UVA eliminates/extends ED deadline Forum

[rundoxierun]

Some of this might have been said before, but I disagree that this will help UVA's ranking for the following reasons:

1. Most people only ED to their reach schools because they are willing to trade the ranking for potential $. This is also the reason why historically the ED pool generally has worse stats than the RD pool.

2. Quite a few have suggested that admitting splitters using this would increase their stats. Are we forgetting that splitters are splitters because their other number is much lower, and hereby would pull down the school's median for the other number? Admitting a 172/3.2 would help the LSAT but hurt the GPA. It's not like admitting splitters is a low hanging fruit strategy toward bumping stats.

3. Yes this definitely helps their yield, but how much that helps their ranking is to be seen.

No. We remember two things....

- That there are two kinds of splitters
- How medians work

3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8
165, 166, 167, 168, 169

Median: 3.6, 167

Splitter 1: 3.2, 172
Splitter 2: 3.9, 163

Admit Splitter 1: Median becomes 3.55, 167.5
Admit Splitter 2: Median becomes 3.65, 166.5

how bout this 3.1, 3.1, 3.5, 3.5, 3.7, 3.8, 3.8, 3.8, 3.9, 3.9, 3.8, 4.0, 3.8, 4.0, 3.8
165, 167, 170, 171, 171, 172, 166, 168, 169, 165, 167, 167, 163, 161, 175
Spliter 1: 2.8, 177
Splitter 2: 3.9 168

EDIT: and yes I put the numbers out of order to make you work hard

lol, in case anyone is wondering.. take splitter 1

[Helmholtz]

The results of lawyer/judge surveys (with their ~30% response rate) collected by a second rate news magazine probably isn't the best crutch to keep leaning on when trying to prove legal prestige.

With the number of people who fill them out, and their consistency it's fine. What' even worse to use to prove legal prestige is LSAT/GPA ratios--which most lawyers have no idea what they currently are, and don't care. The peer scores collected by this second rate magazine maybe even worse considering how unstable they are outside of HYS, and considering that the people filling them out will never be hiring you unless you go into academia. Basically whoever hired "insert random legal scholar" last year suddenly jumps up by .2 in a year. Besides the lawyer/judge scores align pretty closely with the employment stats.

I think you're looking at LSAT/GPA wrong way. Its just like peer or lawyer scores. Its simply a poll of student preference. Students with better numbers have more options on what schools to attend and by looking at where they end up, you have a picture of what the most desirable schools are.

From a law professor at George Mason:

f you must rely on ranking and desire a superior alternative to U.S. News, look at matriculating students' LSAT scores. The wisdom of crowds suggests that tens of thousands of law students making hundreds of thousands decisions about accepting and rejecting offers of admission, taking into account everything that prospective law students take into account--location, academic reputation, faculty quality, clinics, placement, specialties, cost, and so forth--provide far more useful information than the hamhanded U.S. News rankings. And unlike GPA, LSAT scores are both a reasonable proxy for student quality (at least when considered across an entire school's student body) and are not really manipulable by the law schools.

[rayiner]

Wow... I wonder what prompted this change.

Are apps down at UVA?

I think UVA is for sure trying to get more applicants, I got a fee waiver from them as a non-URM with a sub-3.0 GPA.

O RLY

This is interesting...

So did I, I think UVA hands out fee-waivers like candy.

[slider]

+1

[NayBoer]

"The reputation ratings are all that matter! My school is undervalued by USNWR including unfair considerations!" - UVA admit

"The reputation ratings don't matter at all! My school is undervalued by USNWR including unfair considerations!" - NU admit


Personally, I think the reputation scores are awfully subjective and very regional. If we're going to pick something with real-world impact, I'd rather it be more directly connected to acquiring a job. I don't have a suggestion for how to do that and something like the NLJ250 seems inadequate.

But I think asking busy professors, judges and attorneys to fill out the reputation survey is equivalent to asking them "based on your misremembered prejudices from 30 years ago when you went to law school and on the most recent USNWR rankings you looked up two minutes before taking this survey, how would you rate these schools?" Just really subjective.

But I'll admit I'm biased because without prac and prof reputation, NU would be somewhere at or below CCN and at or above BMVP.

