Top Law Schools

On LSN it seems Harvard has raised its gpa ceiling about 1.5 points over the past 5 years. In 2004 175+ students stood a pretty decent chance of getting in with 3.5+ gpa but now that is almost unheard of. Has the gpa median increased significantly over this period, if so how much?

I think the stats for most schools have increased a little over the past few years because so many people are applying to law school to wait out the recession. At Georgetown, for example, the LSAT 25th-75th range went from 166-170 in 2008 to 168-172 last year. The dean there said they had a 15% increase in the number of applicants that year, and expect another increase (though probably not as big of an increase) this year.

If you look at the TLS rankings and then check out the schools' class profiles on their websites, you will see that the TLS #'s are out of date and lower for several schools. I think that's because of the increased volume of applicants due to the recession. If schools have more students with 175's to choose from, they are less likely to admit as many applicants with 172's, and so then slightly lower-ranked schools have more 172's to choose from and don't need to admit as many 170's, etc. Same goes for GPA.

what to make of the lsn difference over 5 years though with a 1.5 difference in ceiling? thats pretty damn big and not coming from a school like uva that is moving up in the world etc.

so is the general assessment that lsn graphs are accurate and such a change in gpa ceilings exists?

of Benito Cereno wrote:so is the general assessment that lsn graphs are accurate and such a change in gpa ceilings exists?

in a word: yup

not really clear why, since as far as I can tell HLS had basically the same 25-75 gpa range in 2003 as now.

of Benito Cereno wrote:not really clear why, since as far as I can tell HLS had basically the same 25-75 gpa range in 2003 as now.

The other surprising thing is that this year, there are a few 3.7+, 177+ applicants either floating around in JR1 purgatory or have been passed over. In previous years, these applicants were autoadmits.

I have to think, though, that they'll come back to these folks by the end of the cycle.

democrattotheend wrote:I think the stats for most schools have increased a little over the past few years because so many people are applying to law school to wait out the recession. At Georgetown, for example, the LSAT 25th-75th range went from 166-170 in 2008 to 168-172 last year. The dean there said they had a 15% increase in the number of applicants that year, and expect another increase (though probably not as big of an increase) this year.

If you look at the TLS rankings and then check out the schools' class profiles on their websites, you will see that the TLS #'s are out of date and lower for several schools. I think that's because of the increased volume of applicants due to the recession. If schools have more students with 175's to choose from, they are less likely to admit as many applicants with 172's, and so then slightly lower-ranked schools have more 172's to choose from and don't need to admit as many 170's, etc. Same goes for GPA.

1)More applicants

2)LSAC stopped averaging the LSAT, which sent scores up. And test prep has gotten better. This leads to a higher percentage of the population having 175's. Harvards class isn't getting better so they can be more selective with the GPA.

so what was harvard's median gpa/lsat in 2003? 2000? seems basically the same as far as i can tell. why would ceiling increase if medians are the same

of Benito Cereno wrote:so what was harvard's median gpa/lsat in 2003? 2000? seems basically the same as far as i can tell. why would ceiling increase if medians are the same

Because in order to get that LSAT median to where it was in 2000 they had to take 175/3.5's. Now there are enough 175/3.7's to reach their medians.

25/75 and medians have gone up slightly over the last 10 yrs.

More people applying.
Grade inflation.
Changes in how retakes of LSAT are treated.

EijiMiyake wrote:

of Benito Cereno wrote:not really clear why, since as far as I can tell HLS had basically the same 25-75 gpa range in 2003 as now.

The other surprising thing is that this year, there are a few 3.7+, 177+ applicants either floating around in JR1 purgatory or have been passed over. In previous years, these applicants were autoadmits.

I have to think, though, that they'll come back to these folks by the end of the cycle.

JR was originally a WL at HLS. Perhaps he was a reverse splitter and he is now taking revenge

EijiMiyake wrote:

of Benito Cereno wrote:not really clear why, since as far as I can tell HLS had basically the same 25-75 gpa range in 2003 as now.

The other surprising thing is that this year, there are a few 3.7+, 177+ applicants either floating around in JR1 purgatory or have been passed over. In previous years, these applicants were autoadmits.

I have to think, though, that they'll come back to these folks by the end of the cycle.

One would hope :/

Desert Fox wrote: 1)More applicants

2)LSAC stopped averaging the LSAT, which sent scores up. And test prep has gotten better. This leads to a higher percentage of the population having 175's. Harvards class isn't getting better so they can be more selective with the GPA.

false.

Proportion of applicants at a given score is held constant. For example, a 177 is the 99.7 percentile... 99.7% of all scores are below that level. In this era, a 177 will always be at the 99.7 percentile. Just because there is better prep available does not increase the percentage of the population having a 177.

