JenDarby wrote:danquayle wrote:JenDarby wrote:CooleyReject wrote:I wonder if IUB will show my 172 a little love even though I decided to apply kind of late. Does anyone have any thoughts on the number of 120k schollys IUB seems to be giving out? It strikes me as a tad odd considering the data available for last year on LSN.
I don't think there is a distinct number. I imagine they use an index. They must know a good majority of those people won't attend, many probably even withdraw early.
I'm not sure this is true. Once they've established their "goal" median, all that should matter is whether its above or below. 167 LSAT is just as good as a 172 median if you're looking at a 166 median.
I mean if we're assuming they are just gaming numbers here.
I'd plug the sweet spots for strong admission at 166 or a 3.9 gpa...
I think you misunderstand. The index would place a value on LSAT and GPA, based on what they are looking for, and being above the minimum threshold would make you passable. They are not going to simply stop making offers because of offers out there, as people withdraw, and many/most won't matriculate, so for their goal, they will likely still put more offers out, to people who fit their index and will raise their numbers.
No, I certainly don't misunderstand. I think maybe you do. I honestly don't think they're using an index. An index would likely say, for example, a 163/3.8 would be a stronger admission than a 166/3.0. That certainly isn't the case. Not for IU. Not for this year.
The index approach simply doesn't improve numbers, for the reasons I've stated above. LSATs are far scarcer. Do they want high GPAs? Certainly, but they can hold out longer for them than the high LSATs. In fact, if you look at the primary difference amongst law school class compositions, it's the LSAT not the GPA.
So yes, I think they
will hold off on making offers to people with high GPAs and so-so LSATs, because if they're assuming their median is a 165, they really don't care if they're losing out by holding off on people with say a 162-160, because they're not really much more valuable. In fact, a 160/3.5 is probably a lot less valuable to them than a 152/3.9, because the former will drag down own of their presumed medians while the latter will not. If that sounds
idiotic I agree, but its totally sensible if you look at how the game they're playing functions.
I think your analysis is flawed because you're not really considering what really matters to them. And that's how the overall
class profile will look at the medians, not how the overall applicant looks at the medians. Therefore I really, really do not think an index is used, or would even be effective in reaching their objectives. And I think the preliminary empirical evidence backs me up in that assertion.
Hopefully it works out in your favor too. I'm also a 167.
