Top 25 Schools with a holistic approach Forum

[Aeon]

Do you have evidence to show that Michigan categorically does not have a holistic admissions policy, Ronde?

[rondemarino]

Do you have evidence to show that Michigan categorically does not have a holistic admissions policy, Ronde?

I gave you two points.

EDIT: to paraphrase,

(1) Using WLs waaaaay more often than dings for applicants in the high LSAT pool.

(2) Admitting almost no non-URM candidates with numbers below both medians.

[CE2JD]

But what about the people who were outright rejected with the same numbers? Why is there a difference between two candidates with the same numbers at a school that is 100% numbers-driven?

Random sorting? Srsly, a WL at UVA is the kiss of death. Getting in after a WL is like winning the lottery, especially ITE when yield has gone through the roof at schools like UVA (see the drop in acceptance rate as evidence of this).

[rondemarino]

But what about the people who were outright rejected with the same numbers? Why is there a difference between two candidates with the same numbers at a school that is 100% numbers-driven?

Random sorting?

There's also ED vs. not-ED distinctions to be made. What looks good in September could look very ugly in April.

[Aeon]

That's hardly evidence, Ronde. Plus, LSN, while certainly having its uses (and I'll grant that it is arguably the best picture that we can get as third-party observers), is not an entirely accurate representation of the applicant pool.

I'll address your two points, in order.

(1) The vast majority of the people with 170+/3.3+ who aren't admitted right away are WL'ed, not rejected. If Michigan truly has "serious reservations" about these people, why not outright ding them, unlike the poor saps who happen to below both medians?

Most applicants about whom Michigan has reservations are rejected. Therefore, most applicants whom Michigan rejects must have caused serious reservations on Michigan's part. This logic is faulty.

(2) If Michigan's admissions policy is so "holistic," where are the amazingly special snowflakes with numbers below both medians? (link) Or can truly amazing people only be found in the piles of 170+s or 3.7+s?

If someone is an "amazingly special snowflake," are they likely to post their concrete details on a site such as LSN where they could be relatively easily identified? Not to mention that truly spectacular people whose accomplishments are considerable enough to justify admitting them in spite of their numbers are not a dime a dozen. In any case, if Michigan can choose an applicant with great softs and with numbers that are higher than another applicant with softs of a similar magnitude of greatness, why wouldn't they? After all, they are interested in having a class of not only great people, but also individuals who are academically motivated, as are all top law schools.

I do not think that Michigan, nor any other law school, denies that they are unlikely to admit someone with dismal numbers, but if a truly spectacular candidate with low numbers applies, I cannot see Michigan not giving their application a serious review.

[rondemarino]

That's hardly evidence, Ronde. Plus, LSN, while certainly having its uses (and I'll grant that it is arguably the best picture that we can get as third-party observers), is not an entirely accurate representation of the applicant pool.

I'll address your two points, in order.

(1) The vast majority of the people with 170+/3.3+ who aren't admitted right away are WL'ed, not rejected. If Michigan truly has "serious reservations" about these people, why not outright ding them, unlike the poor saps who happen to below both medians?

Most applicants about whom Michigan has reservations are rejected. Therefore, most applicants whom Michigan rejects must have caused serious reservations on Michigan's part. This logic is faulty.

(2) If Michigan's admissions policy is so "holistic," where are the amazingly special snowflakes with numbers below both medians? (link) Or can truly amazing people only be found in the piles of 170+s or 3.7+s?

If someone is an "amazingly special snowflake," are they likely to post their concrete details on a site such as LSN where they could be relatively easily identified? Not to mention that truly spectacular people whose accomplishments are considerable enough to justify admitting them in spite of their numbers are not a dime a dozen. In any case, if Michigan can choose an applicant with great softs and with numbers that are higher than another applicant with softs of a similar magnitude of greatness, why wouldn't they? After all, they are interested in having a class of not only great people, but also individuals who are academically motivated, as are all top law schools.

I do not think that Michigan, nor any other law school, denies that they are unlikely to admit someone with dismal numbers, but if a truly spectacular candidate with low numbers applies, I cannot see Michigan not giving their application a serious review.

