Columbia 2011! Forum

[Knock]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 5#p2253435

m51 (a current CLS student who has been incredibly good about CLS admittance discussion) said this about index:

Basically, if a school has an index #, use that instead of your GPA/LSAT when trying to figure out your odds.

Just glanced at CLS graphs... compared to their previous years, they're doing the same amount of YP-ing as they've traditionally done (not much). CCN has always randomly taken and rejected and WL-ed borderline candidates... and whatever you may think... 3.75/170 is NOT even a 4.3 on CLS's index... of which only 50% get admitted w/o first being WL-ed. A 4.2 has only a 25% historical success rate.

These people have a higher chance of being WL-ed/Rejected than of being outright Accepted. That's been true for 3 years running. I don't see what the big confusion is. For a school that uses index #s, your LSAT/GPA is mostly meaningless... take the index #s, which have been steady through the years for CLS. 4.4 = you're in unless we find dirt on you. 4.3 = you have a good shot. 4.2 = you have a shot, but it's not great. 4.1 = you're kindda screwed.

Just using Columbia as an example because I ED-ed here and did a lot of research. Normal 4.3 index # acceptance rate is somewhere around 50%. ED 4.3 acceptance rate is well over 75%. Normal 4.2 index # acceptance rate is somewhere around 20%. ED rate is well over 33%..

[bdubs]

Just glanced at CLS graphs... compared to their previous years, they're doing the same amount of YP-ing as they've traditionally done (not much). CCN has always randomly taken and rejected and WL-ed borderline candidates... and whatever you may think... 3.75/170 is NOT even a 4.3 on CLS's index... of which only 50% get admitted w/o first being WL-ed. A 4.2 has only a 25% historical success rate.

These people have a higher chance of being WL-ed/Rejected than of being outright Accepted. That's been true for 3 years running. I don't see what the big confusion is. For a school that uses index #s, your LSAT/GPA is mostly meaningless... take the index #s, which have been steady through the years for CLS. 4.4 = you're in unless we find dirt on you. 4.3 = you have a good shot. 4.2 = you have a shot, but it's not great. 4.1 = you're kindda screwed.

Do they truncate, round, or other?

[Knock]

Just glanced at CLS graphs... compared to their previous years, they're doing the same amount of YP-ing as they've traditionally done (not much). CCN has always randomly taken and rejected and WL-ed borderline candidates... and whatever you may think... 3.75/170 is NOT even a 4.3 on CLS's index... of which only 50% get admitted w/o first being WL-ed. A 4.2 has only a 25% historical success rate.

These people have a higher chance of being WL-ed/Rejected than of being outright Accepted. That's been true for 3 years running. I don't see what the big confusion is. For a school that uses index #s, your LSAT/GPA is mostly meaningless... take the index #s, which have been steady through the years for CLS. 4.4 = you're in unless we find dirt on you. 4.3 = you have a good shot. 4.2 = you have a shot, but it's not great. 4.1 = you're kindda screwed.

Do they truncate, round, or other?

I have no idea, but I would guess they wouldn't.

[law_monkey]

Does anyone know how all of this applies to URMs, or are we still stuck at being unpredictable?

[WestOfTheRest]

Does anyone know how all of this applies to URMs, or are we still stuck at being unpredictable?

If your above those indexes your in.

[Knock]

Does anyone know how all of this applies to URMs, or are we still stuck at being unpredictable?

There is actually a companion graph for URMs. It's pretty much shifted down a little bit, I can't recall exactly. But it groups all URMs together, so it may be inaccurate for certain types of URMs. I wish I could locate these graphs, they were pretty informative .

[ahduth]

I was about to ask about these mythical index graphs.

[Knock]

I was about to ask about these mythical index graphs.

I've been searching for them for a little while, no luck. Someone must have them saved or have an idea where they can be found.

[law_monkey]

Does anyone know how all of this applies to URMs, or are we still stuck at being unpredictable?

There is actually a companion graph for URMs. It's pretty much shifted down a little bit, I can't recall exactly. But it groups all URMs together, so it may be inaccurate for certain types of URMs. I wish I could locate these graphs, they were pretty informative .

Those do sound super helpful. Luckily CLS is definitely one of my reaches, so a ding will be expected and anything else will be a pleasant surprise.

[bdubs]

For applicants identified as White or unreported


ED:
--ImageRemoved--

RD:
--ImageRemoved--

[jdstl]

Is their any consensus on the index cutoff for Butlers/Hamiltons, or are those basically done from softs among the high number people?

[c_dubya_s]

Is their any consensus on the index cutoff for Butlers/Hamiltons, or are those basically done from softs among the high number people?

I've heard quoted several times on TLS that the Hamilton cutoff is roughly 3.8+, 174+.

