YP at Michigan is DISGUSTING Forum

[scribelaw]

Strangely, I don't think one person in my sample from the 169-170 did ED. Here is a link:

http://michigan.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... ,8&type=jd

On the other hand, one admit in the 172-173 sample did ED.

For a forum full of people so proud of their logic and LSAT skills, the annoying excuse of YP runs rampant -- just because something could be an explanation doesn't make it the explanation. I know plenty of you are smart enough to realize that, but seriously, anytime someone doesn't get into a school where they are > both 75th's, it is always YP. I can't come up with a better reason to explain the numbers you're coming up with scribe, but i'm also not convinced. Plus, as said before, LSN is a small sampling of applications.

I think most of it's popularity is because people find it a comforting excuse. Just maybe, schools care a little bit about softs and the personality of your application. Maybe.

Disclaimer: I do think it's mostly a numbers game, i'm not the smartest person on this forum or even in this thread, I got lucky on my LSAT, and my application wasn't the greatest. But, I get sick of YP whining. Condolences to those of you who have an honest interest Mich and are decent people, which OP definitely is not.

This reasoning doesn't hold up. Most of the people who Michigan waitlisted will get into CCN and maybe HYS, so the softs and the application package obviously are not the issue.

EDIT: I also never said that it's YP in every case. In fact, I said in an earlier post that I don't doubt there are cases where a school just doesn't like an applicant, and there are examples of people with >75th numbers who avoid YP (as Helm pointed out). Still, I'm surprised people are denying that YP is widespread at MVP. The evidence is overwhelming.

[Shlonster]

Strangely, I don't think one person in my sample from the 169-170 did ED. Here is a link:

http://michigan.lawschoolnumbers.com/ap ... ,8&type=jd

On the other hand, one admit in the 172-173 sample did ED.

For a forum full of people so proud of their logic and LSAT skills, the annoying excuse of YP runs rampant -- just because something could be an explanation doesn't make it the explanation. I know plenty of you are smart enough to realize that, but seriously, anytime someone doesn't get into a school where they are > both 75th's, it is always YP. I can't come up with a better reason to explain the numbers you're coming up with scribe, but i'm also not convinced. Plus, as said before, LSN is a small sampling of applications.

I think most of it's popularity is because people find it a comforting excuse. Just maybe, schools care a little bit about softs and the personality of your application. Maybe.

Disclaimer: I do think it's mostly a numbers game, i'm not the smartest person on this forum or even in this thread, I got lucky on my LSAT, and my application wasn't the greatest. But, I get sick of YP whining. Condolences to those of you who have an honest interest Mich and are decent people, which OP definitely is not.

This reasoning doesn't hold up. Most of the people who Michigan waitlisted will get into CCN and maybe HYS, so the softs and the application package obviously are not the issue.

^ Assumes all schools are looking for exactly the same thing.

Also, I'm not saying that YP never happens, just that people place too much faith in it happening to them. I like you and all, but come on.

edit: not fair of you to edit your post while I'm posting mine. All I'm saying is that evidence which suggests YP is overwhelming does not prove YP. I think it is rarer than most people think. However, I will admit, I have never been on the receiving end of it so maybe i just don't understand.

[Unitas]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

[Aeon]

Dean Z's article "Admissions of a director" contains a great deal of discussion of 'leapfroggers' that seems to be relevant to this thread. For example:

We have gathered some interesting and surprising data about the extent to which those perspectives and experiences matter in our admissions process. Looking at the applicants to the class entering in 2001, and comparing the LSAT and UGPA of each student who enrolled in 2001 to the list of those who had been denied, we learned that 20 percent, or 76 students, of an enrolled class of 362 had both lower LSAT and UGPA than at least 100 applicants who had been denied; another nearly 30 percent, or 103, had both lower LSAT and UGPA than at least 23 and as many as 99 of the denied applicants. Moreover, these enrolled students comprised a racially diverse group: More than two-thirds were white or Asian, while the remainder were African American, Native American, or Latino.

[Wolverhoo]

~3.5, 171-173 and admitted, checking in.

Wrote a Why Mich and sent in a LOCI before hearing back.

I feel very grateful after what has gone on today.

[AngryAvocado]

Dean Z's article "Admissions of a director" contains a great deal of discussion of 'leapfroggers' that seems to be relevant to this thread. For example:

We have gathered some interesting and surprising data about the extent to which those perspectives and experiences matter in our admissions process. Looking at the applicants to the class entering in 2001, and comparing the LSAT and UGPA of each student who enrolled in 2001 to the list of those who had been denied, we learned that 20 percent, or 76 students, of an enrolled class of 362 had both lower LSAT and UGPA than at least 100 applicants who had been denied; another nearly 30 percent, or 103, had both lower LSAT and UGPA than at least 23 and as many as 99 of the denied applicants. Moreover, these enrolled students comprised a racially diverse group: More than two-thirds were white or Asian, while the remainder were African American, Native American, or Latino.

