Chances! 3.76/174 Forum

[bristolio]

I must confess, I already have an idea of what my chances are based on LSN and LSP but I'd like to get input from the denizens of TLS.

Graduated from a Top 10 undergrad (one with a reputation for grade deflation, not that it necessarily counts for much), currently starting my second year working at a nonprofit through AmeriCorps. I've got three solid recommendations lined up, two of which will definitely be ecstatic. I'm still working on drafts of my personal statement but I'm focusing on the urban economic injustice I've encountered through work and talking about how I'd like to do public interest law to correct it, expand economic opportunities, etc.

So, I'm fairly confident I can hit somewhere in the T6 but I'm wondering specifically about my scholarship chances and my chances at HYS (a longshot, I'm guessing?). Any thoughts are much appreciated!

[bk1]

Input from the denizens of TLS is going to be them regurgitating LSN/LSP.

[crazyblink653]

with your stats, undergrad pedigree, and Americorps experience, sounds like you're probably a lock for at least one in the T6 and probably at least one of HYS (prob Harvard). You could probably even get significant scholarship money from a school like Michigan, too.

[bristolio]

Input from the denizens of TLS is going to be them regurgitating LSN/LSP.

And here I thought TLSers had privileged access to Truth.

with your stats, undergrad pedigree, and Americorps experience, sounds like you're probably a lock for at least one in the T6 and probably at least one of HYS (prob Harvard). You could probably even get significant scholarship money from a school like Michigan, too.

Thanks, I appreciate the look.

[thederangedwang]

whatever you do, do not apply to HYS............i hate competition

[KremeCheez]

I'd consider it a coin flip at HS.
Wouldn't expect worthwhile scholarship money until the T10.

[swfangirl]

Input from the denizens of TLS is going to be them regurgitating LSN/LSP.

Not necessarily. If the numbers are close to your own, you tend to have a feel for it that way.

I'd consider it a coin flip at HS.
Wouldn't expect worthwhile scholarship money until the T10.

This is way too generous. A sub 3.8 GPA is an almost certain out at S, and needs a better LSAT to get anywhere near a coin flip for H. Those who get into H with 174 LSATs tend to have GPAs closer to 3.9. Though, ditto to the second part.

That GPA is a death knell at Stanford ---Stanford wants an LSAT in the 170-180 range paired with a 3.85+ GPA unless a URM or someone with rather exceptional softs, and I don't think AmeriCorps moves them enough (if you get in, consider that why, I could be wrong).

Can't really say about Yale.

Harvard you're most likely out as well. You generally need a 177+ LSAT to offset a GPA below 3.8.

You will get into CCN, though heavy scholarship money is unlikely. UChicago will give you more if you demonstrate genuine interest in Chicago--so be sure to show up to their online events and demonstrate enthusiasm if you really want to go there. Without interest, don't count on much. I had a similar GPA and higher LSAT(177+) and got ~20K from the C's and 65K from NYU, so you can expect to get around there. If money really concerns you, then definitely apply to MVP etc. and write those Why X essays.

[bristolio]

Thanks. That's sort of what I expected but I didn't know that about Chicago and money.

[swfangirl]

Thanks. That's sort of what I expected but I didn't know that about Chicago and money.

I know several people this cycle who got their offers bumped up after letting Chicago know the original offer wasn't quite enough.

[amc987]

This is way too generous. A sub 3.8 GPA is an almost certain out at S, and needs a better LSAT to get anywhere near a coin flip for H. Those who get into H with 174 LSATs tend to have GPAs closer to 3.9. Though, ditto to the second part.

I don't think this is true, especially considering the quality of OP's undergrad school. The career offices at the school I went to (which was also top 10) published the median LSAT and GPA ranges for people who ended up at various law schools. I was shocked to find out that the average GPA and average LSAT for students matriculating there from my UG were 3.72 and 170 respectively. For Harvard, the average GPA was 3.8 and the average LSAT was 171.6. Even for Yale, the average GPA was 3.83 and the average LSAT was 172.5. This shows me that schools, even the highest ranked schools, do show some leniency when evaluating the GPAs of students coming from strong undergraduate institutions. According to people on this board, no one with a sub 3.8 GPA who isn't a URM has a chance at HYS. Ditto for LSAT scores. The average LSAT scores for alumni from my school who matriculate at HYS are at or below the median LSAT scores for HYS's incoming classes.

Based on these stats (which btw are from the 2008-2009 cycle which was reportedly much more competitive than this cycle is purported to be), it's clear that someone like the OP, who has a GPA around HYS's 25th but an LSAT that's above their median (and above their 75th in the case of S) absolutely has a fighting chance at being admitted to those schools. This is especially true because the quality of the school OP attended is so high. Now I have no idea whether OP will actually get into HYS, but I would be surprised if he/she didn't get into at least one of them as long as the other parts of their application (essays, recs) are strong. It's certainly worth an application fee to find out.

