. Forum

[LoganCouture]

IMO the open Skype sign-up thing really isn't a great idea - literally anyone who throws them an app can sign up, so they probably end up interviewing a ton of uninformed people (or delusional special snowflakes) who don't stand a chance because of <25th numbers.

+1

I know someone who flew from California to Chicago to interview with GPA < median, LSAT < 25th. She was crushed by her ding this week...

Ouch!!

Yeah, I was hoping it would get her to seriously consider another retake but nope...

I also don't get why NU doesn't just invite applicants to interview...Seems like a waste of both people's time.

[Gray]

.

[Lightworks]

.

[Gray]

.

[rebexness]

[mindthegap]

Northwestern's 25th LSAT is 162...

Even if you could get accepted <25th, odds are you are going to be in way over your head.

Wait, lol. The 25th is 162, which suggests a decent chunk of the enrolled/admitted students got in with much lower numbers than that - and, for some reason, I seriously doubt that all of those people are in over their head.

[cc78]

Northwestern's 25th LSAT is 162...

Even if you could get accepted <25th, odds are you are going to be in way over your head.

Wait, lol. The 25th is 162, which suggests a decent chunk of the enrolled/admitted students got in with much lower numbers than that - and, for some reason, I seriously doubt that all of those people are in over their head.

Doesn't mean that necessarily. The 25th percentile is an at or below number, so literally 25% of the class could have a 162 and no lower.

[mindthegap]

Northwestern's 25th LSAT is 162...

Even if you could get accepted <25th, odds are you are going to be in way over your head.

Wait, lol. The 25th is 162, which suggests a decent chunk of the enrolled/admitted students got in with much lower numbers than that - and, for some reason, I seriously doubt that all of those people are in over their head.

Doesn't mean that necessarily. The 25th percentile is an at or below number, so literally 25% of the class could have a 162 and no lower.

Yes, true; however, a quick look at LSN shows that several candidates with scores in the 150s were admitted last year (and LSN is only a small sample size so I'm guessing the number might be even larger in the total pool), and assuming those self-reported scores are all true and some of those people enrolled, then it's fair to make the leap and say that there were a fair number of admitted students <162. I mean, yeah, I guess it could happen but realistically, I doubt that any school has an entire entering class with no one below the 25% mark, which is why I didn't account for that possibility.

Anyway, I guess I'm mostly just opposed to the attitude that unless you get X score, you won't do well at Y school.

[cc78]

Doesn't mean that necessarily. The 25th percentile is an at or below number, so literally 25% of the class could have a 162 and no lower.

Yes, true; however, a quick look at LSN shows that several candidates with scores in the 150s were admitted last year (and LSN is only a small sample size so I'm guessing the number might be even larger in the total pool), and assuming those self-reported scores are all true and some of those people enrolled, then it's obvious that not all in the <25% had a 162. I mean, yeah, it could happen but realistically, I doubt that any school has an entire entering class with no one below the 25% mark, which is why I didn't account for that possibility.

Anyway, I guess I'm mostly just opposed to the attitude that unless you get X score, you won't do well at Y school.

You're right, and I was just benignly making a point about statistics/percentiles, for what purpose, I don't really know. I agree with you completely, especially because the LSAT loses a great deal of its predictive validity within the narrow score bands that are present in any law school class. I'd imagine that a 150 and 170 might do differently in law school, but by and large they don't end up together in large enough numbers for us to make predictions.

[Lightworks]

.

[LoganCouture]

I'm sure we could argue the predictive value of numbers for weeks, but the fact that Affirmative Action admits tend to get massacred is highly suggestive. While I certainly don't think 3 or 4 LSAT points makes any real difference, when the difference gets significant (ie. AA admits) it clearly matters.

That's not to say a <25th LSAT can't do well, it's just less likely, and probably not in your best interest to try.

http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/applic ... -outcomes/

You might find this interesting. Also...data on affirmative action admits being "massacred"??

[Lightworks]

.

[rebexness]

[LoganCouture]

On to my regularly scheduled NU admissions neuroticism...anyone think tomorrow could be the day??

[Lightworks]

You're right, this isn't the place.

Still sitting on an 11/18 Complete

[xylocarp]

Still sitting on an 11/18 Complete

if it makes you feel better, I'm still at 9/25 complete

[R. Jeeves]

Still sitting on an 11/18 Complete

if it makes you feel better, I'm still at 9/25 complete

Complete 10/16

[LoganCouture]

Still sitting on an 11/18 Complete

if it makes you feel better, I'm still at 9/25 complete

Complete 10/16

10/22 -> 12/11 and wondering what the date change meant...

[mindthegap]

My point is that a <25th LSAT candidate with none of the factors that offset the predictive value of LSAT scores (your typical URM applicant) is not likely to succeed, and I think that data backs me up.

I'm hoping that I've misunderstood you but how on earth could you know what the "typical URM applicant" profile looks like? For all you know, URM candidates could consistently have more notable softs than non-URM applicants.

Moving on...

I applied in early December and still haven't received a confirmation email. LSAC shows my app as having been successfully sent but my follow up email to the admissions office has gone unanswered. Should I leave it another week or so and assume everything's alright in the meantime?

[LawBron James]

Still sitting on an 11/18 Complete

if it makes you feel better, I'm still at 9/25 complete

9/22

[Tr3]

10/22 -> 12/11 and wondering what the date change meant...

I also had a date change in dec (12/8) after being complete in November. The only thing I could think of is that I interviewed before submitting my app, so maybe they matched up my interview with my app on 12/8?

dun dun duuunnnnnn idk

[santoki]

Post removed.

[R. Jeeves]

NU consensus is that WE is a huge boon?

It's more like a lack of WE being a significant hurdle for an NU applicant. 90% of the class of 2017 has at least one year of post-UG work experience.

[theramblingfool]

.

[tk17]

10/22 -> 12/11 and wondering what the date change meant...

I also had a date change in dec (12/8) after being complete in November. The only thing I could think of is that I interviewed before submitting my app, so maybe they matched up my interview with my app on 12/8?

dun dun duuunnnnnn idk

I went complete (after my interview) on 10/31, and I had the 12/8 date change as well. I'm assuming it means they put me in one pile or another, and now they're just waiting to tell me about it.