I see your point. But the reality is that these people and their "biases" are the one's hiring you. Not those of us who worship US News and consider jumps in LSAT/GPA ratio along with the hottest new faculty as the best way of estimating employment prospects. Besides there is a reason HYS have always had higher lawyer/judge scores than the school's below them. Do people want to start saying that that's silly because of lawyer's "biases"? Besides I sure care a lot more about the people who will be hiring me and their biases than I do 0L's biases (LSAT/GPA ratio, location, top faculty hiring).

The best way to judge employment prospects is to get something that measures employment results, rather than proxies like opinion and reputation.

Law is really regional and so are job prospects. It doesn't make sense for the vast majority of schools to get a national ranking. Why rank reputations for schools that are regional? For example, if I wanted to work only in Montana or Mississippi, why do I care what biglaw guys in NYC, DC, LA, Boston or elsewhere think of my school choices?

Maybe the reputation rankings reflect something like national prestige (weighted based on the geographic distribution of attorneys) and that could be a rough proxy for employment prospects. But I think actual employment outcomes would be far better reflection of prospects than a survey of opinions. Something like clerkship hiring, biglaw hiring, etc. would be more relevant. All the rep scores tell you is prestige and rep among survey respondents.

[JCougar]

2. Quite a few have suggested that admitting splitters using this would increase their stats. Are we forgetting that splitters are splitters because their other number is much lower, and hereby would pull down the school's median for the other number? Admitting a 172/3.2 would help the LSAT but hurt the GPA. It's not like admitting splitters is a low hanging fruit strategy toward bumping stats.

Yes, it is. Medians only get hurt if 50% of your entering class has those low numbers. If you only admit people above either one of both medians, you're naturally going to have some people above both medians. So if you compose 50% of your class with high-GPA splitters, and the other 50% with high-LSAT splitters, you can raise your medians without worrying about applicants' weaker numbers.

Naturally, some people that matriculate at your school will be above both target medians, which means you only really need, for example, a class of 35% GPA splitters and 35% LSAT splitters, and 15% above both target medians to seriously game the rankings. This still leaves 15% of your slots open for people below both medians who won't affect the final numbers at all. These slots can be used for URMs, special cases or legacy admits.

To top it off, splitters are more likely to matriculate with less financial aid given out, since they have theoretically less options available to them. So your yield rate will be higher, you can more strategically use your financial aid available to attract those students above both medians or raise your medians, boost your URM credentials, etc.

There's a lot of schools from 19-30 (WUSTL, Minnesota, UIUC, IU-B, W&L) that seem to use this strategy, so the returns on this strategy probably are diminished slightly in this range (as splitters in the range of these schools have more options); but few if any other schools in UVA's range seem to be keen to use it (the "right angle" admit fingerprint). For example, splitters with a 2.9/171+ really don't have a lot of other options other than UVA ED, but a splitter with a 2.9/167 can easily get into and probably get a little money at WUSTL, UIUC, Minnesota, W&L, or more money at IU-B. Therefore, the splitters at UVA theoretically would be foolish not to matriculate because that is by far their best option with their numbers, and they can't really bargain for scholarhip $$ at similarly-ranked schools.

Anyways, that's just my two cents sitting around working at my boring job. I think this will be good for UVA's entering class medians.

[Encyclopedia Brown]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

[thesealocust]

nM

[im_blue]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

I would go for it, since your numbers aren't going to get HYSCC, NYU looks unlikely, and you might very well lock up a T10 with UVA ED.

[Space_Cowboy]

Some of this might have been said before, but I disagree that this will help UVA's ranking for the following reasons:

1. Most people only ED to their reach schools because they are willing to trade the ranking for potential $. This is also the reason why historically the ED pool generally has worse stats than the RD pool.

2. Quite a few have suggested that admitting splitters using this would increase their stats. Are we forgetting that splitters are splitters because their other number is much lower, and hereby would pull down the school's median for the other number? Admitting a 172/3.2 would help the LSAT but hurt the GPA. It's not like admitting splitters is a low hanging fruit strategy toward bumping stats.

3. Yes this definitely helps their yield, but how much that helps their ranking is to be seen.

No. We remember two things....

