Top Law Schools

So... What does everyone think will be the GRE scores / medians to get into GULC or Harvard (25/50/75%)?

My non-URM guess for all is 340.

.

TheKingLives wrote:My guess is probably 320, 330, and 335 (maybe 340) for the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile respectively.

That seems incredibly optimistic, given how quickly the GRE percentiles drop off. Remember that Harvard's median LSAT is already 99th percentile, and they aren't looking for an excuse to lower their standards.

The way I'm looking at it is by just attempting to parse out the "why" of it all. One hypothesis is: Harvard wants more applicants to increase the diversity of its applicant pool and, subsequently, class. That's not too far out there, they've pretty much said as much. The issue comes with the candidate pool that fills that diversity without killing numbers. URMs with LSAT scores above a school's 25th tend to get in barring some great catastrophe with the GPA, so the logical extension is that Harvard is looking for more students they're targeting that won't hurt the numbers. If a student only hurts one of the two metrics but increases the class diversity to Harvard's liking, that's a success and numbers show that, above certain floors, these students get in.

So Harvard is looking at splitters they're not comfortable admitting for one reason or another. They, thus, decide to allow the GRE because, fuck it they're Harvard. This allows them the ability to game those numbers even more and, theoretically, balance the population size in the class.

Where the guesswork comes in concerns students who were not underrepresented in the applicant pool previously. I think this may apply to a very small group of students who have decided the LSAT is too much of a barrier, but that the GRE was unavoidable and they went ahead and dropped a great score. This is not the pool Harvard is trying to increase, however, and this pool also comes with more questions concerning whether or not they actually want to be a lawyer or they just want that sweet, sweet Harvard prestige. So, I'm thinking, for that population which is already fully represented, they will need to score an equivalent to the median applicant with an LSAT to get in. That's a 340. There's a logical jump there, certainly, but it's not too large.

This math all changes when the entirety of the T14 takes the GRE (next year?) but I don't think it does as drastically as some think. I still think populations that aren't considered URM are going to be better off with a 173 than a 340. Then it just becomes about which an applicant feels she is more likely to obtain.

.

.

tuna_wasabi wrote: Really, a 320 won't get you to good grad programs these days. What makes you think Harvard Law is desperate enough to admit a 320?

Wishful thinking?

.

TheKingLives wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

tuna_wasabi wrote: Really, a 320 won't get you to good grad programs these days. What makes you think Harvard Law is desperate enough to admit a 320?

Wishful thinking?

https://magoosh.com/gre/2013/harvard-gre-scores/

Facts, actually. Harvard GSAS reports some GRE scores to US News and they're not 340s across the board. I guess Harvard isn't a good graduate school to be admitting such atrociously low-scoring candidates.

Of course, Harvard Law might just act as cynical as some of the posters on this board and DEMAND 340s, regardless of outside qualifications. Guess
we'll have to wait and see.

Since "Harvard Graduate School" doesn't admit any students, maybe you should be slightly less cocky. A lot of graduate programs only ask for the GRE as a formality, and even more programs only consider one of your section scores.

I get that you think you've got a free ticket to Harvard thanks to their new policy, but they really aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. There's no indication that they will consider the GRE scores of students with reportable LSATs, and there's every indication that the only plausible outcome for this cycle is that Harvard will get to artificially inflate their applicant pool.

tuna_wasabi wrote:

TheKingLives wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

TheKingLives wrote:My guess is probably 320, 330, and 335 (maybe 340) for the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile respectively.

That seems incredibly optimistic, given how quickly the GRE percentiles drop off. Remember that Harvard's median LSAT is already 99th percentile, and they aren't looking for an excuse to lower their standards.

But they are though, at least in a way. If all they care about is numbers, why start accepting the GRE at all if the LSAT is perfectly capable of giving you the numbers you need in an incoming class? My guess is Harvard is trying to get students that otherwise wouldn't do well on the LSAT in through a mechanism that won't affect their rankings, and that's the GRE. Otherwise, they would just limit their admissions to the LSAT.

They're probably doing it just to boost the number of applications--perhaps by getting 1000 to 1500 more applicants who apply solely with their GREs, and admitting 20-30 of them (a small number, but enough so that no one can complain they're doing it just to lower their acceptance rate).

Moreover, adcoms likely want to admit students who may not do well on the LSAT, but those who nonetheless can compete with other students. A 320-330 just won't cut it, especially not against students who score high on the LSAT. Seriously, the verbal part of the GRE is just easier than that of LSAT. It's also easy enough to get people who score perfect on the Verbal section, given the number of GRE takers every year. Taking all of these into account, that'll probably take a 335 at the very least, and probably a perfect score for the verbal part.

Really, a 320 won't get you to good grad programs these days. What makes you think Harvard Law is desperate enough to admit a 320?

is H required or expected to release their median GRE scores and how many they admitted based on GRE coming cycle?

appind wrote:

tuna_wasabi wrote:

TheKingLives wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

TheKingLives wrote:My guess is probably 320, 330, and 335 (maybe 340) for the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile respectively.

That seems incredibly optimistic, given how quickly the GRE percentiles drop off. Remember that Harvard's median LSAT is already 99th percentile, and they aren't looking for an excuse to lower their standards.

But they are though, at least in a way. If all they care about is numbers, why start accepting the GRE at all if the LSAT is perfectly capable of giving you the numbers you need in an incoming class? My guess is Harvard is trying to get students that otherwise wouldn't do well on the LSAT in through a mechanism that won't affect their rankings, and that's the GRE. Otherwise, they would just limit their admissions to the LSAT.

They're probably doing it just to boost the number of applications--perhaps by getting 1000 to 1500 more applicants who apply solely with their GREs, and admitting 20-30 of them (a small number, but enough so that no one can complain they're doing it just to lower their acceptance rate).

Moreover, adcoms likely want to admit students who may not do well on the LSAT, but those who nonetheless can compete with other students. A 320-330 just won't cut it, especially not against students who score high on the LSAT. Seriously, the verbal part of the GRE is just easier than that of LSAT. It's also easy enough to get people who score perfect on the Verbal section, given the number of GRE takers every year. Taking all of these into account, that'll probably take a 335 at the very least, and probably a perfect score for the verbal part.

Really, a 320 won't get you to good grad programs these days. What makes you think Harvard Law is desperate enough to admit a 320?

is H required or expected to release their median GRE scores and how many they admitted based on GRE coming cycle?

I reached out to US News and they said they'll be incorporating GRE into score rankings for schools that admit students on that basis - as they already do for AU. Whether they'll release the specific data to the public, I don't know, though it seems likely if they want to demonstrate this policy change is a success.

The other question with the GRE - will the GRE writing sections be more scrutinized than the LSAT writing sections.... Just something to think about.

I also think you need at least a 325 combined to get into Harvard - at least. I also think that while the Verbal is easier than LSAT verbal, I think some might struggle on the Math sections.... Just a hunch.

.

KPUSN07 wrote:The other question with the GRE - will the GRE writing sections be more scrutinized than the LSAT writing sections.... Just something to think about.

I also think you need at least a 325 combined to get into Harvard - at least. I also think that while the Verbal is easier than LSAT verbal, I think some might struggle on the Math sections.... Just a hunch.

GRE verbal is much much easier than LSAT so I'm not sure how GRE verbal score can be a reasonable substitute for reading aptitude that LSAT tests. GRE verbal 165/170 is ~94% so there is a big mismatch between distribution of score among percentile range.

possible that Q score can be used to assess quant skills that are not tested by any LSAT section?

if H applicant pool stayed approx same over the last couple of years, then wouldn't change to accept GRE score have some other motivation than increasing pool?