[quetzal_bird]

tag. chances aren't great but i'm banking on URM cycles being unpredictable and crossing my fingers

[jdstl]

Is their any consensus on the index cutoff for Butlers/Hamiltons, or are those basically done from softs among the high number people?

I've heard quoted several times on TLS that the Hamilton cutoff is roughly 3.8+, 174+.

Yeah, that's about what I hear too. I guess I should phrase the question "is there any idex above which a certin scholarship becomes automatic?"

[LinzerTorte]

Ugh, I'd rather be straight rejected than WL, but I have a feeling I'm headed for the waitlist.

[ryukpark]

Can someone tell me how they grade UG grades from abroad, or convert them into indices?

[bdubs]

Can someone tell me how they grade UG grades from abroad, or convert them into indices?

Considering that they are not reportable to USNWR, I would doubt that they go into the formula. My guess is that it is a tie breaker for borderline candidates.

[s0ph1e2007]

Just glanced at CLS graphs... compared to their previous years, they're doing the same amount of YP-ing as they've traditionally done (not much). CCN has always randomly taken and rejected and WL-ed borderline candidates... and whatever you may think... 3.75/170 is NOT even a 4.3 on CLS's index... of which only 50% get admitted w/o first being WL-ed. A 4.2 has only a 25% historical success rate.

These people have a higher chance of being WL-ed/Rejected than of being outright Accepted. That's been true for 3 years running. I don't see what the big confusion is. For a school that uses index #s, your LSAT/GPA is mostly meaningless... take the index #s, which have been steady through the years for CLS. 4.4 = you're in unless we find dirt on you. 4.3 = you have a good shot. 4.2 = you have a shot, but it's not great. 4.1 = you're kindda screwed.

I cannot believe this is perfectly accurate. I'm a 4.4 URM, and I'm not that confident in getting in, and not just because I'm a crazy pessimist. I just don't think my 3.4 is going to be impressing anyone anytime soon.

[vertex]

I cannot believe this is perfectly accurate. I'm a 4.4 URM, and I'm not that confident in getting in, and not just because I'm a crazy pessimist. I just don't think my 3.4 is going to be impressing anyone anytime soon.

You'll get in. 4.4 URM is in. See you in New York!

[pereira6]

I got something in the mail from Columbia today.

It wasn't this color.

I said 'ello, reject pile.

It was just the viewbook I requested 3 months ago

[r6_philly]

I got something in the mail from Columbia today.

It wasn't this color.

I said 'ello, reject pile.

It was just the viewbook I requested 3 months ago

lol what color is the viewbook?

I still only have 2 viewbooks total (Berkeley + USC). You'd think I would get viewbooks from places I am already admitted...

[LinzerTorte]

I got something in the mail from Columbia today.

It wasn't this color.

I said 'ello, reject pile.

It was just the viewbook I requested 3 months ago

That is seriously evil.

[pereira6]

I got something in the mail from Columbia today.

It wasn't this color.

I said 'ello, reject pile.

It was just the viewbook I requested 3 months ago

lol what color is the viewbook?

I still only have 2 viewbooks total (Berkeley + USC). You'd think I would get viewbooks from places I am already admitted...

Amazingly enough, the viewbook has a this color picture of the law school and the same color back cover

Yet the envelope was not. Alas, no acceptance yet! Haha hopefully I get one.

I requested viewbooks from all schools that didn't say "look at it online" because I like looking at them for info and they make good looking coffee-table books. Along with the Onion's Our Dumb World.

[WestOfTheRest]

Why I didnt get a viewbook from columbia, I don't know. Those bastards.

[sarahlawg]

Just glanced at CLS graphs... compared to their previous years, they're doing the same amount of YP-ing as they've traditionally done (not much). CCN has always randomly taken and rejected and WL-ed borderline candidates... and whatever you may think... 3.75/170 is NOT even a 4.3 on CLS's index... of which only 50% get admitted w/o first being WL-ed. A 4.2 has only a 25% historical success rate.

These people have a higher chance of being WL-ed/Rejected than of being outright Accepted. That's been true for 3 years running. I don't see what the big confusion is. For a school that uses index #s, your LSAT/GPA is mostly meaningless... take the index #s, which have been steady through the years for CLS. 4.4 = you're in unless we find dirt on you. 4.3 = you have a good shot. 4.2 = you have a shot, but it's not great. 4.1 = you're kindda screwed.

I cannot believe this is perfectly accurate. I'm a 4.4 URM, and I'm not that confident in getting in, and not just because I'm a crazy pessimist. I just don't think my 3.4 is going to be impressing anyone anytime soon.

if it were perfect, there wouldn't be yellow in the 4.4 range, but of course there is, and I doubt those who are in yellow have some crazy dirt against them.
It's a tough GPA to have, but good luck! I'm really pulling for you!