Perhaps I'm reading this wrong, but that doesn't seem particularly meaningful. Schools like Michigan get thousands of applications a year, so the fact that a minority of their class had worse numbers than ~100 applicants (<2% of applicants) means almost nothing. In fact, if my interpretation is correct, it pretty much suggests the opposite of what SZ seems to have intended--that the process is overwhelmingly numbers based.

[Unitas]

Dean Z's article "Admissions of a director" contains a great deal of discussion of 'leapfroggers' that seems to be relevant to this thread. For example:

We have gathered some interesting and surprising data about the extent to which those perspectives and experiences matter in our admissions process. Looking at the applicants to the class entering in 2001, and comparing the LSAT and UGPA of each student who enrolled in 2001 to the list of those who had been denied, we learned that 20 percent, or 76 students, of an enrolled class of 362 had both lower LSAT and UGPA than at least 100 applicants who had been denied; another nearly 30 percent, or 103, had both lower LSAT and UGPA than at least 23 and as many as 99 of the denied applicants. Moreover, these enrolled students comprised a racially diverse group: More than two-thirds were white or Asian, while the remainder were African American, Native American, or Latino.

Perhaps I'm reading this wrong, but that doesn't seem particularly meaningful. Schools like Michigan get thousands of applications a year, so the fact that a minority of their class had worse numbers than ~100 applicants (<2% of applicants) means almost nothing. In fact, if my interpretation is correct, it pretty much suggests the opposite of what SZ seems to have intended--that the process is overwhelmingly numbers based.

And does denied = waitlist and rejection, or is deny just rejection?

[scribelaw]

Just one more thing from LSN...From applicants with a 172-173 LSAT, there's a 56 percent acceptance rate for people with GPAs from 3.6 to 3.8.

But, there's a 75 percent acceptance rate for people with the same LSAT score and GPAs from 3.4 to 3.59.

I mean, come on. This is YP, plain and simple.

[Aeon]

It was just an excerpt from the article, which itself focuses on the impact of soft factors on admissions decisions. Read the entire thing - the article doesn't lend itself well to brief snippets.

[tamlyric]

Just one more thing from LSN...From applicants with a 172-173 LSAT, there's a 56 percent acceptance rate for people with GPAs from 3.6 to 3.8.

But, there's a 75 percent acceptance rate for people with the same LSAT score and GPAs from 3.4 to 3.59.

I mean, come on. This is YP, plain and simple.

Perhaps it would be good for someone to define YP. I think people might be operating with different definitions of YP, which is why people can't seem to agree. Suppose, e.g., we say that a school practices YP if and only if the school views the likelihood of a candidate's matriculating as a factor in the acceptance of applicants. Presumably, all schools engage in this kind of YP, no? The question, then, is whether Mich is doing something over and above this form of YP (say, denying applicants solely on the basis of their #s). For my part, I don't think so.

[soullesswonder]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

If the schools can reliably predict their yield rate, then bolded statement is false. As for the usefulness of LSN...there are 924 applicants listed for Michigan in this cycle, a fairly large sample size. Yes, a portion of the numbers are fudged, but I doubt that the data is systematically skewed in a way that would produce such a graphically visible pattern. Moreover, I have never seen a convincing explanation for why that data would be systematically skewed.

[scribelaw]

Just one more thing from LSN...From applicants with a 172-173 LSAT, there's a 56 percent acceptance rate for people with GPAs from 3.6 to 3.8.

But, there's a 75 percent acceptance rate for people with the same LSAT score and GPAs from 3.4 to 3.59.

I mean, come on. This is YP, plain and simple.

Perhaps it would be good for someone to define YP. I think people might be operating with different definitions of YP, which is why people can't seem to agree. Suppose, e.g., we say that a school practices YP if and only if the school views the likelihood of a candidate's matriculating as a factor in the acceptance of applicants. Presumably, all schools engage in this kind of YP, no? The question, then, is whether Mich is doing something over and above this form of YP (say, denying applicants solely on the basis of their #s). For my part, I don't think so.

The problem with your construction is "solely." That's a difficult standard.

I think MVP are deciding to waitlist stronger applicants who are otherwise qualified, and who they would otherwise admit, because they know that this group will matriculate at a low percentage and hurt their yield rates, which are calculated in USNWR rankings.

[existenz]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

^This.

