Really???? Forum

[monkeyboy]

People quoting LSP as gospel reminds me of how the economy went down the pooper - blind plugging and chugging of numbers.

80% of the decisions are easy to make. A 4.0/180 isn't going to get rejected by Geriogetown. Nor is a nun-URM 3.0/155 getting into Cornell. LSP is horrifically weak with borderline cases - splitters. It is also does a terrible job of taking into account how much being below both medians is the kiss of death. For example consider 168/3.6. Doesn't sound too far away from Michigan's (169/3.7) or Penn's (170/3.8 ) medians, right? However, if you look at LSN graphs, you'll find that its almost impossible to get into Michigan or Penn with a 168/3.6, and yet, LSP tells you that you have a close to 50% chance of getting in.

Like every tool, LSP has its strengths and weaknesses. Getting a second opinion is a good way of figuring this out.

ps - I get the feeling OP worked at AIG FP......

LOL on the AIG thing.

Yeah, this is a weird cycle, too. The OP should take that into account. Two or three years ago all of this was probably a lot more predictable. As it is, I've taken the LSAT once and my score would have been good enough to gain admission to a lot of my schools of choice in '07, but now it appears that I am on the cusp or possibly on the outside looking in. Gauging one's chances is important. If it becomes clear to me through consulting others here in addition to checking out LSP that I need to take a swing at a Feb retake to shore up my chances, then that's what I'll do. This forum has been a valuable source of info for me.

[Space_Cowboy]

People quoting LSP as gospel reminds me of how the economy went down the pooper - blind plugging and chugging of numbers.

80% of the decisions are easy to make. A 4.0/180 isn't going to get rejected by Geriogetown. Nor is a nun-URM 3.0/155 getting into Cornell. LSP is horrifically weak with borderline cases - splitters. It is also does a terrible job of taking into account how much being below both medians is the kiss of death. For example consider 168/3.6. Doesn't sound too far away from Michigan's (169/3.7) or Penn's (170/3.8 ) medians, right? However, if you look at LSN graphs, you'll find that its almost impossible to get into Michigan or Penn with a 168/3.6, and yet, LSP tells you that you have a close to 50% chance of getting in.

Like every tool, LSP has its strengths and weaknesses. Getting a second opinion is a good way of figuring this out.

ps - I get the feeling OP worked at AIG FP......

LOL on the AIG thing.

Yeah, this is a weird cycle, too. The OP should take that into account. Two or three years ago all of this was probably a lot more predictable. As it is, I've taken the LSAT once and my score would have been good enough to gain admission to a lot of my schools of choice in '07, but now it appears that I am on the cusp or possibly on the outside looking in. Gauging one's chances is important. If it becomes clear to me through consulting others here in addition to checking out LSP that I need to take a swing at a Feb retake to shore up my chances, then that's what I'll do. This forum has been a valuable source of info for me.

Is it? I don't see anything terribly different from last year (except Duke isn't quite as in love with the 169 as it was last year). Everything else, at least in the T20, is the same as last year.

[monkeyboy]

People quoting LSP as gospel reminds me of how the economy went down the pooper - blind plugging and chugging of numbers.

80% of the decisions are easy to make. A 4.0/180 isn't going to get rejected by Geriogetown. Nor is a nun-URM 3.0/155 getting into Cornell. LSP is horrifically weak with borderline cases - splitters. It is also does a terrible job of taking into account how much being below both medians is the kiss of death. For example consider 168/3.6. Doesn't sound too far away from Michigan's (169/3.7) or Penn's (170/3.8 ) medians, right? However, if you look at LSN graphs, you'll find that its almost impossible to get into Michigan or Penn with a 168/3.6, and yet, LSP tells you that you have a close to 50% chance of getting in.

Like every tool, LSP has its strengths and weaknesses. Getting a second opinion is a good way of figuring this out.

ps - I get the feeling OP worked at AIG FP......

LOL on the AIG thing.

Yeah, this is a weird cycle, too. The OP should take that into account. Two or three years ago all of this was probably a lot more predictable. As it is, I've taken the LSAT once and my score would have been good enough to gain admission to a lot of my schools of choice in '07, but now it appears that I am on the cusp or possibly on the outside looking in. Gauging one's chances is important. If it becomes clear to me through consulting others here in addition to checking out LSP that I need to take a swing at a Feb retake to shore up my chances, then that's what I'll do. This forum has been a valuable source of info for me.

Is it? I don't see anything terribly different from last year (except Duke isn't quite as in love with the 169 as it was last year). Everything else, at least in the T20, is the same as last year.

Well, I guess I wouldn't know about last year. It just seems that it's becoming more competitive and unpredictable. I thought about law school a few years ago but didn't take the LSAT. I seem to remember it being a bit easier to get into a competitive (T50) school before. I could be wrong. My memory may be off.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

[vanwinkle]

UT and Cornell have been pretty picky so far. UVA has changed the rules of ED. Fordham might be being overly picky as well, but haven't paid as much attention to that thread.

Both number of applications are suppose to be way up so far this year (and while some it may be accounted for by increased # of applicants per student, I don't think that alone can account for the jump in #'s). Things should be more competitive then ever, at all schools.

This is all true, and reinforced by the fact that the number of LSAT takers jumped 20% this year, creating a huge addition to the number of people looking to apply to law school, and it's logical to assume it created an increase in the number of people with high-percentile LSAT scores. That means more competition which means a tougher cycle in general.

Combine that with things like UVA extending ED to give themselves an advantage and you've got a mess trying to figure out how much if any of the old assumptions about law school admissions are still true.