Law School Discussion

Any advice for my graph?

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2008, 11:26:27 AM »
Worked fine for me, with the exception of Stanford and Boalt.  They came out at target and likely respectively, when it should really be reach and target.  Can't really expect otherwise though, considering how atypical their admissions practices are.

ETA:  Although you might want to consider weighting GPA more heavily at Stanford, might help a bit.

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2008, 11:35:43 AM »
This thing gets me wrong entirely.

It tells me that Northwestern is a great target school, along with GULC, Berkeley, Duke, and  Michigan. There's almost no use of "reach" for me. It says all of those are targets, then that UVa (which should be the same as GULC I think) is a reach, to long shots and prayers.

I think you need a few definitions, at least for the tiptop schools, for noticeable trends. For instance, at GULC anything below 170 better have a great GPA. Duke doesn't seem to really like splitters unless you have a really high LSAT. Berkeley loves their high GPAs. NU also loves their 170+s with a low GPA, but only where there's work experience. Without taking the particular schools (at least at the top) patterns into consideration, you cannot make this board happy.

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #22 on: February 02, 2008, 12:39:33 PM »
I'm into this. I'm really not a fan of the one over on Chiasu, not sure why, it's just too complicated to follow, a little too hopeful, etc. The thing about HYS is, how can anyone know what they're really looking for. Especially HS, you've got no idea what they'll do with you whether you're 4.0/178 or 3.2/165. So you can't expect a calculator to figure it out. I give the graph good marks except that it said I'd be good to go at UCLA and Vandy and instead they YPed me. Or rejected me. But obviously I prefer to think one over the other.

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #23 on: February 02, 2008, 01:27:44 PM »
I'm into this. I'm really not a fan of the one over on Chiasu, not sure why, it's just too complicated to follow, a little too hopeful, etc. The thing about HYS is, how can anyone know what they're really looking for. Especially HS, you've got no idea what they'll do with you whether you're 4.0/178 or 3.2/165. So you can't expect a calculator to figure it out. I give the graph good marks except that it said I'd be good to go at UCLA and Vandy and instead they YPed me. Or rejected me. But obviously I prefer to think one over the other.

You mean YS?

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2008, 05:48:05 PM »
No I mean HS. I think Yale is a little more predictable about their class. I wouldn't apply there without insane stats.

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #25 on: February 02, 2008, 06:11:20 PM »
No I mean HS. I think Yale is a little more predictable about their class. I wouldn't apply there without insane stats.

Not that I'd know (having neither applied at nor researched HYS), but I always thought that Harvard became pretty easy to predict around 3.8+/174+ while Yale and Stanford could virtually never be guaranteed.

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #26 on: February 02, 2008, 06:13:21 PM »
No I mean HS. I think Yale is a little more predictable about their class. I wouldn't apply there without insane stats.

Not that I'd know (having neither applied at nor researched HYS), but I always thought that Harvard became pretty easy to predict around 3.8+/174+ while Yale and Stanford could virtually never be guaranteed.

Well that's a solid point. I was thinking in terms of the other end, how far down they'd go.

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #27 on: February 02, 2008, 06:16:09 PM »
No I mean HS. I think Yale is a little more predictable about their class. I wouldn't apply there without insane stats.

Not that I'd know (having neither applied at nor researched HYS), but I always thought that Harvard became pretty easy to predict around 3.8+/174+ while Yale and Stanford could virtually never be guaranteed.

Well that's a solid point. I was thinking in terms of the other end, how far down they'd go.

Which in retrospect is probably more useful, because a 3.8/174 doesn't need a graph to figure out where to apply.  :)

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #28 on: February 02, 2008, 06:19:05 PM »
No I mean HS. I think Yale is a little more predictable about their class. I wouldn't apply there without insane stats.

Not that I'd know (having neither applied at nor researched HYS), but I always thought that Harvard became pretty easy to predict around 3.8+/174+ while Yale and Stanford could virtually never be guaranteed.

Well that's a solid point. I was thinking in terms of the other end, how far down they'd go.

Which in retrospect is probably more useful, because a 3.8/174 doesn't need a graph to figure out where to apply.  :)

I think the only thing a 3.8/174 needs is a list of demands to send to schools.

Re: Any advice for my graph?
« Reply #29 on: February 03, 2008, 03:28:45 AM »
Does "splitter" mean my stats come from different planets?  That's me. I'm 167 / 2.9. As for soft stats, I'm white, male, hardly volunteered and not even gay (worst luck), so your calculator should have all it needs and I think it hit the targets just right. One was WaUSL, which I hadn't originally considered because of my stinky GPA--but they enticed me with a fee waiver, and sure enough I was accepted. 

It kind of blew up on the reaches, though.  Southern Cal? Boalt?  Surely ye jest.  I did not even allow them to spit in my general direction.

But I like the concept a lot.  I say keep the colors and the graph format.

Back to reaches: LSAC's predictor named Illinois, Ohio, Colorado, Fordham, Maryland (all just under 50/50 odds).  If I'm a USNWR true believer, why would I reach for these reaches?  I don't think I have reaches that outrank Washington in USN.  Everything that outranks Washington is out of my reach, I think.  My reaches are (slightly) lower ranked schools. 

As it happens I'm not a true believer and I did apply to Illinois.