Additionally, and I don't mean to hate on swfangirl because I'm sure her intentions were good, but the type of TLS logic that suggests that the limited sample size on LSN is the end all be all is ultimately not helpful to people seeking advice. I think that almost anyone who is familiar with admissions, especially for students coming from good schools, wouldn't say this

Harvard you're most likely out as well. You generally need a 177+ LSAT to offset a GPA below 3.8.

, because it just isn't accurate. At a lot of schools in the T10, having a ~3.8 GPA is going to be an asset, not something that needs to be compensated by having an LSAT score above the 75th at HYS. Maybe using LSN as the holy grail works when considering applicants who come from less strong and less reputable colleges that might disadvantage them in the HYS applicant pools, or when you're assuming that the applicants have poor resumes and therefore have to have astronomically high numbers to persuade HYS to give them a chance. I don't know. But dissuading someone from applying to HYS with OPs numbers and suggesting that it would be really improbable for him/her to be admitted to HYS can't be based on much apart from LSN. And giving that sort of advice with such authority seems to do more harm than good if it dissuades potentially compelling applicants from applying to the top schools. Just my two cents.

Good luck with your cycle, OP! I hope HYS works out for you. Like I said, I think you've got a fighting chance based on numbers and other intangibles!

[swfangirl]

Based on these stats (which btw are from the 2008-2009 cycle which was reportedly much more competitive than this cycle is purported to be)

I don't know. But dissuading someone from applying to HYS with OPs numbers and suggesting that it would be really improbable for him/her to be admitted to HYS can't be based on much apart from LSN. And giving that sort of advice with such authority seems to do more harm than good if it dissuades potentially compelling applicants from applying to the top schools. Just my two cents.

The 2008-2009 cycle was different from the 2010-2011 cycle(this past cycle), even on LSN, which I participated in.

I also never said it wasn't worth a shot. Definitely apply--there are exceptions. I'm just giving chances in terms of whether you should be expecting it. Also, I suppose I should add a caveat that it depends on which Top 10 we're talking about. If it's H, then yes, you have a better shot at H. Law schools tend to favor their own undergrads, as well. I've seen Harvard's grids--they're kinder to their undergrads than anyone from the typical applicant population in terms of how low their GPAs can be. Don't forget, either, that averages are averages, and many people split. If you admit a decent number of 3.7/177s and 4.0/170s admitted and suddenly the average looks a lot different than the actual picture. I find it unlikely that many 3.7/170s, for example, ever make it in, though a 3.76/174 is definitely better in that 174 is above median. Harvard's bottom 25th has also gone up with time.

Again, 08-09 is different. This is partially due to a change in admissions officer. 2008-2009 was the last cycle under Toby Stock. Even on LSN you see that 3.7+ was fine, whereas under Josh Rubenstein you see a shift to 3.8+.
LSN is a small sample, but if it's unrepresentative, then it's likely to be too optimistic than overly pessimistic.

Mind you I say this as someone who had a 3.76 from a "top" undergrad who got admitted to HLS, straight out rejected by Stanford, and waitlisted at Yale. So I'm not saying it's impossible--there's certainly a decent shot at H and Y (though I very much doubt S). I just think that "coin flip" is a bit generous for HS, particularly S.


Notice even on LSN:

http://harvard.lawschoolnumbers.com/app ... ,8&type=jd
In 07-08, you see a lot of acceptances in this numbers range.
and none in 10-11
http://harvard.lawschoolnumbers.com/app ... ,8&type=jd

Could just be the sample sure, but considering that H's overall numbers moved up over this time as well, it's not inconsistent with that trend.

[vincanity1]

As a 3.77 173 very interested in hls, I Wholeheartedly encourage you guys to continue this debate :7

[amc987]

swfangirl, I am obviously not in a position to argue with your experience. If you had a 3.76 and a 177+ LSAT, and those were your results coming from a top undergrad, then so be it. You did get into Harvard, so clearly a 3.76 isn't prohibitive in that regard. And we know from experience that a 174 LSAT isn't prohibitive for HYS. The question is whether the combination of the two is. I also can't take issue with your theory about admissions decisions after Josh Rubenstein took over. I don't think there's any way to truly confirm what you've said. There may be some merit to your theory. LSN seems to substantiate your claim. But the fact of the matter is that HYS's GPA and LSAT ranges have changed very little over the past 3 years, so any favoring of higher GPAs over the past 2 years could also be purely coincidental.

