NYU Class of 2015 Applicants Forum

[snehpets]

Does anyone know when NYU gives non-named scholarships?

I think maybe they go out around march? you have to fill out some forms.

[indigomachine]

Does anyone know when NYU gives non-named scholarships?

Called and asked about this a few days ago. I was told that merit would be in the letter and need comes after you file the appropriate documentation with FinAid. I'd check with the actual office though.

[PigBodine]

I wonder how good NYU is about getting a class yield with stats similar to that of its admitted applicants? I'm guessing some with higher stats will be more likely to get into and enroll at other HYSCC and those with lower stats are more likely to have N as their most solid admit. Maybe scholly differences (more money at the upper end and less to nothing in merit at the lower end) make any of that a wash?

Anyways, congrats to all the admits yesterday!! GL to everyone else still waiting. Looks like there's still a lot of people with solid stats waiting, so I'm sure we'll see more positive movement

I was posting a little about that yesterday. Essentially, we can say that NYU admissions wants a 172 median more than about anything else in the world, and their plan to get it last cycle was to put up a wustl-style wall at 172. Obviously, there were some repercussions to this. For one, their yield rate was quite a bit higher than they were planning. I think this might be partially due to people in a certain range (3.3-3.5 / 172-174) getting offered to NYU and nowhere better as a result of NYU's offering strategy, but there are also other factors. ITE, people might be more ranking-sensitive than in past years. Where someone in 2006 might have taken Michigan over NYU due to the library, or college-town atmosphere, or Michigan football, or whatever, now they're going with the higher ranking. I think Columbia mentioned having a higher yield than they anticipated last cycle, too.

A second thing that happened as a result of the strategy was that the male/female yield got a little ridiculous. This isn't as much of a problem at wustl because targeting splitters at the 172+ level means that they're going to be disproportionately male. As a result, the class they enrolled last cycle, per a poster in this thread earlier, was massively weighted towards males -- something like 60/40, or near that. Apparently, they weren't happy with this, and I thought they were going to take some drastic measures to reverse it.

Despite all that, the plan ended up being a failure. I suspect they got close, but they weren't able to save the 172. They ended up at 171, which they also couldn't have been happy about.

Based on their difficulty getting 172, and with the huge drop in LSATs taken, I thought that they were going to be a lot more conservative targeting male applicants with my kind of stats (LSAT over 172, GPA under 3.7). I thought they'd either live with the 171 and try to pump GPA, female-ness, and softs, or they'd at least exercise some discretion, and evaluate them in April.

Yesterday, we found out that they're not only offering these kind of people again, they're doing it much earlier in the cycle. From a logistical standpoint, I don't have any idea why. If they're trying to keep the 172, they're going to have to shrink the class massively (well into the 300s, probably), enroll another hugely male-weighted class, and sacrifice everything else they want (GPA, volunteer positions, advanced degrees, awards, etc.). It'll be interesting to see how the rest of the cycle plays out, and how their ranking looks in the USNWR as a result of the drop in median (they probably won't lose the 6 slot, but I imagine Penn is going to make up some ground with the point totals). Shrug.

[crumpledq]

This is an interesting and thoughtful analysis. What is the basis for the calculation that to get more 172+ splitters in its class, NYU would have to admit significantly more men than women? Is there empirical evidence that men predominate among splitters to such an extent that it would be difficult to find a gender balance?

As a a well-above-75th LSAT/well-below-25th GPA female splitter, I am curious about why I'd be considered a rarity

I wonder how good NYU is about getting a class yield with stats similar to that of its admitted applicants? I'm guessing some with higher stats will be more likely to get into and enroll at other HYSCC and those with lower stats are more likely to have N as their most solid admit. Maybe scholly differences (more money at the upper end and less to nothing in merit at the lower end) make any of that a wash?

Anyways, congrats to all the admits yesterday!! GL to everyone else still waiting. Looks like there's still a lot of people with solid stats waiting, so I'm sure we'll see more positive movement

I was posting a little about that yesterday. Essentially, we can say that NYU admissions wants a 172 median more than about anything else in the world, and their plan to get it last cycle was to put up a wustl-style wall at 172. Obviously, there were some repercussions to this. For one, their yield rate was quite a bit higher than they were planning. I think this might be partially due to people in a certain range (3.3-3.5 / 172-174) getting offered to NYU and nowhere better as a result of NYU's offering strategy, but there are also other factors. ITE, people might be more ranking-sensitive than in past years. Where someone in 2006 might have taken Michigan over NYU due to the library, or college-town atmosphere, or Michigan football, or whatever, now they're going with the higher ranking. I think Columbia mentioned having a higher yield than they anticipated last cycle, too.