You didn't even both addressing (1). Although, I like that you're pretending to be a logic Jedi. If admissions are truly "holistic," why aren't all those people with 170+ being dinged instead of WL'ed? A "holistic" approach wouldn't reveal such a crisp line separating admissions outcomes, as can be seen at the 170 line in LSN.

w.r.t (2), I think you're really missing the point. I'm sure someone with a 165/3.5 and a Nobel Prize in physics would be admitted. Is such an instance really evidence of a "holistic" admissions policy? I'm not saying its 100% numbers. Clearly, its not the case. Only, a fool would argue otherwise. One counterexample doesn't mean the process is holistic to a reasonable degree. A holistic process would not have starkly divergent outcomes for candidates separated by a single point on the LSAT. However, see how much difference a point makes in terms of admission to Michigan.

168s, non-URM, below GPA median

169s, non-URM, below GPA median

What a difference a point makes!

[rondemarino]

Is it just me or do Michigan admits drink the kool-aid more than their peers?

[MC Southstar]

Is it just me or do Michigan admits drink the kool-aid more than their peers?

It's like they feel victimized by the no one who is making fun of them.

[rondemarino]

Is it just me or do Michigan admits drink the kool-aid more than their peers?

It's like they feel victimized by the no one who is making fun of them.

LOL. How's the day after? You know, now that you know you're going to be paying Penn $120k over the next three years.

[awesomepossum]

Is it just me or do Michigan admits drink the kool-aid more than their peers?

It's like they feel victimized by the no one who is making fun of them.

Its true, it's true, I hate my dad, it's all his fault!!!!

oh wait........

[MC Southstar]

Is it just me or do Michigan admits drink the kool-aid more than their peers?

It's like they feel victimized by the no one who is making fun of them.

LOL. How's the day after? You know, now that you know you're going to be paying Penn $120k over the next three years.

Yes, I was crunching numbers today, but I'm still feeling optimistic. I don't think I could've gotten a scholarship at a school I would have wanted to go to anyway. Plus, Philly COL is appetizing.

[rondemarino]

Is it just me or do Michigan admits drink the kool-aid more than their peers?

It's like they feel victimized by the no one who is making fun of them.

LOL. How's the day after? You know, now that you know you're going to be paying Penn $120k over the next three years.

Yes, I was crunching numbers today, but I'm still feeling optimistic. I don't think I could've gotten a scholarship at a school I would have wanted to go to anyway. Plus, Philly COL is appetizing.

Its not soul crushingly bad. Plus, the Phillies rule (Philly native here)!

EDIT: Do you work anywhere near there now?

[rayiner]

Do you have evidence to show that Michigan categorically does not have a holistic admissions policy, Ronde?

Do you have any evidence that you don't beat your wife?

[MC Southstar]

Do you have evidence to show that Michigan categorically does not have a holistic admissions policy, Ronde?

Do you have any evidence that you don't beat your wife?

That bitch better not be talkin' shit bout his Michigan.

@Ronde: I work in Edison, NJ. I live near Princeton, about 1-1.5 hour drive from center of Philly.

[Aeon]

Cheers, Ronde. Considering that the perception of a school as having a relatively more holistic review process than others among the top law schools is to some degree subjective, especially among us 0Ls (let's be honest, LSN stats do not give us a complete picture of the applicant pool and admissions decisions), this argument is moot, so it looks like we'll just agree to disagree.

[rondemarino]

Do you have evidence to show that Michigan categorically does not have a holistic admissions policy, Ronde?

Do you have any evidence that you don't beat your wife?

That bitch better not be talkin' shit bout his Michigan.

@Ronde: I work in Edison, NJ. I live near Princeton, about 1-1.5 hour drive from center of Philly.

Not bad. Picking out a sweet apartment and whatnot shouldn't be too much of pain if its only an hour's drive on the weekend.

[Burger in a can]

But what about the people who were outright rejected with the same numbers? Why is there a difference between two candidates with the same numbers at a school that is 100% numbers-driven?

Random sorting? Srsly, a WL at UVA is the kiss of death. Getting in after a WL is like winning the lottery, especially ITE when yield has gone through the roof at schools like UVA (see the drop in acceptance rate as evidence of this).

Fine. I'm just saying, and I feel you have to agree, that the presence of a waitlist at all, along with its use for candidates with lower-than-median numbers, is probably indicative that UVA adcomms are at least reading some personal statements and looking at WE... looking at qualities other than numbers alone in at least SOME instances, whether or not they ever admit people off that waitlist. Truce?

