Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014) Forum

[Workingtitle]

Ok so I can't concentrate on anything besides this now, so I think I might as well get a discussion going. Does anyone have any opinion on splitters (like me ) who have high GPAs but low LSAT scores? It seems to me like the conventional wisdom on here has been that Harvard is going to take a hit on their GPA median due to the lower number of applicants with 173+ LSAT scores. I understand this logic, but it leads to this question: by the same logic, why would Harvard not take a hit on their LSAT median to keep their GPA median up? It seems like this would actually be easier to do...

I guess maybe it's because the LSAT is weighed more heavily? I don't know, I'm just wondering what people's opinion is on prospects of splitters with lower LSATs but higher GPAs.

An above median or at median LSAT is much more rare than above or at median GPAs

Right that's why I said it would probably be easier for Harvard to drop a point or two on their LSAT median and keep their GPA median in tact. So why choose to dp the reverse, and drop on the GPA median to keep the LSAT median intact?

Because if they let the LSAT median drop by accepting more reverse splitters, then some other school will scoop up those rarer LSATs, and still match Harvard's GPA median since GPAs are so much more common. So in your scenario Harvards LSAT median drops and it's GPA median is maintained, and school B increases its LSAT and still maintains it's GPA.

I think you might be slightly misunderstanding what people are saying. I don't think anyone is guessing that Harvard's GPA median is going to drop, they're saying Harvard may lower it's GPA floor somewhat for top LSATs. This may be reflected in the 25th percentile for the c/o 2017, but we will have to wait and see. So I don't think they need to take a bunch of reverse splitters to keep the GPA median, as I don't think GPA median is the larger concern. There is a much larger dearth of top LSAT scores than top GPAs.

Oh ok I got you. If the predication is that the GPA floor will be lowered then that would change the way I was thinking about.

[objection_your_honor]

Ok so I can't concentrate on anything besides this now, so I think I might as well get a discussion going. Does anyone have any opinion on splitters (like me ) who have high GPAs but low LSAT scores? It seems to me like the conventional wisdom on here has been that Harvard is going to take a hit on their GPA median due to the lower number of applicants with 173+ LSAT scores. I understand this logic, but it leads to this question: by the same logic, why would Harvard not take a hit on their LSAT median to keep their GPA median up? It seems like this would actually be easier to do...

I guess maybe it's because the LSAT is weighed more heavily? I don't know, I'm just wondering what people's opinion is on prospects of splitters with lower LSATs but higher GPAs.

An above median or at median LSAT is much more rare than above or at median GPAs

Right that's why I said it would probably be easier for Harvard to drop a point or two on their LSAT median and keep their GPA median in tact. So why choose to dp the reverse, and drop on the GPA median to keep the LSAT median intact?

Because if they let the LSAT median drop by accepting more reverse splitters, then some other school will scoop up those rarer LSATs, and still match Harvard's GPA median since GPAs are so much more common. So in your scenario Harvards LSAT median drops and it's GPA median is maintained, and school B increases its LSAT and still maintains it's GPA.

I think you might be slightly misunderstanding what people are saying. I don't think anyone is guessing that Harvard's GPA median is going to drop, they're saying Harvard may lower it's GPA floor somewhat for top LSATs. This may be reflected in the 25th percentile for the c/o 2017, but we will have to wait and see. So I don't think they need to take a bunch of reverse splitters to keep the GPA median, as I don't think GPA median is the larger concern. There is a much larger dearth of top LSAT scores than top GPAs.

+1

Per the most recent data from LSAC, there are about 60,000 applicants this cycle so far. A top 1% LSAT means you're one of about 600 applicants.

[IrishJew]

Ok so I can't concentrate on anything besides this now, so I think I might as well get a discussion going. Does anyone have any opinion on splitters (like me ) who have high GPAs but low LSAT scores? It seems to me like the conventional wisdom on here has been that Harvard is going to take a hit on their GPA median due to the lower number of applicants with 173+ LSAT scores. I understand this logic, but it leads to this question: by the same logic, why would Harvard not take a hit on their LSAT median to keep their GPA median up? It seems like this would actually be easier to do...

I guess maybe it's because the LSAT is weighed more heavily? I don't know, I'm just wondering what people's opinion is on prospects of splitters with lower LSATs but higher GPAs.

I've wondered this too, and I'd be curious to see the responses. There was a thread about splitters and reverse splitters somewhere and I asked a bunch of questions there, some of which got answered and some of which didn't. It sounds to me like the answer has two parts. First, awesome LSATs are harder to come by than awesome GPAs. Woth ~100K test takers are year there are only about 2000 LSATs in the 98th percentile. With grade inflation etc. there are probably much more A averages than 170+ LSATs. This means that a school could protect both numbers by taking a mix of people who are strong in both + splitters. I could be TOTALLY wrong here, but that's how some of the explanations sounded to me and they seem to make some sense.

Second, is that maybe they will take some reverse splitters. There are probably more splitters and reversers than there are strong/strongs, so it may be "cheaper" for a school to ensure good medians by getting 50% good LSATs and 50% good GPAs than to find 50% good in both. Honestly I have no idea how true that is, but using LSN data someone with a 171 LSAT and 4.0 (reverse splitter) has a better chance (http://mylsn.info/2qo0eq) at Harvard than someone with a 172 and a 3.8 (http://mylsn.info/796zv1) who is just below median in both. A >75th <25th splitter or reverser probably fares better than someone who's 49th/49th, even if the latter may be a "better" candidate. But I just did that quickly and the sample size is very small, so I could be full of sh**.