A second thing that happened as a result of the strategy was that the male/female yield got a little ridiculous. This isn't as much of a problem at wustl because targeting splitters at the 172+ level means that they're going to be disproportionately male. As a result, the class they enrolled last cycle, per a poster in this thread earlier, was massively weighted towards males -- something like 60/40, or near that. Apparently, they weren't happy with this, and I thought they were going to take some drastic measures to reverse it.

Despite all that, the plan ended up being a failure. I suspect they got close, but they weren't able to save the 172. They ended up at 171, which they also couldn't have been happy about.

Based on their difficulty getting 172, and with the huge drop in LSATs taken, I thought that they were going to be a lot more conservative targeting male applicants with my kind of stats (LSAT over 172, GPA under 3.7). I thought they'd either live with the 171 and try to pump GPA, female-ness, and softs, or they'd at least exercise some discretion, and evaluate them in April.

Yesterday, we found out that they're not only offering these kind of people again, they're doing it much earlier in the cycle. From a logistical standpoint, I don't have any idea why. If they're trying to keep the 172, they're going to have to shrink the class massively (well into the 300s, probably), enroll another hugely male-weighted class, and sacrifice everything else they want (GPA, volunteer positions, advanced degrees, awards, etc.). It'll be interesting to see how the rest of the cycle plays out, and how their ranking looks in the USNWR as a result of the drop in median (they probably won't lose the 6 slot, but I imagine Penn is going to make up some ground with the point totals). Shrug.

[luxxe]

This is an interesting and thoughtful analysis. What is the basis for the calculation that to get more 172+ splitters in its class, NYU would have to admit significantly more men than women? Is there empirical evidence that men predominate among splitters to such an extent that it would be difficult to find a gender balance?

As much as I hate to bump this without a DLS, I would really like to know this as well, because I haven't seen information alluding to that anywhere and the poster cites that to achieve that median the class will have to be "hugely male-weighted" multiple times.

Though don't Columbia, Harvard, and Yale have the same, if not higher, LSAT medians with a better gender balance?

[PigBodine]

This is an interesting and thoughtful analysis. What is the basis for the calculation that to get more 172+ splitters in its class, NYU would have to admit significantly more men than women? Is there empirical evidence that men predominate among splitters to such an extent that it would be difficult to find a gender balance?

Yeah. Last I checked (from the 2001-2006 data), the different in male and female scores was about 2.5 points, or about one quarter of a standard deviation. That's a big difference. It's even more pronounced at the 170+ level, apparently. The same report said that .33% of females record 175+ scores, while .75% of males do. Females also have statistically significantly higher GPAs than males. 'True' (3.x/170+) splitters are disproportionately male.

[PigBodine]

This is an interesting and thoughtful analysis. What is the basis for the calculation that to get more 172+ splitters in its class, NYU would have to admit significantly more men than women? Is there empirical evidence that men predominate among splitters to such an extent that it would be difficult to find a gender balance?

Though don't Columbia, Harvard, and Yale have the same, if not higher, LSAT medians with a better gender balance?

That's the point. They are, and NYU was, before they implemented the wall at 172. That's what the post was addressing.

[PigBodine]

Also, someone just sent me a PM to say that USNWR doesn't use the actual median anymore -- just the average of the 25 and 75. Oops. That makes a *lot* more sense as to why they'd continue to target these kind of applicants into this cycle. They're still boosting the 75.

[thelawyler]

Also, someone just sent me a PM to say that USNWR doesn't use the actual median anymore -- just the average of the 25 and 75. Oops. That makes a *lot* more sense as to why they'd continue to target these kind of applicants into this cycle. They're still boosting the 75.

That does not seem right

[xlawschoolhopefulx]

Does anyone know when NYU gives non-named scholarships?

Called and asked about this a few days ago. I was told that merit would be in the letter and need comes after you file the appropriate documentation with FinAid. I'd check with the actual office though.