The only thing that can affect how many 177s there are is the number of test takers. On a micro level, better prep may improve one's chances of scoring better; however, this effect is absent at the macro level.

split22 wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: 1)More applicants

2)LSAC stopped averaging the LSAT, which sent scores up. And test prep has gotten better. This leads to a higher percentage of the population having 175's. Harvards class isn't getting better so they can be more selective with the GPA.

false.

Proportion of applicants at a given score is held constant. For example, a 177 is the 99.7 percentile... 99.7% of all scores are below that level. In this era, a 177 will always be at the 99.7 percentile. Just because there is better prep available does not increase the percentage of the population having a 177.

The only thing that can affect how many 177s there are is the number of test takers. On a micro level, better prep may improve one's chances of scoring better; however, this effect is absent at the macro level.

No you are wrong. The test is equated not curved. That means they attempt to make each test the same difficulty. A 177 is supposed to equal a 177 on any given test, regardless of the people actually taking it.

And you can see this by the way 170 used to be 99% and now its 97.5%.

Desert Fox wrote:

split22 wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: 1)More applicants

2)LSAC stopped averaging the LSAT, which sent scores up. And test prep has gotten better. This leads to a higher percentage of the population having 175's. Harvards class isn't getting better so they can be more selective with the GPA.

false.

Proportion of applicants at a given score is held constant. For example, a 177 is the 99.7 percentile... 99.7% of all scores are below that level. In this era, a 177 will always be at the 99.7 percentile. Just because there is better prep available does not increase the percentage of the population having a 177.

The only thing that can affect how many 177s there are is the number of test takers. On a micro level, better prep may improve one's chances of scoring better; however, this effect is absent at the macro level.

No you are wrong. The test is equated not curved. That means they attempt to make each test the same difficulty. A 177 is supposed to equal a 177 on any given test, regardless of the people actually taking it.

And you can see this by the way 170 used to be 99% and now its 97.5%.

Does anyone have the exact percentile breakdown for all of the 170s?

englawyer wrote:http://www.esc.edu/ESConline/focused/pr ... endocument

2001-2002 LSAT Percentile Table
(June 1998 - February 2001)
180
179
178
177
176
175
174
173
172
171
170
169
168
167
166
165
164
163
162
161
160
159
158
157
156
155
154
153
152
151
150
149
148
147
146
145
144
143
142
141
140
139
138
137
136
135
134
133
132
131
130
129
128
127
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
99.98 %
99.96 %
99.91 %
99.86 %
99.78 %
99.67 %
99.53 %
99.32 %
99.07 %
98.69 %
98.21 %
97.55 %
97.03 %
95.92 %
94.84 %
93.49 %
91.91 %
90.00 %
88.18 %
85.74 %
83.07 %
80.60 %
77.43 %
74.18 %
70.74 %
67.14 %
63.25 %
59.29 %
55.22 %
51.49 %
47.26 %
43.20 %
39.33 %
35.60 %
32.17 %
28.40 %
25.46 %
22.19 %
19.59 %
16.92 %
14.56 %
12.44 %
10.63 %
9.01 %
7.54 %
6.29 %
5.39 %
4.25 %
3.49 %
2.93 %
2.38 %
1.82 %
1.48 %
1.19 %
0.93 %
0.77 %
0.60 %
0.47 %
0.37 %
0.34 %
0.00 %

HTML won't work here so sorry about the formatting.

Thanks. I saw that chart, but it looked a little outdated. It still shows 170 > 98 percent.

scribelaw wrote:Thanks. I saw that chart, but it looked a little outdated. It still shows 170 > 98 percent.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =6&t=60695

And in 2009 its 97.5%. Obviously this test isn't just normalized.

still, these changes don't seem to be enough to bring about a change of gpa ceiling from 3.5 to 3.65/3.7. I think it must be a combination of applicant pool size/increase in lsat/gpas and a change in admissions philosophy.

Here is some old data that indicates the upward GPA trend is not nearly as strong as LSN suggests for HLS. The change which now counts the highest LSAT took place around '06 accounting for much of the big jump between the 2001 and 2006 LSAT numbers.

2001 USNWR (published 2002)
GPA (25/75) 3.76-3.95
LSAT (25/75) 167-172

2006 USNWR (published 2007)
GPA (25/75) 3.72-3.95
LSAT (25/75) 169-175

2007 USNWR (published 2008)
GPA (25/75) 3.75-3.95
LSAT (25/75) 170-175

Current LSAC Official Guide (published 2009)
GPA (25/75) 3.74-3.95
LSAT (25/75) 170-176

well that data does actually go a long way toward explaining the lsn data. LSN doesn't really suggest a big change in gpa medians, it simply shows that they used to allow in a few some students with sub 3.65 gpas more often than now. That makes a lot of sense when you see how much their lsats have gone up, as a 175+ lsat was a lot rarer 5 or 6 years ago thus making a 175+ lsat a more acceptable counterweight to a lower gpa.