If Michigan simply admitted 95% of the people with numbers above their medians and WL'd everyone else, they'd be admitting 1500 people of whom maybe 100 would matriculate. Then they'd have to go to their WL, to the median and below median candidates, and try to get them back after hurting their feelings with the WL. By this time it would be mid-April, no time for ASW, minimal time for scholly consideration, and who knows how many or few students they'd wind up with.

They've been doing this admissions game for years. If you aren't HYSC, you can't just take the best numbers and expect them to show up. At the same time, you don't want to overadmit and risk having 600 1Ls show up in August.

At the end of the day, Michigan and these other schools want a diverse class and they know how to get it. They reached their quota of big stat empty suits like OP and don't need any more.

[soullesswonder]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

^This.

If Michigan simply admitted 95% of the people with numbers above their medians and WL'd everyone else, they'd be admitting 1500 people of whom maybe 100 would matriculate. Then they'd have to go to their WL, to the median and below median candidates, and try to get them back after hurting their feelings with the WL. By this time it would be mid-April, no time for ASW, minimal time for scholly consideration, and who knows how many or few students they'd wind up with.

They've been doing this admissions game for years. If you aren't HYSC, you can't just take the best numbers and expect them to show up. At the same time, you don't want to overadmit and risk having 600 1Ls show up in August.

At the end of the day, Michigan and these other schools want a diverse class and they know how to get it. They reached their quota of big stat empty suits like OP and don't need any more.

subtle Chicago trolling

[tomhobbes]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

^This.

If Michigan simply admitted 95% of the people with numbers above their medians and WL'd everyone else, they'd be admitting 1500 people of whom maybe 100 would matriculate. Then they'd have to go to their WL, to the median and below median candidates, and try to get them back after hurting their feelings with the WL. By this time it would be mid-April, no time for ASW, minimal time for scholly consideration, and who knows how many or few students they'd wind up with.

They've been doing this admissions game for years. If you aren't HYSC, you can't just take the best numbers and expect them to show up. At the same time, you don't want to overadmit and risk having 600 1Ls show up in August.

At the end of the day, Michigan and these other schools want a diverse class and they know how to get it. They reached their quota of big stat empty suits like OP and don't need any more.

subtle Chicago trolling

Subtle Chicago trolling on your part.

[Emma.]

"I think it’s really important that there not be a high 'jackass' quotient here." - Sarah Zearfoss

[tamlyric]

"I think it’s really important that there not be a high 'jackass' quotient here." - Sarah Zearfoss

[Unitas]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

If the schools can reliably predict their yield rate, then bolded statement is false. As for the usefulness of LSN...there are 924 applicants listed for Michigan in this cycle, a fairly large sample size. Yes, a portion of the numbers are fudged, but I doubt that the data is systematically skewed in a way that would produce such a graphically visible pattern. Moreover, I have never seen a convincing explanation for why that data would be systematically skewed.

Self selection?

That is a big "if" that schools can reliably predict their yield rate for students with higher numbers. Look at UVA for the past three years.

In addition to that we would have another funfest like we did with Chicago yesterday if everyone was admitted with great numbers then got no money.

[AngryAvocado]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

^This.

If Michigan simply admitted 95% of the people with numbers above their medians and WL'd everyone else, they'd be admitting 1500 people of whom maybe 100 would matriculate. Then they'd have to go to their WL, to the median and below median candidates, and try to get them back after hurting their feelings with the WL. By this time it would be mid-April, no time for ASW, minimal time for scholly consideration, and who knows how many or few students they'd wind up with.

They've been doing this admissions game for years. If you aren't HYSC, you can't just take the best numbers and expect them to show up. At the same time, you don't want to overadmit and risk having 600 1Ls show up in August.

At the end of the day, Michigan and these other schools want a diverse class and they know how to get it. They reached their quota of big stat empty suits like OP and don't need any more.

subtle Chicago trolling

Subtle Chicago trolling on your part.

Subtle NYU trolling by both of you.

[soullesswonder]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

If the schools can reliably predict their yield rate, then bolded statement is false. As for the usefulness of LSN...there are 924 applicants listed for Michigan in this cycle, a fairly large sample size. Yes, a portion of the numbers are fudged, but I doubt that the data is systematically skewed in a way that would produce such a graphically visible pattern. Moreover, I have never seen a convincing explanation for why that data would be systematically skewed.

Self selection?

That is a big "if" that schools can reliably predict their yield rate for students with higher numbers. In addition to that we would have another funfest like we did with Chicago yesterday if everyone was admitted with great numbers then got no money. Look at UVA for the past three years.

Self Selection isn't a convincing explanation - it's just another way of claiming the sample isn't representative. WHY are they self-selecting?