Interesting. I got a different answer when I called- supposedly you are only considered for need AND merit scholarships after you've filled out the appropriate forms.

[soj]

Also, someone just sent me a PM to say that USNWR doesn't use the actual median anymore -- just the average of the 25 and 75. Oops. That makes a *lot* more sense as to why they'd continue to target these kind of applicants into this cycle. They're still boosting the 75.

No.

[planeride]

Does anyone know when NYU gives non-named scholarships?

Called and asked about this a few days ago. I was told that merit would be in the letter and need comes after you file the appropriate documentation with FinAid. I'd check with the actual office though.

Interesting. I got a different answer when I called- supposedly you are only considered for need AND merit scholarships after you've filled out the appropriate forms.

From the Admitted Students website:

The School of Law devotes substantial resources to institutional aid each year, offering awards to qualified students from a combination of merit and need-based funding sources. The School of Law also offers a number of awards based solely on merit and within certain areas of academic interest, as well as several programmatic scholarships. Regardless of the type of institutional aid received, all admitted students wishing to be considered for such aid must complete the Need Access Financial Aid Application. This on-line application will be available to students January 2011.

[PigBodine]

Also, someone just sent me a PM to say that USNWR doesn't use the actual median anymore -- just the average of the 25 and 75. Oops. That makes a *lot* more sense as to why they'd continue to target these kind of applicants into this cycle. They're still boosting the 75.

No.

Fair enough.

[Strange]

So people had a DLS change already today? Still emptyhanded

[freestallion]

Got the phone call via voicemail! In for sure, WOOHOO

And I hope their need to boost their median (and get some more ladies) will prompt them to give me some sort of merit aid... Please NYU...

[JamMasterJ]

Also, someone just sent me a PM to say that USNWR doesn't use the actual median anymore -- just the average of the 25 and 75. Oops. That makes a *lot* more sense as to why they'd continue to target these kind of applicants into this cycle. They're still boosting the 75.

No.

this. Also, the LSAT curve for men is shaped differently than the curve for women. Women are more clustered closer to the median, while there are more men in the 160s and 170s, but also in the 130s and 120s

[JamMasterJ]

Got the phone call via voicemail! In for sure, WOOHOO

And I hope their need to boost their median (and get some more ladies) will prompt them to give me some sort of merit aid... Please NYU...

congrats

[birdlaw117]

Also, someone just sent me a PM to say that USNWR doesn't use the actual median anymore -- just the average of the 25 and 75. Oops. That makes a *lot* more sense as to why they'd continue to target these kind of applicants into this cycle. They're still boosting the 75.

No.

this. Also, the LSAT curve for men is shaped differently than the curve for women. Women are more clustered closer to the median, while there are more men in the 160s and 170s, but also in the 130s and 120s

So what you're saying is women are more curvy than men?

[Yeshia90]

Also, someone just sent me a PM to say that USNWR doesn't use the actual median anymore -- just the average of the 25 and 75. Oops. That makes a *lot* more sense as to why they'd continue to target these kind of applicants into this cycle. They're still boosting the 75.

No.

this. Also, the LSAT curve for men is shaped differently than the curve for women. Women are more clustered closer to the median, while there are more men in the 160s and 170s, but also in the 130s and 120s

So what you're saying is women are more curvy than men?

http://instantrimshot.com/

[Danny Mothers]

I got the call earlier!
But seriously guys. Am I REALLY accepted? Is it for sure? I want to be as paranoid as possible here.

[jellybean8]

Got the call!

It's official guys.

They accept 168 LSAT scores!

[quaker10]

Do you have AMAZING softs?

Got the call!

It's official guys.

They accept 168 LSAT scores!

[thestillpoint]

Got the call!

It's official guys.

They accept 168 LSAT scores!

Are these calls new acceptances? Or just NYU finishing up calls for people who switched to DLS yesterday?

And congrats to everyone who's gotten in so far

[wendys27]

Got the call!

It's official guys.

They accept 168 LSAT scores!

Congrats

What was your submit date and what date were you UR?

Also are you URM?

[erikjc]

Got the call!

It's official guys.

They accept 168 LSAT scores!

Are these calls new acceptances? Or just NYU finishing up calls for people who switched to DLS yesterday?

And congrats to everyone who's gotten in so far

I got DLS yesterday and the call today!