Top Law Schools

Sorry if this issue has been brought up before, but looking at the numbers on both of these has made me question their efficacy to urm's and splitters. The reason I began thinking this way is because of the fact that both seem to be self-selecting samples in which those with higher numbers will most likely post and those with lower numbers will not, and a majority of urm applicants don't even use these services from what I've been able to see. Now my question is this; schools have a 25th-75th threshold where 25% of the people admitted were admitted with a gpa or lsat underneath the 25th percent lsat and gpa and vice versa for those who scored higher. Are the people underneath the 25th percentile splitters? or are they mostly comprised of the urm's we don't hear about or see on lsn and lsp respectively.

if you don't think LSP is giving you a good idea of where to apply, ask TLS. that is, after all, its only practical purpose.

it's not necessarily that, it's more of the fact that many who are aspiring for law school admissions base their decisions on these websites. More importantly being a URM and hopefully a high splitter come the October LSAT it would be hard to gauge where I would have a decent to good chance of admission. More importantly the under 25% has to exist for a reason and I'm beginning to think that is where individuals who add diversity but aren't necessarily competitive for that school land; with diversity being anything from being a urm to having a different life story etc. With all that being said it seems to me that people aren't totally disqualified from schools they didn't think they could get in to if they have decent numbers but not numbers near the schools range. Again its an assumption I'm making but at least it gives hope to some.

tooswolle wrote:it's not necessarily that, it's more of the fact that many who are aspiring for law school admissions base their decisions on these websites. More importantly being a URM and hopefully a high splitter come the October LSAT it would be hard to gauge where I would have a decent to good chance of admission. More importantly the under 25% has to exist for a reason and I'm beginning to think that is where individuals who add diversity but aren't necessarily competitive for that school land; with diversity being anything from being a urm to having a different life story etc. With all that being said it seems to me that people aren't totally disqualified from schools they didn't think they could get in to if they have decent numbers but not numbers near the schools range. Again its an assumption I'm making but at least it gives hope to some.

Doesn't LSP admit on its website that it's less reliable for splitters?

I don't think it purports to be definitive. It's just better than the other resources out there.

tooswolle wrote:it's not necessarily that, it's more of the fact that many who are aspiring for law school admissions base their decisions on these websites. More importantly being a URM and hopefully a high splitter come the October LSAT it would be hard to gauge where I would have a decent to good chance of admission. More importantly the under 25% has to exist for a reason and I'm beginning to think that is where individuals who add diversity but aren't necessarily competitive for that school land; with diversity being anything from being a urm to having a different life story etc. With all that being said it seems to me that people aren't totally disqualified from schools they didn't think they could get in to if they have decent numbers but not numbers near the schools range. Again its an assumption I'm making but at least it gives hope to some.

URM makes for a unpredictable cycle and so does being a splitter, combined makes it totally unpredictable.

LSN is a great resource, and LSP is pretty good too. None are exact.

Desert Fox wrote:

tooswolle wrote:it's not necessarily that, it's more of the fact that many who are aspiring for law school admissions base their decisions on these websites. More importantly being a URM and hopefully a high splitter come the October LSAT it would be hard to gauge where I would have a decent to good chance of admission. More importantly the under 25% has to exist for a reason and I'm beginning to think that is where individuals who add diversity but aren't necessarily competitive for that school land; with diversity being anything from being a urm to having a different life story etc. With all that being said it seems to me that people aren't totally disqualified from schools they didn't think they could get in to if they have decent numbers but not numbers near the schools range. Again its an assumption I'm making but at least it gives hope to some.

URM makes for a unpredictable cycle and so does being a splitter, combined makes it totally unpredictable.

LSN is a great resource, and LSP is pretty good too. None are exact.

+1. Splitters (such as myself) and URMs should use these two sites to produce a very rough outline of where (and where not) to apply. If you have aspirations to attend a certain school (and it's not completely out of your ballpark), it would be worth it to send an app.

Is there a general guideline for what GPA makes you a splitter?

Hannibal wrote:Is there a general guideline for what GPA makes you a splitter?

I think it's dependant on your LSAT. The term "splitter" refers to the split between GPA and LSAT score. To me, a true splitter has a sub 3.0 GPA and 168+ LSAT.

With the exception of trolls and those fuzzying their numbers for anonymity, LSN is 100% accurate.

It's correct that lsp does not purport to be absolutely correct, however that's not my point. My point is more focused on what the below 25% represents, does it mean that anyone stands a chance as long as they have average numbers? It's merel a curiosity of mines since I don't entirely understand the methods behind the system but what I can tell is that some schools have some leeway. As for the poster who said it's absolutist correct, I'd disagree perhaps it may be for those with high numbers since they would be the most represented statistically but it's accuracy would be lower for small groups due to the lack that it is not representational of the group.