Discrepancy between law school predictors Forum

[Mrs Featherbottom]

Hey good people,

Applying for Fall 2016. I've been researching my odds at target schools, and I've been getting some conflicting information between different online predictors.

LSAT: 167 (retaking in October)
GPA: 3.10
Non-URM
Texas resident

Reach schools are Texas and UWash. Targets are Colorado, SMU and Tulane. Safeties are Oregon and Univ. of San Diego. Setting my sights on regionals where I have ties in the hopes of avoiding paying sticker, but that's sort of off topic.

My question comes from the big statistical discrepancy I'm seeing on law school predictors. As an example, my Law School Numbers says I've got just a 50 percent shot at Colorado, while LSAC's admissions grid says 33 out of 36 applicants with my stats (165-169; 3.0-3.25) were admitted last year, which would indicate my chances are much higher. Other schools show a similar gap between the two sites. Mylsn doesn't seem reliable because of the very limited sample size for splitters.

My question is, which site provides a more realistic view of my chances? Am I setting my sights too high with my current school set? I'm expecting to crack 170 this time around, but I don't want to jump the gun there.

I know I should be studying for my fast-approaching LSAT right now instead of reading tea leaves, but please indulge my procrastination. Thanks all for the help.

[lymenheimer]

Hey good people,

Applying for Fall 2016. I've been researching my odds at target schools, and I've been getting some conflicting information between different online predictors.

LSAT: 167 (retaking in October)
GPA: 3.10
Non-URM
Texas resident

Reach schools are Texas and UWash. Targets are Colorado, SMU and Tulane. Safeties are Oregon and Univ. of San Diego. Setting my sights on regionals where I have ties in the hopes of avoiding paying sticker, but that's sort of off topic.

My question comes from the big statistical discrepancy I'm seeing on law school predictors. As an example, my Law School Numbers says I've got just a 50 percent shot at Colorado, while LSAC's admissions grid says 33 out of 36 applicants with my stats (165-169; 3.0-3.25) were admitted last year, which would indicate my chances are much higher. Other schools show a similar gap between the two sites. Mylsn doesn't seem reliable because of the very limited sample size for splitters.

My question is, which site provides a more realistic view of my chances? Am I setting my sights too high with my current school set? I'm expecting to crack 170 this time around, but I don't want to jump the gun there.

I know I should be studying for my fast-approaching LSAT right now instead of reading tea leaves, but please indulge my procrastination. Thanks all for the help.

Well...MyLSN only goes as far as the self-reporting goes, but it goes through a few years worth of data as well. The chart is only based on last years' data and doesn't differentiate between URM and not. But, imo, if you can find the charts for the past few years, then it's not that difficult to calculate your chances. Not sure if you had to take a statistics class, but usually the one that is the most accurate is the one with the most correct data (ie. the chart).

[Mrs Featherbottom]

Hey good people,

Applying for Fall 2016. I've been researching my odds at target schools, and I've been getting some conflicting information between different online predictors.

LSAT: 167 (retaking in October)
GPA: 3.10
Non-URM
Texas resident

Reach schools are Texas and UWash. Targets are Colorado, SMU and Tulane. Safeties are Oregon and Univ. of San Diego. Setting my sights on regionals where I have ties in the hopes of avoiding paying sticker, but that's sort of off topic.

My question comes from the big statistical discrepancy I'm seeing on law school predictors. As an example, my Law School Numbers says I've got just a 50 percent shot at Colorado, while LSAC's admissions grid says 33 out of 36 applicants with my stats (165-169; 3.0-3.25) were admitted last year, which would indicate my chances are much higher. Other schools show a similar gap between the two sites. Mylsn doesn't seem reliable because of the very limited sample size for splitters.

My question is, which site provides a more realistic view of my chances? Am I setting my sights too high with my current school set? I'm expecting to crack 170 this time around, but I don't want to jump the gun there.

I know I should be studying for my fast-approaching LSAT right now instead of reading tea leaves, but please indulge my procrastination. Thanks all for the help.

Well...MyLSN only goes as far as the self-reporting goes, but it goes through a few years worth of data as well. The chart is only based on last years' data and doesn't differentiate between URM and not. But, imo, if you can find the charts for the past few years, then it's not that difficult to calculate your chances. Not sure if you had to take a statistics class, but usually the one that is the most accurate is the one with the most correct data (ie. the chart).

Thanks. I don't think LSAC displays charts from years prior, but I guess last year's applicant pool is the most representative of my chances anyway.

