The Official June 2015 Study Group Forum

[sfoglia]

In contrast to just about every other law school, there's anecdotal evidence that retaking the LSAT can hurt you at YLS. Not sure about SLS. I think retaking a 175 is all downside.

That answers my question. Thank you.

[Smallville]

Eh. Kind of odd to cite the two schools that would care least about the difference between a 175 and a 180 when they're probably more concerned with cherry picking strong soft candidates at that level.

I would imagine that if you had two identical applications, both with 175, but one retook and received, say, a 179, that would be the more desirable candidate. This is what I am wondering.

I would say probably, but I cant imagine there being no other differences in work/life experiences

[CambrianExplosives]

Eh. Kind of odd to cite the two schools that would care least about the difference between a 175 and a 180 when they're probably more concerned with cherry picking strong soft candidates at that level.

I would imagine that if you had two identical applications, both with 175, but one retook and received, say, a 179, that would be the more desirable candidate. This is what I am wondering.

Absent from all other variables, sure. Bigger Number > Smaller Number. But that doesn't mean it makes a lot of difference because there are never going to be two identical applications and at those schools the difference between a 175 and 179 means a lot less than a lot of other factors.

[RZ5646]

The correlation between score and the thing which the test purports to measure breaks down at the extreme ends of the bell curve, so 99th percentile retakers have a high risk of scoring the same or lower, which would definitely look bad to YS.

Also, do you suppose there's a strong correlation between scoring 180 and having an insufferable personality? I can see that.

[rpupkin]

Eh. Kind of odd to cite the two schools that would care least about the difference between a 175 and a 180 when they're probably more concerned with cherry picking strong soft candidates at that level.

I would imagine that if you had two identical applications, both with 175, but one retook and received, say, a 179, that would be the more desirable candidate. This is what I am wondering.

Again, I don't think that's right. Didn't Asha say something like that she would be less likely to choose the applicant who retook a 175 and got a 180?

[sfoglia]

Eh. Kind of odd to cite the two schools that would care least about the difference between a 175 and a 180 when they're probably more concerned with cherry picking strong soft candidates at that level.

I would imagine that if you had two identical applications, both with 175, but one retook and received, say, a 179, that would be the more desirable candidate. This is what I am wondering.

I would say probably, but I cant imagine there being no other differences in work/life experiences

I'm just asking out of curiosity, so, entirely hypothetical.

[sfoglia]

Again, I don't think that's right. Didn't Asha say something like that she would be less likely to choose the applicant who retook a 175 and got a 180?

See above, where I thanked you for your explanation.

[rpupkin]

Again, I don't think that's right. Didn't Asha say something like that she would be less likely to choose the applicant who retook a 175 and got a 180?

See above, where I thanked you for your explanation.

Sorry, I missed it!

By the way, the TLS conventional wisdom about retaking is generally spot on. Even a school like Columbia doesn't care if it took you three tries to get a 175. I don't think Harvard cares much either. But at Yale (and perhaps Stanford), you can sometimes shoot yourself in the foot by following generic TLS advice.

[buckiguy_sucks]

.

[biggestlawman]

I will be so, so, happy with a 174. That is what I need. Let the champs retake a 176+.

[Rigo]

If you can do better, then retake. Retaking a 175 is pretty damn masochistic, though, and will yield diminishing returns.

[rpupkin]

Being the stats retard that I am, I never thought about it until now. Why do lawl schoolz use median and not like average lsat or something

Because a class's median is what gets reported to USNWR for ranking purposes.

[Rigo]

Being the stats retard that I am, I never thought about it until now. Why do lawl schoolz use median and not like average lsat or something

Because median is a much more meaningful stat than mean.
I suspect that if they used mean instead, the admissions process would be even more numbers-centric because low scores couldn't be as easily offset.

[buckiguy_sucks]

Being the stats retard that I am, I never thought about it until now. Why do lawl schoolz use median and not like average lsat or something

Because a class's median is what gets reported to USNWR for ranking purposes.