In regards to your claim about OP's chances, I believe that 2009-10 these people were all non-URMs accepted at Harvard with GPAs from 3.75 to 3.85 and LSAT scores between 171 and 175: http://lawschoolnumbers.com/nixxers, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/keren, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/ndnguy86, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/SprangTyme, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/lizzerbie, and http://lawschoolnumbers.com/legalread. For 2010-11, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/WarioLaw, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/mcweanis, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/phogirl, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/annamay all were accepted with similar numbers and in some cases way lower numbers. That seems like plenty of people, not all of whom are even coming from the highest quality colleges who got in to Harvard with numbers like OP's. I also know at least 3 people who I went to college with who aren't URMs (and aren't on LSN) who were accepted at Harvard with GPAs between 3.75 and 3.8 and LSATs between 170 and 174.

For Stanford, all of these people were accepted with numbers close to OP's in the last 2 cycles: http://lawschoolnumbers.com/carolineb, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/redoaccount, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/YaoMing0468, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/usonesinbetween.

For Yale, all of these people were accepted with numbers close to OP's in the last 2 cycles: http://lawschoolnumbers.com/smile, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Saxonthebeach6, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/coffeena, http://lawschoolnumbers.com/whatisatort,

I'm sure I could find more examples of GPAs around 3.8 and LSATs between 170 and 175 who aren't URMs who have gotten into HYS in the last couple of years, but you already get my drift. Are there some people who get rejected at HYS with 3.76 and 174? Absolutely. Given that Harvard (and Stanford and Yale for that matter) seem to accept a good number of people with numbers like OPs, does he/she have a chance at getting in with what they have? You bet.

All I'm trying to say is that I think in this case it's a mistake to suggest that anything is going to be determined by numbers alone in OPs case. Their numbers aren't a guarantee of admission, but they aren't going to automatically lock the person out of HYS either. It's probably going to come down to intangible factors like how good their essays and recs are; how good their school was (are we talking HYP or Northwestern); what kinds of classes they took; whether they have any compelling softs; etc. This is why it doesn't make sense (and can even be unhelpful) to just use LSN to suggest that his chances are slim.

Also, can you explain how you think LSN is a more optimistic barometer of admissions chances than the results of HYS's entire applicant pool? It seems to me that sites like LSN compel people with very high numbers to post and dissuades people with lower numbers from doing so. So the results on LSN might be skewed to make you think that there aren't a lot of people who get into HYS with 3.8s and 172s and there are tons of HYS students accepted with 3.9s and 177s, when part of the discrepancy could be explained by the prevalence of posters with those numbers who are willing to post on the site. Thoughts?

[MumofCad]

The career offices at the school I went to (which was also top 10) published the median LSAT and GPA ranges for people who ended up at various law schools. I was shocked to find out that the average GPA and average LSAT for students matriculating there from my UG were 3.72 and 170 respectively. For Harvard, the average GPA was 3.8 and the average LSAT was 171.6. Even for Yale, the average GPA was 3.83 and the average LSAT was 172.5. This shows me that schools, even the highest ranked schools, do show some leniency when evaluating the GPAs of students coming from strong undergraduate institutions. According to people on this board, no one with a sub 3.8 GPA who isn't a URM has a chance at HYS. Ditto for LSAT scores. The average LSAT scores for alumni from my school who matriculate at HYS are at or below the median LSAT scores for HYS's incoming classes.

There is a very basic problem with the numbers you give - they are averages that are unrelated to one another. They seem to hint strongly in your favor, but without complete profiles they tell you very little. It may be that most that got in with sub-3.8 GPAs had 178+ on their LSATS and vice versus that those with 171 LSAT were the ones bringing up the GPA stat with close to 4.0s.

Remember too that averages are less informative the smaller the sample size - if they are talking about 4 people that got into HS that year, then knowing the "average" isn't terribly useful without also knowing the average of those rejected. You would need both these numbers to know if the PP "coin flip" was accurate or not.

I think that is why people prefer LSN. You can compare LSAT/GPA interactions rather than simply going on 25th-75th percentiles which tell you very little about how the two are weighted and interact in the admissions process. It also gives you a chance to see if the same people are getting rejected, thus putting you in the "coin flip" category. Like any good "soft," I would think that you would get a boost from going to a prestigious undergrad if you are being compared to another candidate with similar numbers and other softs that did not. It just depends on how it all stacks up.

[JamMasterJ]

I'd consider it a coin flip at HS.
Wouldn't expect worthwhile scholarship money until the T10.

This is stupid

[Glock]

Any thoughts are much appreciated!

In with $$$$ at Texas Tech.

[swfangirl]

Cut because then this would be too long

Not trying to argue with you on a personal level, btw, just about the point.

