Top Law Schools

Splitter status: (pting low 170s, 3.2gpa). applying in 2018-2019 cycle.

I can't stop reading about NU and GULC's decision to now accept the GRE and forego the LSAT requirement. If this trend continues, everything I've read leads me to believe my chances at a T14, let alone with a scholarship, have significantly dropped. I will be applying next cycle, and I'm losing motivation. Can someone convince me otherwise?

Well we dont know what will happen, so dont even worry about it.

.

I'm still not convinced that there exists a large number of folks out there who:

1. want to go to law school
2. didn't because of an LSAT score
3. also had a high GPA
4. also had an elite GRE

Let's be real. Are there a few of them? Sure. They might apply too. The whole reason schools are doing this is to try and boost numbers. This should be a confirmation to applicants more than anything else; create a great app and see what happens.

Any other thoughts?

I mean, until you're actually a splitter there's no real use spending any time worrying about this.

Platopus wrote:

polodobo wrote:Splitter status: (pting low 170s, 3.2gpa). applying in 2018-2019 cycle.

I can't stop reading about NU and GULC's decision to now accept the GRE and forego the LSAT requirement. If this trend continues, everything I've read leads me to believe my chances at a T14, let alone with a scholarship, have significantly dropped. I will be applying next cycle, and I'm losing motivation. Can someone convince me otherwise?

High LSAT's are still going to have value to a school. In order to maintain their LSAT medians, school still need to admit people with high LSATs, there is literally no way around that. The GRE is going to be the death of reverse splitters: those with high GPA's and Low LSATs. Schools can now selectively admit high GPA high GRE students without negatively affecting their LSAT medians in any way, giving them little incentive to admit a student with a low LSAT score but a high GPA.

They don't even have to admit high GRE students, if GRE isn't reported. They could admit mediocre/low GRE students with high GPA.

.

I assume this change is to allow schools to game the US news and other rankings by getting high GPA applicants. They would have to report people with high GPAs, and no LSAT score for this to really change anything. If an applicant had an LSAT score, the schools would have to report their score. Over time the population with no LSAT may grow bigger, but in the short term, I don't see there being a ton of high achieving people that are interested in law school that choose to forego the LSAT entirely. Its probably going to be people who took the GREs and decided to not go to some other type of grad school.

Any more thoughts!?

It's still a "down" year even if it's bottomed out. You should be fine. Things do not change overnight.

doggozeg wrote:It's still a "down" year even if it's bottomed out. You should be fine. Things do not change overnight.

Next year is going to be a huge "up" cycle due to the removal of 3 takes/2years and because of the orange oompa-loompa in charge of America. So I think it has changed overnight in this case.

twiix wrote:

doggozeg wrote:It's still a "down" year even if it's bottomed out. You should be fine. Things do not change overnight.

Next year is going to be a huge "up" cycle due to the removal of 3 takes/2years and because of the orange oompa-loompa in charge of America. So I think it has changed overnight in this case.

So you think splitters are in danger next cycle because of individuals who couldn't take the LSAT a 4th time?

I still think that if your LSAT puts you at a schools 75th or above they're still going to want to find a reason to take you. Let's say apps are up 5%, a pretty robust increase, you're talking, distribution considered give or take, an extra 50-100 individuals with LSAT scores above the 75th%. Sure, it gets more competitive, but it's not like we're getting close to 2009 numbers or anything.

All I can say is apply early.

AJordan wrote:

twiix wrote:

doggozeg wrote:It's still a "down" year even if it's bottomed out. You should be fine. Things do not change overnight.

Next year is going to be a huge "up" cycle due to the removal of 3 takes/2years and because of the orange oompa-loompa in charge of America. So I think it has changed overnight in this case.

So you think splitters are in danger next cycle because of individuals who couldn't take the LSAT a 4th time?

I still think that if your LSAT puts you at a schools 75th or above they're still going to want to find a reason to take you. Let's say apps are up 5%, a pretty robust increase, you're talking, distribution considered give or take, an extra 50-100 individuals with LSAT scores above the 75th%. Sure, it gets more competitive, but it's not like we're getting close to 2009 numbers or anything.

https://twitter.com/SpiveyConsult/statu ... 1006138369

You're right in saying above 75% LSAT is still a safe place to be... the problem lies with all of those retakers likely driving the medians and 75% up even higher. I personally know over 5 people who decided not to enroll in this coming cycle (all with 99% LSAT scores) because they wanted to retake and help themselves out with better scholarship money due to a likely higher LSAT. Obviously I don't know a very large portion of the community, but a small example like this will hopefully help paint the picture.

I do think splitters and super splitters are in slight danger. I'm in the super category myself, so yeah I'm nervous. A 171 might have gotten acceptance and some scholarship money to the bottom T14/T20 before when medians were 168. (this example is made up, don't waste your time bickering about these numbers). But now, with lets say 10% more 170+ scores, why would they take a splitter at 171 when their median jumped up to 170 due to the influx of re-apps, and now they could take a new scorer with a 170 but has a significantly better GPA than you?

Obviously an extreme and made up example, but I think with all of the retakers, its going to drive LSAT scores up and make it harder to be in the >75% category. But, if you are >75%, you're safe either way. It's largely going to impact the people right at the 75% cut off the most imo