Ok then why doesn't usnwr use average

[sfoglia]

Sorry, I missed it!

By the way, the TLS conventional wisdom about retaking is generally spot on. Even a school like Columbia doesn't care if it took you three tries to get a 175. I don't think Harvard cares much either. But at Yale (and perhaps Stanford), you can sometimes shoot yourself in the foot by following generic TLS advice.

I'm not YS material, so I really don't know much about the two. I know historically Yale has disliked retakes, but I didn't think that would apply in quite the same way if your first take was a high score. You know, you demonstrate excellency and then you demonstrate near perfection vs. you demonstrate competency and then you demonstrate excellency, kind of thing.

[JackelJ]

Being the stats retard that I am, I never thought about it until now. Why do lawl schoolz use median and not like average lsat or something

Because median is a much more meaningful stat than mean.

Mean can be affected by outliers more drastically than the median can. So the median probably gives a better idea about the class stats

[Rigo]

Being the stats retard that I am, I never thought about it until now. Why do lawl schoolz use median and not like average lsat or something

Because median is a much more meaningful stat than mean.

Mean can be affected by outliers more drastically than the median can. So the median probably gives a better idea about the class stats

Edited my above statement, but yeah.

[CambrianExplosives]

Being the stats retard that I am, I never thought about it until now. Why do lawl schoolz use median and not like average lsat or something

Median is a mathematically better way to look at a set like this. You know that half the people scored at X or above and half score at X or below. It gives you a generally clearer picture.

If you had two schools with 11 people and those schools had:

150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 130

and

120 130 130 130 130 130 170 170 170 170 180

They would both average at about 148. but the Median of the first would be 150 and the second would be 130 because most of the students in the second have a 130 or below.

It shows where the population lies better overall.

[JackelJ]

Edited my above statement, but yeah.

you're too quick for me

[Rigo]

Edited my above statement, but yeah.

you're too quick for me

Or just too trigger-happy with the submit button.

[buckiguy_sucks]

Well that makes a lot more sense than averages did in my head

[Smallville]

Edited my above statement, but yeah.

you're too quick for me

Or just too trigger-happy with the submit button.

wouldnt that be you since you submitted b4 your additional statement? And she started to quote b4 the statement so not too quick... y'all confuse me

[Blueprint Ben]

Sorry, I missed it!

By the way, the TLS conventional wisdom about retaking is generally spot on. Even a school like Columbia doesn't care if it took you three tries to get a 175. I don't think Harvard cares much either. But at Yale (and perhaps Stanford), you can sometimes shoot yourself in the foot by following generic TLS advice.

I'm not YS material, so I really don't know much about the two. I know historically Yale has disliked retakes, but I didn't think that would apply in quite the same way if your first take was a high score. You know, you demonstrate excellency and then you demonstrate near perfection vs. you demonstrate competency and then you demonstrate excellency, kind of thing.

I really don't think it's true that Yale "dislikes" retakes. They just take a slightly less rigidly positive view of them, since Yale doesn't worry about medians in the way that other schools do. In a webinar with Asha last year, someone asked about this. Her response was that when they're looking at multiple LSATs, they use all of the other components of the application to decide which score reflects the applicant's true potential. I don't think that was just a line. It makes a lot of sense. Yale doesn't need to favor the highest score, but they do have an interest in figuring out what the scores say about the applicant in general. Eta: Because numbers can't get you into Yale. Numbers can only keep you out of Yale.

In this hypo, I could see how retaking a 175 for a 180 might signal that the applicant is a little neurotic, and probably just interested in collecting gold rings. But I'm just speculating.

[Rigo]

BP Ben outing himself as a wannabe Yalie.

[Rigo]

Edited my above statement, but yeah.

you're too quick for me

Or just too trigger-happy with the submit button.

wouldnt that be you since you submitted b4 your additional statement? And she started to quote b4 the statement so not too quick... y'all confuse me

...Precisely what I was saying.

4 for you Glenn Coco! You go Glenn Coco!