[lymenheimer]

Thanks. I don't think LSAC displays charts from years prior, but I guess last year's applicant pool is the most representative of my chances anyway.

True. They might not, but you may be able to find them somewhere online. I wouldn't be so sure about the bolded. While I have no insight, a school may decide to switch their focus in a certain cycle. So more data points is generally better data points.

[Mrs Featherbottom]

Thanks. I don't think LSAC displays charts from years prior, but I guess last year's applicant pool is the most representative of my chances anyway.

True. They might not, but you may be able to find them somewhere online. I wouldn't be so sure about the bolded. While I have no insight, a school may decide to switch their focus in a certain cycle. So more data points is generally better data points.

Looks like I should head to the google then and see if someone's uploaded them.

It seems strange that the LSAC charts aren't mentioned more on TLS though. Maybe it's a relatively recent addition to LSAC's site, but it just seems so much less anecdotal than mylsn--for splitters at least.

[benwyatt]

Post removed.

[lymenheimer]

Looks like I should head to the google then and see if someone's uploaded them.

It seems strange that the LSAC charts aren't mentioned more on TLS though. Maybe it's a relatively recent addition to LSAC's site, but it just seems so much less anecdotal than mylsn--for splitters at least.

Top-Law-Schools don't have much in the way of these. That's why many people don't refer to them. Also, they don't consider URM, which is a heavy factor in admissions. I find them very helpful for reference though (if the school will provide it).

[MistakenGenius]

Post removed.

[Mrs Featherbottom]

I think I can field this one OP.

LSAC's charts aren't incredibly new from what I know. They've been around for a few years, and because they include the entire set of data, they are most definitely more accurate than mylsn where available. However, look at the name of this website. Most people here realize that the legal market is terrible at the moment, and so, to make sure they make a better investment, go to the best school at the biggest discount they can. We preach for students to retake the LSAT to achieve higher scores so they don't wind up unemployed and posting in the Vale of Tears. The general rule of thumb is to have a high enough LSAT to either attend a T14 (which all have far higher rates of employment), or receive a large scholarship to a regional school located where you want to work for the next 10+ years.

Because of that, mylsn simply doesn't have enough students applying to these lower-ranked schools with bad employment. You'll find many more students who applied to the T14 than a place like Colorado (I see that you have a 25% chance on there, but only because the sample size is 4). That allows mylsn to be more accurate as you rise in the rankings. At the same time, most of the T14 do not have charts on LSAC, meaning they don't help the majority of students on here. That's why you don't hear us mentioning LSAC's admissions charts, because they don't help for the schools most of us are looking at.

Speaking of which, I am compelled by TLS law to advise you to retake once or even twice to make sure you hit at least 170. I feel like you're setting your sights far too low. A few of these schools are dumpster fires that leave you with less than a coin flips chance of finding employment. The only school in your current selection that I wouldn't eliminate is UT. Texas is a fine school if you receive a significant scholarship and you're okay spending the next decade or more of your life in Texas. However, with your current numbers, I don't believe you'll receive a large scholarship even if you get in. You also seem very unsure about where you want to live. In your current school set, I see schools in Texas, California, Washington, Oregon, and Louisiana. Absolutely none of these law schools are national, so you need to be sure that's where you want to be if you attend them. If you receive a 170+, your chances and potential scholarships shoot up. With your GPA and a 170+, you stand a respectable chance at NYU, UVA, GULC, and Northwestern (your strongest chances are here). All those schools do have more national reaches, so you can be more flexible there. You also should be able to land scholarships at Texas, Vanderbilt, and WUSTL (they throw wads of money at high LSATs). This is really a no brainer to me.

Thanks, that definitely helps solidifies my mindset that 170+ LSAT is necessary for a decent option.

I'm leaning toward shooting for scholarship money at a regional rather than paying sticker at a t-14, because the latter's price tag is pretty intimidating, and I'd be happy settling down in Austin or the Pacific Northwest. I'll see how October goes before ruling anything out though. Thanks again.

[Broncos15]

Be careful of reading too much into the LSAC admissions charts. Even if T14 schools did post them, myLSN would be more reliable because you can get much more precise data.

The one major drawback to the LSAC charts is that the LSAT bands are too broad by the 5 point increments they use. For instance in your case of a 165-169, there is a huge difference between a 165 and a 167 or a 167 and a 169.

[landshoes]

I think I can field this one OP.