- That there are two kinds of splitters
- How medians work

3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8
165, 166, 167, 168, 169

Median: 3.6, 167

Splitter 1: 3.2, 172
Splitter 2: 3.9, 163

Admit Splitter 1: Median becomes 3.55, 167.5
Admit Splitter 2: Median becomes 3.65, 166.5

Obviously, the value in splitters is in being able to pair the different types. Worst case, you're back to where you started (in this case 3.6/167 for enrolling both). Best case? You need to throw tons of scholarship money at WAAAAAY fewer candidates who are above both medians to improve the class' numbers. For example,

U. of IHATESPLITTERS: 3.6/167, 3.6/167, 3.5/168, 3.6/168 [median = 3.55/167.5]

UVA: 3.9/161, 3.9/161, 3.2/174, 3.2/174 [median = 3.55/167.5]

Now, if both enroll a 3.8/169, what are the new medians?

Clearly this is an exaggerated example. But when you enroll a splitter-heavy group, moving medians is easier.

EDIT: Way better explanation from JCougar above.

EDIT2: GeePee too. Man, a lot of people jumped on this thread before I got back.

[Drew2010]

I don't know about all this USNEWS stuff.. but I know UVA has tempted me..

[thesealocust]

nM

[holborn]

Reading the last few pages has been painful. I want to be a lawyer, I was a history major, I took my math requirement already. I should never have to see this much math again.

just kidding. but only kind of. I hate math.

[NayBoer]

Also, I meant to say earlier that I suspect the reason they include prof/prac reputations is partly an anchor to make sure their rankings reflect industry opinion while also using more objective factors ($, LSAT, S:F ratio) so it's not transparently a popularity contest.

The rankings get some credibility by better reflecting pre-existing notions. This is part of the reason Cooley's rankings are ridiculous even before you consider their factors (e.g. libraries) or the fact that Cooley ranks itself #12. Yale at 9 and Stanford at 18 are just not believable and instantly diminish the credibility of the rankings.

[hopefulincal]

2. Quite a few have suggested that admitting splitters using this would increase their stats. Are we forgetting that splitters are splitters because their other number is much lower, and hereby would pull down the school's median for the other number? Admitting a 172/3.2 would help the LSAT but hurt the GPA. It's not like admitting splitters is a low hanging fruit strategy toward bumping stats.

Yes, it is. Medians only get hurt if 50% of your entering class has those low numbers. If you only admit people above either one of both medians, you're naturally going to have some people above both medians. So if you compose 50% of your class with high-GPA splitters, and the other 50% with high-LSAT splitters, you can raise your medians without worrying about applicants' weaker numbers.

I'm confused... How could people with numbers above both medians be splitters? Surely anyone you admit with numbers above both medians will raise your medians, but they aren't splitters.

If there are any Stat gurus out there please pitch in, but in my opinion the using-splitters-to-raise-your-medians theory makes sense only if your applicant pool is heavily concentrated around the median for one number (let's say GPA) and more spread out for the other number (let's say LSAT). That way, you can add candidates with higher LSATs and lower GPAs without affecting your GPA median. I don't think that's the case however. I would imagine the distribution for both numbers are similar, whether we assume a normal distribution, even distribution, or whatever.

[ogman05]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

Do it! JOIN US.

Definitely do it. T10 for you my friend

[jawsthegreat]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

I bet you would get accepted.

[Drew2010]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

I'm also heavily considering it.. damn NYU

[Space_Cowboy]

2. Quite a few have suggested that admitting splitters using this would increase their stats. Are we forgetting that splitters are splitters because their other number is much lower, and hereby would pull down the school's median for the other number? Admitting a 172/3.2 would help the LSAT but hurt the GPA. It's not like admitting splitters is a low hanging fruit strategy toward bumping stats.

Yes, it is. Medians only get hurt if 50% of your entering class has those low numbers. If you only admit people above either one of both medians, you're naturally going to have some people above both medians. So if you compose 50% of your class with high-GPA splitters, and the other 50% with high-LSAT splitters, you can raise your medians without worrying about applicants' weaker numbers.

I'm confused... How could people with numbers above both medians be splitters? Surely anyone you admit with numbers above both medians will raise your medians, but they aren't splitters.

If there are any Stat gurus out there please pitch in, but in my opinion the using-splitters-to-raise-your-medians theory makes sense only if your applicant pool is heavily concentrated around the median for one number (let's say GPA) and more spread out for the other number (let's say LSAT). That way, you can add candidates with higher LSATs and lower GPAs without affecting your GPA median. I don't think that's the case however. I would imagine the distribution for both numbers are similar, whether we assume a normal distribution, even distribution, or whatever.