(disclaimer: I didn't apply to UVA, and wouldn't have applied regardless of my numbers, so I don't have a pony in this race.)

[b.j.]

If you're well above the 75th LSAT, a pretty bad GPA won't keep you out of most schools, even good ones. The floor seems to be:

3.6-3.7 for YHS+B.
3.5 for CCN.
3.1-3.2 for Duke, Michigan, Cornell.
3.0 for V/P.
G/N will take sub-3.0 on occasion.

What about a school outside the T14? What about schools outside the Top 25? The Top 50? I mean, would you guess that there's a pretty good relationship between how much less they care about a crappy GPA as long as you have an LSAT score above the 75th? And really, how high above it does it need to be?

[rayiner]

If you're well above the 75th LSAT, a pretty bad GPA won't keep you out of most schools, even good ones. The floor seems to be:

3.6-3.7 for YHS+B.
3.5 for CCN.
3.1-3.2 for Duke, Michigan, Cornell.
3.0 for V/P.
G/N will take sub-3.0 on occasion.

What about a school outside the T14? What about schools outside the Top 25? The Top 50? I mean, would you guess that there's a pretty good relationship between how much less they care about a crappy GPA as long as you have an LSAT score above the 75th? And really, how high above it does it need to be?

Outside the T14, most schools have a 3.0-3.3 GPA floor. I don't think there is much correlation with rank. With a 3.0, you have a better chance at UIUC or WUSTL (or hell at NU) with the appropriate LSAT than you do at Georgia.

[b.j.]

If you're well above the 75th LSAT, a pretty bad GPA won't keep you out of most schools, even good ones. The floor seems to be:

3.6-3.7 for YHS+B.
3.5 for CCN.
3.1-3.2 for Duke, Michigan, Cornell.
3.0 for V/P.
G/N will take sub-3.0 on occasion.

What about a school outside the T14? What about schools outside the Top 25? The Top 50? I mean, would you guess that there's a pretty good relationship between how much less they care about a crappy GPA as long as you have an LSAT score above the 75th? And really, how high above it does it need to be?

Outside the T14, most schools have a 3.0-3.3 GPA floor. I don't think there is much correlation with rank. With a 3.0, you have a better chance at UIUC or WUSTL (or hell at NU) with the appropriate LSAT than you do at Georgia.

Is that because Georgia is a state school and is bound by the residency requirement? If not, what else could it be? And how often do they make exceptions to the rule?

I am sorry to seem so obsessive with this, but my GPA is below a 3.0, probably around a 2.5, because I switched majors, and I was thinking that if I got a high enough score, I'd get into at least a few schools that are reputable. Or maybe that's just the LSAC calculator and others giving me false hope.

[jay115]

Cornell and UVA.

UVA - really? I would assume michigan over UVA

[rondemarino]

I submit UCLA as the only T25 school that can reasonably claim to have a holistic review (link).

Evidence of holistic review is hard to find, unless you have a taperecorder rigged at an admissions committee's office. However, rendering admissions decisions (for non-URMs) that go completely against USNWR rankings incentives (maintaining LSAT/GPA medians) this early in the game is the next best thing.

[SanBun]

I submit UCLA as the only T25 school that can reasonably claim to have a holistic review (link).

Evidence of holistic review is hard to find, unless you have a taperecorder rigged at an admissions committee's office. However, rendering admissions decisions (for non-URMs) that go completely against USNWR rankings incentives (maintaining LSAT/GPA medians) this early in the game is the next best thing.

+1

Michigan is one of those schools that pretends to be holistic but isn't really, IMO

[Education1st]

Duke!


Oh wait, Duke accepted me about 2 days after going complete despite the fact that I sent in the wrong copy of my resume, which was half filled out, and had little parenthetical notes in it like (remember to add activities here), and (get former boss's telephone #).

Wow. That's a holistic approach. They know who you really are

[im_blue]

But what about the people who were outright rejected with the same numbers? Why is there a difference between two candidates with the same numbers at a school that is 100% numbers-driven?

Its pretty simple: VA residents are waitlisted, while nonresidents are rejected. None has any chance at acceptance.