CLASS OF 2018 MEDIANS! (LSAT/GPA/Class Size) Forum

BasilHallward · Post by **BasilHallward** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:20 pm

LurkerShirker wrote:
runthetrap1990 wrote:
BasilHallward wrote:Baylor numbers:

LSAT Median: 161
LSAT 25/75: 160/163

GPA Median: 3.58
GPA 25/75: 3.41/3.77

Students: 75

http://www.baylor.edu/law/ps/index.php?id=74827
damn, they cut down that class size by half (according to last years #'s on the spread sheet)
I am not sure those are the right numbers for Baylor. Do they count the summer and spring admits listed there as well? There are a significant number of those. That would increase the class size and lower the medians.

They do count summer and spring admits in their calculation. It's a strange school on a lot of administrative fronts.

BasilHallward · Post by **BasilHallward** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:23 pm

But they are down to 131 form 158. That is nearly a 20% drop.

pleadthafif · Post by **pleadthafif** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:27 pm

Post removed...

oceanmd · Post by **oceanmd** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:32 pm

Exactly what I thought, pleadthafif.

LurkerShirker · Post by **LurkerShirker** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:36 pm

BasilHallward wrote:
LurkerShirker wrote:
runthetrap1990 wrote:
BasilHallward wrote:Baylor numbers:

LSAT Median: 161
LSAT 25/75: 160/163

GPA Median: 3.58
GPA 25/75: 3.41/3.77

Students: 75

http://www.baylor.edu/law/ps/index.php?id=74827
damn, they cut down that class size by half (according to last years #'s on the spread sheet)
I am not sure those are the right numbers for Baylor. Do they count the summer and spring admits listed there as well? There are a significant number of those. That would increase the class size and lower the medians.

They do count summer and spring admits in their calculation. It's a strange school on a lot of administrative fronts.

On their website they list the medians separately, so I am guessing that when they are all combined on their 509, their median LSAT will be about 159, and their median GPA will be about 3.52. We will not really know until the 509 is released:

Profile of the Entering Classes

Spring 2015
37 Entering Students
25-75% GPA: 3.27/3.68
3.50 median GPA
25-75% LSAT: 154/159
157 median LSAT

Summer 2015
19 Entering Students
25-75% GPA: 3.08/3.51
3.34 median GPA
25-75% LSAT: 156/161
159 median LSAT

Fall 2015
75 Entering Students
25-75% GPA: 3.41/3.77
3.58 median GPA
25-75% LSAT: 160/163
161 median LSAT

abl · Post by **abl** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:47 pm

oceanmd wrote:Exactly what I thought, pleadthafif. The "wealthy" are the ones who will be paying for it to begin with and will not even qualify for the benefits?

Folks--especially the wealthy--pay for all sorts of benefits in our tax system for which they do not qualify. That's generally the nature of US taxes and government. Spending on education strikes me as being one the least offensive forms of this. (And I think, as most economists would agree, one of the more efficient.)

JCougar · Post by **JCougar** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:52 pm

In general, I support a model where college is free up front, but you pay a certain percentage of your income moving forward for like 25 years.

Sort of like the way PAYE operates now, except the school doesn't receive cash up front backed by Uncle Sam--it only gets money if its graduates make money.

This way, schools that graduate people with no chance of getting a job would quickly go out of business--and schools that are in business would have a big incentive to actually place all of their graduates.

As far as low income but still socially useful professions are concerned (for example, social work, etc.) that's what endowments and Pell grants, etc. should be for.

JCougar · Post by **JCougar** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:53 pm

Under the current system, the school getting rich and the students getting actual jobs are far too divorced from themselves.

oceanmd · Post by **oceanmd** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 2:17 pm

JCougar, not a bad idea, this would create some accountability and responsibility for both parties: colleges and students.

pleadthafif · Post by **pleadthafif** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 2:56 pm

Post removed...

Attrition · Post by **Attrition** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:02 pm

Yo politics people - get a room.

abl · Post by **abl** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:04 pm

pleadthafif wrote:
abl wrote:
oceanmd wrote:Exactly what I thought, pleadthafif. The "wealthy" are the ones who will be paying for it to begin with and will not even qualify for the benefits?
Folks--especially the wealthy--pay for all sorts of benefits in our tax system for which they do not qualify. That's generally the nature of US taxes and government. Spending on education strikes me as being one the least offensive forms of this. (And I think, as most economists would agree, one of the more efficient.)
Lol. Doesn't matter because it will never happen. If Bernie or Hillary or whoever attempts an upper tax bracket of 75%+ this country will see the biggest exodus of wealth in human history. See France circa 2013.