Why on earth would you assume this?


EDIT: If simple hypotheticals (GeePee had a more complete explanation) are what suit your fancy, here is one...

U. of IHATESPLITTERS: 3.6/167, 3.6/167, 3.5/168, 3.6/168 [median = 3.55/167.5]

UVA: 3.9/161, 3.9/161, 3.2/174, 3.2/174 [median = 3.55/167.5]

Now, if both enroll a 3.8/169, what are the new medians?

Clearly this is an exaggerated example. But when you enroll a splitter-heavy group, moving medians is easier.

[jawsthegreat]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

I'm also heavily considering it.. damn NYU

You would be in.

The more I think about it, the more this appears to be a genius move.

[09042014]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

Would you take Northwestern over UVA paying sticker at both?

Would you take a half ride at WUSTL, Minn, UIUC, or IUB over UVA?

If you answered no to both, I'd say Yes you should. If you said yes to either, see how your cycle goes. You'll probably hear back from NU sooner than rather than later.

[JCougar]

2. Quite a few have suggested that admitting splitters using this would increase their stats. Are we forgetting that splitters are splitters because their other number is much lower, and hereby would pull down the school's median for the other number? Admitting a 172/3.2 would help the LSAT but hurt the GPA. It's not like admitting splitters is a low hanging fruit strategy toward bumping stats.

Yes, it is. Medians only get hurt if 50% of your entering class has those low numbers. If you only admit people above either one of both medians, you're naturally going to have some people above both medians. So if you compose 50% of your class with high-GPA splitters, and the other 50% with high-LSAT splitters, you can raise your medians without worrying about applicants' weaker numbers.

I'm confused... How could people with numbers above both medians be splitters? Surely anyone you admit with numbers above both medians will raise your medians, but they aren't splitters.

If there are any Stat gurus out there please pitch in, but in my opinion the using-splitters-to-raise-your-medians theory makes sense only if your applicant pool is heavily concentrated around the median for one number (let's say GPA) and more spread out for the other number (let's say LSAT). That way, you can add candidates with higher LSATs and lower GPAs without affecting your GPA median. I don't think that's the case however. I would imagine the distribution for both numbers are similar, whether we assume a normal distribution, even distribution, or whatever.

They're not splitters.

I don't have time to explain the rest to you...if you just reread the post you qouted, it should be pretty clear.

[NayBoer]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

Would you take Northwestern over UVA paying sticker at both?

Would you take a half ride at WUSTL, Minn, UIUC, or IUB over UVA?

If you answered no to both, I'd say Yes you should. If you said yes to either, see how your cycle goes. You'll probably hear back from NU sooner than rather than later.

Last summer several 175s with GPAs from low 3s downward were WL at NU until June. Just FYI.

[Encyclopedia Brown]

I don't get it. Is this a splitter-friendly decision? More fuel for my Feb. LSAT at the very least (even though UVA doesn't take sub3.0's, it's nice to dream; why can't Northwestern do this ).

Yep, this is splitter friendly. I think a couple of 2.9s may have already gotten in ED this cycle. Knock out a 171+ and you may have a shot.

+1 UVA must have known it was my birthday this month. My ED application to NYU has already been deferred. And yeah, I'm one of those splitters that are nervous about their T14 chances after an uneventful/rough early cycle. I'm thinking about doing it...

...should I do it?

Would you take Northwestern over UVA paying sticker at both?

Would you take a half ride at WUSTL, Minn, UIUC, or IUB over UVA?

If you answered no to both, I'd say Yes you should. If you said yes to either, see how your cycle goes. You'll probably hear back from NU sooner than rather than later.

No and no to the questions; this option is looking more and more attractive. The wait-and-see approach might not be the right move, anyway. After all, what happens if UVA waitlists me while I'm trying to decide? It seems like my decision needs to be made sooner rather than later.

[Encyclopedia Brown]

Last summer several 175s with GPAs from low 3s downward were WL at NU until June. Just FYI.

Good information for sure, but are you thinking I should go ahead and ED at UVA (since I'll likely be waitlisted at NU) or that I should hang on since those ~3.0 splitters came OFF the waitlist?