Top Law Schools

GPA: 3.70
LSAT: 173
Top 25 UG, Business major, No URM status.

Chances at T6 please (particularly columbia)

I know that law school admissions are (nearly) all numbers-based, but how come on Lawschoolnumbers.com I still see some waitlists above the average stats?

If you really want Columbia an ED would make you almost a lock. Otherwise I would give you a 60% shot.

crazi4law wrote: I know that law school admissions are (nearly) all numbers-based, but how come on Lawschoolnumbers.com I still see some waitlists above the average stats?

Shitty Apps or Yield Protection.

OP, you got a good shot everywhere outside YSH.

Agree with whats been said. ED to solidify Columbia, but still a good chance if you applied RD as well. NYU you are 99% in. Chicago also good chance, but they are really hard to predict and like super high GPA's I feel, so your chances may be about 50/50 there.

NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

PigBodine wrote:NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

I'm not sure about Columbia, but NYU definitely does.

hdsoc wrote:

PigBodine wrote:NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

I'm not sure about Columbia, but NYU definitely does.

What do you base that on? I'm not sure I see anyone on the list of acceptances who wouldn't have had a great chance coming through the front door. While it's possible that it might break a tie (though there's really no way to prove that), it's definitely very different from MVP's ED system, where's it'll give you a very consistent, very measurable boost.

http://nyu.lawschoolnumbers.com/applica ... =3&type=jd

Well, I think it helped me (173, 3.3), and on that list, Normally (172, 3.3), Flaming Cow (170, 3.5). I don't think it's as much of a bump as MVP, but definitely helps borderline candidates.

Yeah, I guess I could see that being the case. I think it's sort of a matter of hedging your bets -- I'm pretty sure that Michigan consistently gives 45k to people above their 75th LSAT, so it's sort of a tradeoff between keeping that (and other T14 options) open versus potentially locking down NYU.

Judging by lsn, it seems that an ed to columbia with stats in the op's range does provide a boost

PigBodine wrote:NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

This doesn't make sense. Why would they offer Ed then? And if it's just to get as many good students as they can and they give no boost in return, don't you think word would get out?

Br3v wrote:

PigBodine wrote:NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

This doesn't make sense. Why would they offer Ed then? And if it's just to get as many good students as they can and they give no boost in return, don't you think word would get out?

1. If you look at most schools' ED information, they say point blank that it's just a speed of response thing and that they evaluate students according to the same standards as RD students. At a lot of schools (G, M, P, V) this is a total fiction akin to their claiming to average LSAT scores and they're just saying that in an effort to be as non-transparent as possible. At NYU & Columbia, it seems like the boilerplate ED stuff is actually the case. That it's just a speed of response thing. Although the sample size is really small, there's just no clear evidence that the boost is there. It's possible that the people hdsoc is pointing to might not have gotten in RD, but, on the other hand, they might have. They definitely would have been competitive. Last cycle, they took RD 173s all the way down to 3.3. FlamingCow had a 3.7, not a 3.5, plus a lot of work experience. People with those kind of stats have been getting in RD throughout this cycle and the last one. On top of that, a lot of EDers with solid stats got rejected. The only outright ding at the 173+ 3.5+ level from NYU was to an EDer.

2. I mean, you'd think so..

Br3v wrote:

PigBodine wrote:NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

This doesn't make sense. Why would they offer Ed then? And if it's just to get as many good students as they can and they give no boost in return, don't you think word would get out?

1. Increases yield.
2. Decreases scholarship money to give out.

I (and apparently several other posters) would argue you're probably better off EDing to NYU. Unless you're absolutely hell-bent on Columbia, which even the Columbiaist Columbians think is stupid.

PigBodine wrote:

hdsoc wrote:

PigBodine wrote:NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

I'm not sure about Columbia, but NYU definitely does.

What do you base that on? I'm not sure I see anyone on the list of acceptances who wouldn't have had a great chance coming through the front door. While it's possible that it might break a tie (though there's really no way to prove that), it's definitely very different from MVP's ED system, where's it'll give you a very consistent, very measurable boost.

http://nyu.lawschoolnumbers.com/applica ... =3&type=jd

Maybe you should take a closer look. Those LSN numbers, while limited, actually appear to show a pretty clear ED boost at NYU. The lowest GPA by far in the 172 column came from a non-URM admitted ED applicant, and two of the four lowest GPAs in that column did. Same with the lowest GPA among 180 scorers (again, by far). The lowest GPA among 170 scorers came from a non-URM admitted ED applicant (tied with one other, actually). One of only two non-URM applicants accepted with a 167 was an ED applicant. Two of the four lowest GPAs among 169 scorers came from non-URM admitted applicants; one of the people lower than these two was a PhD and a saxophonist who had won national and international awards.

Doorkeeper wrote:

Br3v wrote:

PigBodine wrote:NYU and Columbia don't give an ED boost.

This doesn't make sense. Why would they offer Ed then? And if it's just to get as many good students as they can and they give no boost in return, don't you think word would get out?

1. Increases yield.
2. Decreases scholarship money to give out.

Lol. So you think they're telling the truth by saying ED provides no boost (which makes no sense), but lying when they say everyone is evaluated equally for scholarships and financial aid? You can't have it both ways.