LSAC's charts aren't incredibly new from what I know. They've been around for a few years, and because they include the entire set of data, they are most definitely more accurate than mylsn where available. However, look at the name of this website. Most people here realize that the legal market is terrible at the moment, and so, to make sure they make a better investment, go to the best school at the biggest discount they can. We preach for students to retake the LSAT to achieve higher scores so they don't wind up unemployed and posting in the Vale of Tears. The general rule of thumb is to have a high enough LSAT to either attend a T14 (which all have far higher rates of employment), or receive a large scholarship to a regional school located where you want to work for the next 10+ years.

Because of that, mylsn simply doesn't have enough students applying to these lower-ranked schools with bad employment. You'll find many more students who applied to the T14 than a place like Colorado (I see that you have a 25% chance on there, but only because the sample size is 4). That allows mylsn to be more accurate as you rise in the rankings. At the same time, most of the T14 do not have charts on LSAC, meaning they don't help the majority of students on here. That's why you don't hear us mentioning LSAC's admissions charts, because they don't help for the schools most of us are looking at.

Speaking of which, I am compelled by TLS law to advise you to retake once or even twice to make sure you hit at least 170. I feel like you're setting your sights far too low. A few of these schools are dumpster fires that leave you with less than a coin flips chance of finding employment. The only school in your current selection that I wouldn't eliminate is UT. Texas is a fine school if you receive a significant scholarship and you're okay spending the next decade or more of your life in Texas. However, with your current numbers, I don't believe you'll receive a large scholarship even if you get in. You also seem very unsure about where you want to live. In your current school set, I see schools in Texas, California, Washington, Oregon, and Louisiana. Absolutely none of these law schools are national, so you need to be sure that's where you want to be if you attend them. If you receive a 170+, your chances and potential scholarships shoot up. With your GPA and a 170+, you stand a respectable chance at NYU, UVA, GULC, and Northwestern (your strongest chances are here). All those schools do have more national reaches, so you can be more flexible there. You also should be able to land scholarships at Texas, Vanderbilt, and WUSTL (they throw wads of money at high LSATs). This is really a no brainer to me.

Thanks, that definitely helps solidifies my mindset that 170+ LSAT is necessary for a decent option.

I'm leaning toward shooting for scholarship money at a regional rather than paying sticker at a t-14, because the latter's price tag is pretty intimidating, and I'd be happy settling down in Austin or the Pacific Northwest. I'll see how October goes before ruling anything out though. Thanks again.

You probably shouldn't aim for anything until you know more about where you actually get in. You might get into a T-14 with money. I know it's stressful to have so many unknowns, but you really have to wait in order to make decisions like that. At the very least, you need to wait until you get your LSAT score.

[Mrs Featherbottom]

Be careful of reading too much into the LSAC admissions charts. Even if T14 schools did post them, myLSN would be more reliable because you can get much more precise data.

The one major drawback to the LSAC charts is that the LSAT bands are too broad by the 5 point increments they use. For instance in your case of a 165-169, there is a huge difference between a 165 and a 167 or a 167 and a 169.

Definitely agree with you about the score gaps. Plus, as lymenheimer pointed out, not differentiating between URM and non-URM applicants adds another degree of unpredictability.

But, at least in the Colorado case I sighted, the fact that 33 out of 36 people within that range were admitted last year seems to imply that the three denied were probably dinged from red flags on their applications, rather than their numbers.

I also realize I'm currently doing exactly what you advised not to do by reading into these charts too much.

[lymenheimer]

Be careful of reading too much into the LSAC admissions charts. Even if T14 schools did post them, myLSN would be more reliable because you can get much more precise data.

The one major drawback to the LSAC charts is that the LSAT bands are too broad by the 5 point increments they use. For instance in your case of a 165-169, there is a huge difference between a 165 and a 167 or a 167 and a 169.

Definitely agree with you about the score gaps. Plus, as lymenheimer pointed out, not differentiating between URM and non-URM applicants adds another degree of unpredictability.

But, at least in the Colorado case I sighted, the fact that 33 out of 36 people within that range were admitted last year seems to imply that the three denied were probably dinged from red flags on their applications, rather than their numbers.

I also realize I'm currently doing exactly what you advised not to do by reading into these charts too much.

Like I also said (and if I didn't then I meant to), they are a decent point of reference. Not many of the applicants (especially to the non-T14 schools) are going to be aware of TLS or the fact that URMs get boost, so WASPs will be applying with those numbers too. Just another thing to keep in mind. Regardless, shoot high for the LSAT and you won't have to worry about dealing with those charts, you can instead stress over MyLSN numbers and uncertainties over T-14 admissions.

[MistakenGenius]

Post removed.