am

cahwc12 wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:True that. Gap year = best choice ever. However, having a lot of free time isn't necessarily good when you are waiting for your lsat score


How exactly are you defining gap year? Why would you have "a lot of free time" if you're working full-time, traveling, etc?


Not working full-time = free time

User avatar
star fox
Posts: 13661
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby star fox » Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:43 pm

guano wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:Class of 2015

LSAT 25th 50th 75th
Penn: 164 170 171
UVA: 164 170 171
NU: 164 170 171

With law school apps down even more from last year with the biggest reduction in the applications scoring in the 170-174 range, are reverse splitters finally going to be rewarded for those 4 years of sacrifice and dedication?? I guess my question real question is does a 165 and a 3.9 actually give an application >50% chance at these schools?

no, it'll make splitters more valuable than ever and reverse splitters less valuable (less high LSAT scores to help balance low LSAT scores)


But if they take a bunch of splitters they need some reverse-splitters too to balance out the GPA hit so that median doesn't fall too far. Both should see a slight boost, which is expected with applications down...

User avatar
052220151
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:58 am

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby 052220151 » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:54 am

john7234797 wrote:
guano wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:Class of 2015

LSAT 25th 50th 75th
Penn: 164 170 171
UVA: 164 170 171
NU: 164 170 171

With law school apps down even more from last year with the biggest reduction in the applications scoring in the 170-174 range, are reverse splitters finally going to be rewarded for those 4 years of sacrifice and dedication?? I guess my question real question is does a 165 and a 3.9 actually give an application >50% chance at these schools?

no, it'll make splitters more valuable than ever and reverse splitters less valuable (less high LSAT scores to help balance low LSAT scores)


But if they take a bunch of splitters they need some reverse-splitters too to balance out the GPA hit so that median doesn't fall too far. Both should see a slight boost, which is expected with applications down...


Not necessarily.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby guano » Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:04 am

john7234797 wrote:
guano wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:Class of 2015

LSAT 25th 50th 75th
Penn: 164 170 171
UVA: 164 170 171
NU: 164 170 171

With law school apps down even more from last year with the biggest reduction in the applications scoring in the 170-174 range, are reverse splitters finally going to be rewarded for those 4 years of sacrifice and dedication?? I guess my question real question is does a 165 and a 3.9 actually give an application >50% chance at these schools?

no, it'll make splitters more valuable than ever and reverse splitters less valuable (less high LSAT scores to help balance low LSAT scores)


But if they take a bunch of splitters they need some reverse-splitters too to balance out the GPA hit so that median doesn't fall too far. Both should see a slight boost, which is expected with applications down...

Firstly, as has already been pointed out in this thread, high LSATs are much rarer than high GPAs, so there really isn't as much need for reverse splitters as there is for splitters
Secondly, as has already been pointed out in this thread, LSAT medians count for more in the rankings than GPA medians, so schools would prefer to take a hit on GPA over LSAT

Therefore, splitters will get much more of a boost and reverse splitters may actually be getting squeezed, as it'll be tougher for schools to accept low LSAT scores

User avatar
star fox
Posts: 13661
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby star fox » Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:30 am

guano wrote:
john7234797 wrote:
guano wrote:
jvincent11 wrote:Class of 2015

LSAT 25th 50th 75th
Penn: 164 170 171
UVA: 164 170 171
NU: 164 170 171

With law school apps down even more from last year with the biggest reduction in the applications scoring in the 170-174 range, are reverse splitters finally going to be rewarded for those 4 years of sacrifice and dedication?? I guess my question real question is does a 165 and a 3.9 actually give an application >50% chance at these schools?

no, it'll make splitters more valuable than ever and reverse splitters less valuable (less high LSAT scores to help balance low LSAT scores)


But if they take a bunch of splitters they need some reverse-splitters too to balance out the GPA hit so that median doesn't fall too far. Both should see a slight boost, which is expected with applications down...

Firstly, as has already been pointed out in this thread, high LSATs are much rarer than high GPAs, so there really isn't as much need for reverse splitters as there is for splitters
Secondly, as has already been pointed out in this thread, LSAT medians count for more in the rankings than GPA medians, so schools would prefer to take a hit on GPA over LSAT

Therefore, splitters will get much more of a boost and reverse splitters may actually be getting squeezed, as it'll be tougher for schools to accept low LSAT scores


Do splitters refer to people with scores below the 25th percentile or just below the 50th?

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby Cobretti » Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:31 am

A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A wrote:It's in their interest to get a high LSAT median over GPA.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/articles/2012/03/12/methodology-law-school-rankings


US NEWS wrote:Library resources (0.0075): The total number of volumes and titles in the school's law library at the end of the 2011 fiscal year.


#CooleyTrolling

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby guano » Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:37 am

john7234797 wrote:Do splitters refer to people with scores below the 25th percentile or just below the 50th?

I think too many people are focused on median. IMO, it's 25th, because that's the shit zone

User avatar
bizzybone1313
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:31 pm

Re: Year of the Reverse Splitter?

Postby bizzybone1313 » Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:44 am

guano wrote:
john7234797 wrote:Do splitters refer to people with scores below the 25th percentile or just below the 50th?

I think too many people are focused on median. IMO, it's 25th, because that's the shit zone


TLS is always focused on medians. By definition, half of the people at any given school have to be below median. That is all you hear on TLS. Median this. Median that. Median in the morning. Median in the middle of the day. Median at night.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests