## Law School Predictor: The Thread"

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

..

gunners

Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:14 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

YCrevolution wrote:
englawyer wrote:i think your HLS index is too LSAT heavy.

According to the calculator, 173/3.93 = 175/3.78, but that doesn't seem to bear out on LSN. Also the first pair comes up with Consider but I think it would be more like Positive Consider (i hope)
I'll look into it, and perhaps make some adjustments.

Both the Yale and Harvard formulas aren't very good right now, partially a result of the limitations of a linear equation. Unfortunately, both of them reject quite a number of applicants that fall within the matriculation ranges; I often thought that I should just turn the Yale prediction into a random result once some LSAT/GPA threshold has been exceed (j/k, sort of).
It's a wonderful tool. I guess, for me, the two criticisms - that it may not be great at predicting HLS or predicting splitters - isn't much of a criticism. That's because predicting HLS and splitters is substantially more difficult than other predictions. I'm not sure of your algorithms, but rather than throwing in the random result for Yale, couldn't you just decrease its band of "Admit" and widen it's band of consider (relative to other schools)? Or maybe you already do that.

But I'd measure the success of the predictor by seeing how it does with "average" (non-splitters, non t6) applicants. And it looks like it does really well at that.

With regard to HLS, do you think it's strange that your website predicts "Consider" for schools that other calculators see as less than 20% with the same numbers? Or admit for schools that other calculators see as 70-90%?

The Sound Of Truth

Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 12:20 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

The FAQ says that for the calculator 'admit' means a 75% chance or better of admittance, which fits with your numbers from the other sites

gunners

Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:14 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

The Sound Of Truth wrote:The FAQ says that for the calculator 'admit' means a 75% chance or better of admittance, which fits with your numbers from the other sites

Ah, silly me, that works. But now that I'm reading the FAQ, I guess there is some disparity with the other calculators predicting much less for HLS than the predictor with "Admit" (implying 38-62%). Once again, not that I think this is a big issue since admissions at HLS is more difficult to predict using just numbers.

YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

..

Want to continue reading?

## Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!

krispykitten

Posts: 441
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 6:44 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

.
Last edited by krispykitten on Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.

gunners

Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:14 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

YCrevolution wrote:
There's possibly that. Also, some of the calculators use LSN data which tends to skew upwards in terms of applicant LSAT/GPA and would yield slighly more pessimistic predictions for the average law school applicant.
Can you explain why there is reason to believe that LSN data skews upwards?

gunners

Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:14 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

krispykitten wrote:
The Sound Of Truth wrote:The FAQ says that for the calculator 'admit' means a 75% chance or better of admittance, which fits with your numbers from the other sites
Which other sites are you referencing? (just curious)
http://www.lawschoolpredictor.com/
http://www.hourumd.com/

krispykitten

Posts: 441
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 6:44 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

.
Last edited by krispykitten on Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Want to continue reading?

## Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?

YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

..

Antipodean

Posts: 120
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:40 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

I was just advising a friend about law school admissions, and pointed her to the new, online Law School Predictor. When she asked how accurate it was, I said 80% for me - but that was with version 1.5.

How exactly did you tweak it for 2.2? Because Yale is now showing as "Consider" for me, instead of a far more accurate "Deny". Harvard is also "Consider" instead of "Weak Consider", which again is less accurate than before.

Whatisthis

Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 5:55 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

YCrevolution wrote:
gunners wrote:
YCrevolution wrote:
There's possibly that. Also, some of the calculators use LSN data which tends to skew upwards in terms of applicant LSAT/GPA and would yield slighly more pessimistic predictions for the average law school applicant.
Can you explain why there is reason to believe that LSN data skews upwards?
There are a number of threads on TLS that discuss this phenomenon. Basically, people who are more motivated to go online and sign up for LSN/TLS/etc. probably are taking the application process fairly seriously and have done some research. A little research would tell them that studying for your LSAT is a good thing, and they would do so. Furthermore, people who are just looking to go to their state's law school may not always bother to go research other options online.

Perhaps the biggest factor is that many more people are admitted than commit to attending (and those who fall into this category probably have relatively superior numbers). LSP, on the other hand, uses matriculated student data.

About 9 months ago, I picked a few T1 law schools at random, and found that LSN applicants average 2-4 more LSAT points than the published matriculated LSAT numbers for the schools I looked at. There was also a slight advantage in GPA although less pronounced (I'd say 0.1 or less).
If we assume these applicants are generally more motivated, better educated and, on average, probably have better softs, LSN should lead one to be overly optimistic as opposed to pessimistic, right?

irie

Posts: 323
Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 9:50 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

Whatisthis wrote:
YCrevolution wrote:
gunners wrote:
YCrevolution wrote:
There's possibly that. Also, some of the calculators use LSN data which tends to skew upwards in terms of applicant LSAT/GPA and would yield slighly more pessimistic predictions for the average law school applicant.
Can you explain why there is reason to believe that LSN data skews upwards?
There are a number of threads on TLS that discuss this phenomenon. Basically, people who are more motivated to go online and sign up for LSN/TLS/etc. probably are taking the application process fairly seriously and have done some research. A little research would tell them that studying for your LSAT is a good thing, and they would do so. Furthermore, people who are just looking to go to their state's law school may not always bother to go research other options online.

Perhaps the biggest factor is that many more people are admitted than commit to attending (and those who fall into this category probably have relatively superior numbers). LSP, on the other hand, uses matriculated student data.

About 9 months ago, I picked a few T1 law schools at random, and found that LSN applicants average 2-4 more LSAT points than the published matriculated LSAT numbers for the schools I looked at. There was also a slight advantage in GPA although less pronounced (I'd say 0.1 or less).
If we assume these applicants are generally more motivated, better educated and, on average, probably have better softs, LSN should lead one to be overly optimistic as opposed to pessimistic, right?
no.

Register now!

## Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!

Sheriff McLawDog

Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 4:21 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.2 - Published June 24, 2009

Hahaha, I like how with a 170 I can get into Liberty and New England with a 0.0 GPA. Shooting for the STARS!

YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

..

Oe.Maas

Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 4:51 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

Wondering what the new index at Stanford means. Is there data on similar changes from the past?

YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

..

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

## Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...

Oe.Maas

Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 4:51 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

Thanks. I wasn't going to apply to Stanford because of my 3.7 GPA, but I'm listed here as a Strong Consider now. Maybe I'll think about sending one in then.

krispykitten

Posts: 441
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 6:44 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

.
Last edited by krispykitten on Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

..

Fuser

Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 11:41 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

No offense but it seems pretty ineffective when it comes to URM's. But then again an admissions predictor for URM's seems a bit strange since URM cycles are almost unpredictable.

A few suggestions though; perhaps it is more beneficial to break down into racial categories like AA, Mexican, etc. Because even those two categories are not alike when it comes to admissions since AA seem to receive a greater boost all across the board. Also perhaps more attention to location, and number of currently matriculated students of said race may allow for a more effective predictor. Lower percentages of a group at a particular school might equate to higher likelihood of admission, however how to quantify this especially within your model, seems a bit difficult altogether. Good luck.

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

## Register now, it's still FREE!

YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

..

jackassjim

Posts: 184
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:58 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

YCrevolution wrote:
Fuser wrote:No offense but it seems pretty ineffective when it comes to URM's. But then again an admissions predictor for URM's seems a bit strange since URM cycles are almost unpredictable.

A few suggestions though; perhaps it is more beneficial to break down into racial categories like AA, Mexican, etc. Because even those two categories are not alike when it comes to admissions since AA seem to receive a greater boost all across the board. Also perhaps more attention to location, and number of currently matriculated students of said race may allow for a more effective predictor. Lower percentages of a group at a particular school might equate to higher likelihood of admission, however how to quantify this especially within your model, seems a bit difficult altogether. Good luck.
Your numbers/stats/decisions?

Aside from the problem of trying to collect the data, I think some schools value URM applicants more than others, not just from a standpoint of having enough/too few, but simply how much weight they give URMs in the application process. Obviously, School X is going to say they care less about URMs than School Y, so aside from LSN data and perhaps the overall URM percentages at a school, there's not much to go on. If somebody wants to spend some time trying to put together this data, I'd definitely look into incorporating it.

It might be true that certain URM races receive more of a boost than other, but I don't have enough data right now to make any sort of extrapolation from that possible trend to making predictions.

School-specific formula enhancements (for state residency, ED, etc.) are something, I've been considering, and it might be something that's implemented over the course of future versions.
Sometimes, it's best not to try to predict what is unpredictable.

YCrevolution

Posts: 3854
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

..

Bronte

Posts: 2125
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm

### Re: Law School Predictor Version 2.3 - Published July 11, 2009

YCrevolution:

The Law School Predictor is great. I read through the About page and the FAQ (although maybe not thoroughly enough) and cannot find the published formulas. Although you mention the "LSAC: 2008-09 Index Formulas," I couldn't find these online.

Anyway, I understand that the spreadsheet is somewhat proprietary, but I'd love to have access to the formulas. I have no intention of publishing a spreadsheet or anything of that nature, but would merely like to tinker. Is there any easy way to get access to the formulas?

## Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!