What? Has anyone proposed an upper tax bracket anywhere close to that?

pleadthafif · Post by **pleadthafif** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:09 pm

Post removed...

emkay625 · Post by **emkay625** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:12 pm

abl wrote:
pleadthafif wrote:
abl wrote:
oceanmd wrote:Exactly what I thought, pleadthafif. The "wealthy" are the ones who will be paying for it to begin with and will not even qualify for the benefits?
Folks--especially the wealthy--pay for all sorts of benefits in our tax system for which they do not qualify. That's generally the nature of US taxes and government. Spending on education strikes me as being one the least offensive forms of this. (And I think, as most economists would agree, one of the more efficient.)
Lol. Doesn't matter because it will never happen. If Bernie or Hillary or whoever attempts an upper tax bracket of 75%+ this country will see the biggest exodus of wealth in human history. See France circa 2013.
What? Has anyone proposed an upper tax bracket anywhere close to that?

Roosevelt proposed 100% on all income over 25K during the depression. It did not pass.

pleadthafif · Post by **pleadthafif** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:15 pm

Post removed...

abl · Post by **abl** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:23 pm

From the linked article:

Sanders noted sarcastically, “When radical, socialist Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, I think the highest marginal tax rate was something like 90 percent.”
Harwood followed up by asking, “When you think about something like 90 percent, you don’t think that’s obviously too high?” to which Sanders replied, “No.”

That's a pretty far cry from even so much as implying that he'll try to raise it anywhere close to that high.

But who cares? Nobody here has argued for a 75% tax rate.

basedvulpes · Post by **basedvulpes** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:47 pm

Mod edit: please don't do that.

A. Nony Mouse · Post by **A. Nony Mouse** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:30 pm

Sweet fucking Christ, people, I get that you want the politics out of this thread, but just use the report button, my phone is ready to kill you right now.

basedvulpes · Post by **basedvulpes** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:33 pm

Post removed.

A. Nony Mouse · Post by **A. Nony Mouse** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:35 pm

To be fair: this isn't the thread for debating candidates' tax policies - there are lots of potential places to cover that in the lounge. Thanks.

Hikikomorist · Post by **Hikikomorist** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:39 pm

abl wrote:Incidentally, anyone who thinks that college or law school can be replaced with self-study has never spent much time in a good classroom. Very little of my learning in undergrad (in particular) happened from the readings that I did. A good teacher adds substantial value beyond merely providing the course list. There may be an argument to be made about how much of a luxury teachers are given the cost of employing teachers and administrative staff. Maybe society would be better off having everyone teach themselves higher ed and devoting the resources saved to different ends. In fact, given the quality of teaching that I've seen at even some supposedly respectable state schools, I wouldn't be surprised if a switch to a universal coursera educational system (or something of that nature) wouldn't be an improvement for many university students.

Not to disagree with your point, but I'd say the other students were even more of a value-add than the professors.

bpolley0 · Post by **bpolley0** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 6:02 pm

pleadthafif · Post by **pleadthafif** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 6:08 pm

Post removed...

abl · Post by **abl** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 8:53 am

Hikkomorist wrote:
abl wrote:Incidentally, anyone who thinks that college or law school can be replaced with self-study has never spent much time in a good classroom. Very little of my learning in undergrad (in particular) happened from the readings that I did. A good teacher adds substantial value beyond merely providing the course list. There may be an argument to be made about how much of a luxury teachers are given the cost of employing teachers and administrative staff. Maybe society would be better off having everyone teach themselves higher ed and devoting the resources saved to different ends. In fact, given the quality of teaching that I've seen at even some supposedly respectable state schools, I wouldn't be surprised if a switch to a universal coursera educational system (or something of that nature) wouldn't be an improvement for many university students.
Not to disagree with your point, but I'd say the other students were even more of a value-add than the professors.

I'd agree. I'd say I learned the most from small class discussions in which a good prof hearded us all in the right direction.

TheProdigal · Post by **TheProdigal** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:55 am

basedvulpes wrote:
flawschoolkid wrote:
urbanist11 wrote:Holy shit can you guys start your own thread or something?

medians

George Washington
LSAT 50%: 165
GPA 50%: 3.71
Class Size: 433 (FT), 40 (PT)