Anyway, good luck to you, dude! I'm freaking out waiting for JS2 over here and as blind as anyone about who gets 'em and why.

[redsox]

+1

Per the most recent data from LSAC, there are about 60,000 applicants this cycle so far. A top 1% LSAT means you're one of about 600 applicants.

Not really though.

[midwest17]

Congrats everyone! Too many names to list!

LS22: can we get some date analytics on the spreadsheet? E.g. Most recent complete to receive JS1, most recent JS1 to receive JS2?

Good suggestion, I'll see what I can do! That'll keep me busy since zero actual work is getting done.

Thanks!

And in the meantime, does anyone know if December completes have started getting JS1s?

[drawstring]

Well past my interview date now

Congrats to the new admits!

[koalacity]

Thanks!

And in the meantime, does anyone know if December completes have started getting JS1s?

Yes-nothingtosee reported one earlier (congrats, by the way!):

JS1 today
Submitted 12.1
Complete 12.11
LSAT 25th-50th
GPA bit below 25th
Strong softs, I think (although not super unique)

Very excited for the interview. Should be fun.

[tls2175]

Congrats to all the JS1s and JS2s today (and I'm sure there are more to come)!

[lawschool22]

+1

Per the most recent data from LSAC, there are about 60,000 applicants this cycle so far. A top 1% LSAT means you're one of about 600 applicants.

Not really though.

We don't know exact numbers for a 173+, but as of 12/6 there were about 1,500 applicants with a 170+ this cycle, and around 350 with a 175+.

For precise numbers check out @SpiveyConsulting on Twitter.

[Workingtitle]

Anyway, good luck to you, dude! I'm freaking out waiting for JS2 over here and as blind as anyone about who gets 'em and why.

Haha thanks. I don't really know either, I just wanted to try and pass the time

[midwest17]

Thanks!

And in the meantime, does anyone know if December completes have started getting JS1s?

Yes-nothingtosee reported one earlier (congrats, by the way!):

JS1 today
Submitted 12.1
Complete 12.11
LSAT 25th-50th
GPA bit below 25th
Strong softs, I think (although not super unique)

Very excited for the interview. Should be fun.

Thanks, missed that somehow.

Congrats, nothingtosee! Quick turn around on the JS1, especially below both medians. Those softs must be cool!!

[objection_your_honor]

+1

Per the most recent data from LSAC, there are about 60,000 applicants this cycle so far. A top 1% LSAT means you're one of about 600 applicants.

Not really though.

We don't know exact numbers for a 173+, but as of 12/6 there were about 1,500 applicants with a 170+ this cycle, and around 350 with a 175+.

For precise numbers check out @SpiveyConsulting on Twitter.

Good to know.

[drawstring]

I'm thinking good softs (or at least not being a K-JD) is quite important this cycle if you don't have crazy numbers. I'm pretty sure I didn't bomb my interview......

[lawschool22]

I'm thinking good softs (or at least not being a K-JD) is quite important this cycle if you don't have crazy numbers.

I definitely got that impression from my JS1...all they cared about was my work experience (I'm a splitter)

[drawstring]

Ya, my numbers are good and my interview seemed to go ok, so I'm thinking the silence here has something to do with me being a K-JD. I don't want to be a downer but it's hard to see so many people who interviewed after me getting accepted.

[Pilking76]

Ya, my numbers are good and my interview seemed to go ok, so I'm thinking the silence here has something to do with me being a K-JD. I don't want to be a downer but it's hard to see so many people who interviewed after me getting accepted.

I'm sorry whats K-JD?

[drawstring]

Ya, my numbers are good and my interview seemed to go ok, so I'm thinking the silence here has something to do with me being a K-JD. I don't want to be a downer but it's hard to see so many people who interviewed after me getting accepted.

I'm sorry whats K-JD?

Straight from undergrad to law school

[Kimikho]

JAY ESS TWO OH MY GOD I AM CRYING THIS IS THE BEST THING EVER

MY DREAM FOR 5 YEARS

I CAN'T BELIEVE I MISSED THIS. STUPID TIME ZONES.

[Kimikho]

also, JS1

[lawschool22]

Ya, my numbers are good and my interview seemed to go ok, so I'm thinking the silence here has something to do with me being a K-JD. I don't want to be a downer but it's hard to see so many people who interviewed after me getting accepted.

I'm sorry whats K-JD?

Usually refers to going straight to law school after undergrad with little to no substantive "real-world" /work experience (not saying that's true for everyone, just the connotation). The idea is you were in school from Kindergarten through law school.

Edit: Scooped

[jingosaur]

also, JS1

CONGRATS SCOOBS!!!!!

[applelover]

also, JS1

CONGRATS SCOOBS!!!!!

I had a JS1 a few days before Thanksgiving. 3.8X, 174 on my third try.

I'll be sticking around here of course, but thank you to everyone for your support through this process. I hope I can offer the same.

So much love! <3

Congrats!!!!! And you to jingo and everyone else who was accepted today.

[Kimikho]

JS2

I am so happy right now. JS1 invite on 11/27 and JS1 interview on 12/10. 75th percentile LSAT and 25th percentile GPA.

OMG so much happiness today.

CONGRATULATIONS, JINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ShrimpToastMasters]

also, JS1

CONGRATS SCOOBS!!!!!

+ a bajillion!!!!

[lawschool22]

also, JS1