About Early Decision

[meggo]

I think a lot of what mark it 8 is true but I think what you'll find here, or what I've seen from wasting my time bumming around LSN, I think if you are a splitter or right on the median of a lot of school's admits, it really comes down to all your supporting documents. I've seen people who have identical numbers and roughly the same EC's, why does one get in over the other? Obviously, there is something they've conveyed that has convinced the adcomm's that they should be admitted. This is why people go on and on about numbers, and I agree, it's a numbers game, but supporting documents like your PS, DS, LOR, whatever can really make or break your application. This is just my own take from what I've seen, obviously not experience, but sometimes I think people overestimate how much of a numbers game things are and don't take into account that PS, LOR, applying ED, etc. they all add up to help your application

[sunglee]

I don't mean to be a glass half empty person(since this phrase was mentioned above) but how can YOU predict what school you will get into. Yes everyone on here says its all about the number, no matter what, the number is 90per cent of the application/acceptance process.

The truth of the matter is, I think this notion that your number is 90% of the process is BS...yes the number matters maybe like 60% but to think that all they do is look at your LSAT and GPA, then you are in or out, I think you are setting yourself up for a failure.

Most people forget that there are other aspects to the process.

I mean I am going to study my butt off to get a great LSAT, but I would never ever think that my numbers, no matter how great or not-so-great they are, will automatically get me in or out of a school.

All I'm saying is, it sounds kinda egotistical and whatnot to say "oh I know I'm getting into Duke, UCLA etc" even before the application opens.

I know everyone will disagree with me on this, because like most people on here, we are all number obsessed freaks, but I just had to put in my thoughts. Carry-on!!!

[sheltron5000]

It's not just that numbers are a huge part of the game (By the way in an Election year, 60% is practically a landslide) it is also the clear predictability of the numbers. Looking at the graphs on LSN or the admittance tables from the schools, it is pretty easy to tell that there is a numbers threshold above which you are virtually guaranteed acceptance. The people above those thresholds who are not accepted presumably sent in sub par essays, reccomendations and the like.

For people below that point, a great PS or LOR can tip the scales, but above it, all the non-numbers stuff does is confirm that you want to go to law school and can put the necessary effort into it.

Naturally none of this holds for Yale. Possibly Stanford as well.

<----Numbers Whore

[meggo]

yeah I agree with mdizzle to a certain extend and sheltron5000. I agree - numbers a predictability. It is quite likely having a 180 and a 4.0 from an Ivy school, that you will get in everywhere you apply. But it's not guaranteed. (as we saw with that 18 kid who had a 178 or 180 and a 4.0 and was rejected all across the board for lack of maturity). And as shltron said, there are things that can tip the scale. It's worth putting in everything you can to have an amazing PS, DS, LOR's, etc. Of course, if you are below the 25% percentile you will likely get rejected, but it's not guaranteed that you will be rejected either.

[bt]

Of course, nothing is a certainty and I hope I don't come across that way.  I don't KNOW I will get into any school.  However, one can make very educated guesses.

LSAC data is a good way to start.  LSN is also very helpful.  For instance, as cocky as it may sound, I am 90+% sure I will get into Georgetown.  Why?  Type in the range of 3.67-3.73/170 LSAT on LSN, and you will find that roughly 10 people applied with just those numbers.  Every person was accepted.  That's a decent sized pool of applicants.  If there were only 3 people that applied to Georgetown and even all 3 were admitted, I would be less certain because those 3 may have had something really special about their apps.  Certainly there's a chance that I won't be admitted, but from previous data it looks like I would have to have a real problem with my application, which I don't foresee. 



As for the importance of numbers, I think it depends on the school.  Berkeley and Stanford in particular want high GPAs (according to LSN, LSAC data) but beyond that they seem to be very focused on the rest of the app.  NYU, however, is very much by the numbers.  As it's my top choice, I did some research.  If you search on LSN for 3.67-3.73 GPA, 170 LSAT you'll find that ~10 people applied, 1 was admitted, and the rest were waitlisted or rejected.  If you search for the same GPA, 171 LSAT, you'll find that around 10 people applied and 9 were admitted.  Coincidence?  Perhaps, but I think it rather reinforces the notion that numbers can be a very strong indicator of your chances. 

[meggo]

sorry just ignore my post above. It's so full of typo's. Eek.

Yeah I agree BT with your post. It's such crap that NYU is like that considering the difference between a 170 and a 171 is what - one question? I think one does have to be careful though with something like LSN since it's a very self selected group of people. And I also don't always agree with LSAC's 'data' that people who do well on the LSAT are apparently ace at life. But as I said in the other thread, we all know we have to play the game and do everything we can to make our apps as strong as possible.

[MauveAvenger]

sorry just ignore my post above. It's so full of typo's. Eek.

Yeah I agree BT with your post. It's such crap that NYU is like that considering the difference between a 170 and a 171 is what - one question? I think one does have to be careful though with something like LSN since it's a very self selected group of people. And I also don't always agree with LSAC's 'data' that people who do well on the LSAT are apparently ace at life. But as I said in the other thread, we all know we have to play the game and do everything we can to make our apps as strong as possible.

THANK you. I got such crap for saying that it's really not representative of all the thousands of people who apply to law school because there aren't that many and they're self-selecting.

[Gone]

*Insert comment on Laura's LSAT score here*

*Insert bitter diatribe against myself and my utterly depressing situation here*

*Add a little self-loathing and jealousy here*

*And finally, an awkward joke here to make me look a little better/happier and try to impress people*

Now that the pleasantries are out of the way, I can go on my usual anti-ED vendetta (insert Cliff joke about ED here) - biggest regret of my college app process was applying ED, and I still love the school I am at. It's not as big a boost as many people perceive it to be, there are plenty of other great ways to demonstrate interest that don't lock you into something, and it can hurt your financial aid by losing the ability to compare offers and haggle. It might also lower your chances at merit scholarships (the whole point of which is to lure applicants way from higher-ranked schools) (I have no proof of this, it's nothing more than an assumption).

[sunglee]

ED hurting merit scholarships??/

I've heard ppl say this b4, how exactly does applying ED hurt merit scholarship? Please share

[Pop Up Video]

ED hurting merit scholarships??/

I've heard ppl say this b4, how exactly does applying ED hurt merit scholarship? Please share

If merit scholarships are offered to entice applicants to attend, there is no incentive for schools to give merit scholarships to people applying (binding) ED.