Sure, you can find cases of people who make it--I won't be too surprised if the OP makes it into H, I just think her odds are less than 50/50(a coin flip). I don't think it's 0, but I think it's closer to 0 than it is to 100. OP should most certainly apply, though.

It hasn't changed dramatically--it used to be that a soft floor was around 3.7, which has risen to 3.8, and the bottom 25% at Harvard has risen along with this. It's a slight change, but basically impacts people in the 3.7-3.8 range. Of those with 3.7+/177+ on LSN under Toby Stock, the vast majority (80+%) got in, while under JR it fell dramatically to I'd say around 35-40%ish---which are still good odds(I was successful in that range, for example), and I can pull up all sorts of LSN profiles that show people in that number range getting in. But it's still reduced, and it's still below a coin flip.

It's not surprising you can find examples--I never really claimed it was 0 in the first place. But I claimed the odds were going to be harder because her GPA is below the 25th percentile and the LSAT isn't enough to make her a splitter. Stanford loves GPA--of the 4 exceptions you gave, 3 were a few years out from undergrad, and 2 were JD/PhD candidates, which are both softs Stanford is known to adore. No indication here that the OP fulfills either, or I would've made a note of this.

I think it skews optimistic because people are more likely to come back and update when accepted (based on a guess, no hard data there). There are plenty people with lower numbers who post--you see a large swath of them in the rejected zone. I mean, the numbers bear out that there aren't a lot of people who get into HYS with 3.7s and 172s--most 3.7s are below their 25th percentile and 172 is below median, which is a bad combination anywhere.

[amc987]

There is a very basic problem with the numbers you give - they are averages that are unrelated to one another. They seem to hint strongly in your favor, but without complete profiles they tell you very little. It may be that most that got in with sub-3.8 GPAs had 178+ on their LSATS and vice versus that those with 171 LSAT were the ones bringing up the GPA stat with close to 4.0s.

I think this is a fair criticism. In fact, I think swfangirl said something similar in one of her previous posts. I do not know whether the kids who got into HYS with LSATs closer to my school's reported average had much better than average GPAs, or whether the students who got in with GPAs closer to the the reported average had much higher than average LSAT scores. I would imagine that there is some of this going on. So, I'm sure there are people who had 170 or 171 on their LSAT and GPAs above 3.9 to compensate, and people who had GPAs that were 3.7 and below who got 177+ on their LSAT to compensate. I also know for a fact that there were 3 people last year who got into HYS with GPAs between 3.75 and 3.8 and LSATs between 170 and 174. To me, this shows that there are at least some people who are closer to the my college's reported average of both GPA and LSAT who still got into HYS. My point wasn't that OP is guaranteed admission to HYS, but that simply using LSN gives an overly pessimistic view of his/her chances at being admitted, because clearly, despite what LSN says, there are plenty of people who get into HYS with numbers around what OP has.

Remember too that averages are less informative the smaller the sample size - if they are talking about 4 people that got into HS that year, then knowing the "average" isn't terribly useful without also knowing the average of those rejected. You would need both these numbers to know if the PP "coin flip" was accurate or not.

I don't totally understand what you're talking about here when you refer to the average of those rejected. In my opinion, knowing the average of those rejected would be much less helpful than than knowing the results of the complete list of applicants who applied with LSAT scores and GPAs like OPs for the last 3 years or so. Then we might be able to make a reasonable prediction about what his/her odds are solely based on the numbers. As far as I'm aware, no one except for the LSAC and the adcomms at HYS would have this information. At best, we're making guesses that range from semi-educated to a complete shot in the dark based on LSN and other school-provided statistics, which I would argue, presents an incomplete picture of the admissions process. In the OP's number range, the decision on their application at HYS is going to come down to more than numbers. Neither the 3.76 GPA nor the 174 LSAT is a deal breaker at HYS. I think his/her chances at being admitted are going to depend almost entirely on the other intangible factors in their application and how those intangibles are received by the respective admissions committees at HYS. This is why LSN and even other statistics can only have so much value. It is also why, unless I'm completely misunderstanding what you've said, knowing the average numbers of the people who HYS rejected isn't relevant to determining the OP's chances. Thinking otherwise suggests that in the OP's GPA and LSAT range that it is predominantly a numbers game. And I don't think it is when you're talking about an above median LSAT and a GPA around the 25th from a strong undergraduate institution.

[Lisi]

I think you have a shot at HYS. Definitely enough to merit an application. So put in some good apps (get them in early) and wait and see. I wouldn't put too much effort into figuring out some sort of exact odds assessment of what your chances are. The point is, do you have enough of a chance where it merits an application? And the answer, IMO, is yes.
Definitely apply to CCN and other schools too. All of these schools will likely give you some money.