And yes, it is a significant "if", but I thought it deserved a mention

[Unitas]

I hate to say this, but schools HAVE to YP. They don't have seats to admit every possible person with numbers that are great. There is a point where they must make decisions to wl people they think are not going to come anyhow so they can make a class that they want with people they believe will come.

If the schools can reliably predict their yield rate, then bolded statement is false. As for the usefulness of LSN...there are 924 applicants listed for Michigan in this cycle, a fairly large sample size. Yes, a portion of the numbers are fudged, but I doubt that the data is systematically skewed in a way that would produce such a graphically visible pattern. Moreover, I have never seen a convincing explanation for why that data would be systematically skewed.

Self selection?

That is a big "if" that schools can reliably predict their yield rate for students with higher numbers. In addition to that we would have another funfest like we did with Chicago yesterday if everyone was admitted with great numbers then got no money. Look at UVA for the past three years.

Self Selection isn't a convincing explanation - it's just another way of claiming the sample isn't representative. WHY are they self-selecting?

And yes, it is a significant "if", but I thought it deserved a mention

And yes, Self Selection isn't a convincing explanation, but I thought it deserved a mention

So are you saying schools should take every student above both 75's if they like them? Just curious.

[soullesswonder]

If the schools can reliably predict their yield rate, then bolded statement is false. As for the usefulness of LSN...there are 924 applicants listed for Michigan in this cycle, a fairly large sample size. Yes, a portion of the numbers are fudged, but I doubt that the data is systematically skewed in a way that would produce such a graphically visible pattern. Moreover, I have never seen a convincing explanation for why that data would be systematically skewed.

Self selection?

That is a big "if" that schools can reliably predict their yield rate for students with higher numbers. In addition to that we would have another funfest like we did with Chicago yesterday if everyone was admitted with great numbers then got no money. Look at UVA for the past three years.

Self Selection isn't a convincing explanation - it's just another way of claiming the sample isn't representative. WHY are they self-selecting?

And yes, it is a significant "if", but I thought it deserved a mention

And yes, Self Selection isn't a convincing explanation, but I thought it deserved a mention

So are you saying schools should take every student above both 75's if they like them? Just curious.

I concede a point and you get mad b/c I didn't accept your two word response The purpose of the "if" was to discuss the underlying logic of the "lack of space" argument.

I lean towards the view that schools should take every student above both 75ths if they like them and that student clearly makes an effort beyond the minimum reqs of the app. In this case, I just don't believe that there are so many 75ths apps with specific reasons why they want to attend Michigan that the consequences of misjudging the yield would be that catastrophic.

[CardinalRules]

I lean towards the view that schools should take every student above both 75ths if they like them and that student clearly makes an effort beyond the minimum reqs of the app. In this case, I just don't believe that there are so many 75ths apps with specific reasons why they want to attend Michigan that the consequences of misjudging the yield would be that catastrophic.

+1. Usually, it's fairly obvious whether an applicant is seriously interested in a specific school or just shooting out an app in case their higher-ranked options inexplicably ding them. Also, the former category is generally rather small, I suspect.

[Unitas]

And yes, Self Selection isn't a convincing explanation, but I thought it deserved a mention

So are you saying schools should take every student above both 75's if they like them? Just curious.

I concede a point and you get mad b/c I didn't accept your two word response The purpose of the "if" was to discuss the underlying logic of the "lack of space" argument.

I lean towards the view that schools should take every student above both 75ths if they like them and that student clearly makes an effort beyond the minimum reqs of the app. In this case, I just don't believe that there are so many 75ths apps with specific reasons why they want to attend Michigan that the consequences of misjudging the yield would be that catastrophic.

Nah, I wasn't mad. I was trying to be funny. Perhaps it is because I have been up since 6 am working and should be in bed that it came across wrong. I apologize. I agree the process of getting WL'd for what appears to be no other reason then apathy on the adcomms part sucks, but I do see why they do it.

I do see your point also, but if they accept those students above the 75th they will most likely want money or otherwise will feel scorned, as seen in the chicago thread. I think the negativity brought about by YP is better then the negativity brought about by accepting then no money offers. Plus, with a YP students can express further interest and possibly get in. How many of those WL'd today would go without any money? I doubt any.

[existenz]

I lean towards the view that schools should take every student above both 75ths if they like them and that student clearly makes an effort beyond the minimum reqs of the app. In this case, I just don't believe that there are so many 75ths apps with specific reasons why they want to attend Michigan that the consequences of misjudging the yield would be that catastrophic.

It would be an interesting one-year experiment to see what happens. Would the school wind up with a much bigger class? Would they shoot up the USNWR rankings? Would it pretty much be a wash, and would only hurt yield?