Law School Discussion

chiashu

06hopeful

chiashu
« on: August 17, 2005, 06:54:40 PM »
Generally speaking, what percentage odds would you consider a safety/reach? I have heard a reach is anywhere less than 40% and a safety is anything greater than 80%.   What do you think? Any anecdotal evidence would be greatly appreciated...

jkang2

  • ****
  • 223
    • View Profile
Re: chiashu
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2005, 07:15:20 PM »
Generally speaking, what percentage odds would you consider a safety/reach? I have heard a reach is anywhere less than 40% and a safety is anything greater than 80%.   What do you think? Any anecdotal evidence would be greatly appreciated...

I know this is not the answer you want but in my experience Chiashu is a good indicator of your chances but not a really really helpful one.  The number you get from Chiashu, you could do it in your head.  Not literally do it in your head (that is crazy) but you could ahve a general idea of where you would fall. 

Such a funny thing with law schools.  I have been rejected from schools (more than one) where I was both above the median in GPA and LSAT.  I guess the safety net is both LSAT and GPA above 75th percentile.  But then...wouldnt you be overqualified? 

Also the numbers from Chiashu can be pretty ridiculous sometimes.  Boalt is harder than Harvard for low GPA High LSAT people.  Even with 180 GPA someone with 3.5 will have hard time at Boalt.  But in reality I am not really sure it always works out that way.
Also, Cornell comes out harder than Columbia with 180 LSAT.  This is crazy.  All to tell you that numbers really are not graved in the stone.  I know a person with about 24% chance at YALE who got in on this board.  But I got rejected from schools where I have 45% chance of getting into.  Or 40% or..I forgot. 

Are the numbers conservative??  What do people think?

Re: chiashu
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2005, 07:23:37 PM »
Well, the logistic regression they use takes into consideration two and only two factors: GPA and LSAT. One would almost be tempted to belive that thaty actually read your personal statement ... or that maybe, just maybe, they look at your UG institution. Somehow, I don't feel a 3.9 from Chico State is better than a 3.6 from Berkeley (notorious for the much more conservative grades compared to inflated Ivy's).

jkang2

  • ****
  • 223
    • View Profile
Re: chiashu
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2005, 08:06:40 PM »
Well, the logistic regression they use takes into consideration two and only two factors: GPA and LSAT. One would almost be tempted to belive that thaty actually read your personal statement ... or that maybe, just maybe, they look at your UG institution. Somehow, I don't feel a 3.9 from Chico State is better than a 3.6 from Berkeley (notorious for the much more conservative grades compared to inflated Ivy's).


Aren't you the guy who started that debate a while back?  About top UG vs. not good UG?  And there GPA relationship? 

You are underestimating the situation.  3.9 from Chico State will be 3.2 in CAL (if they study hard).  Dude, look at the transfer student's GPAs!  Some of them like...die. 

But whether they should weigh the GPA (according to UG) is a different question.  I am pretty sure that law schools look at your UG.  But they are not gonna do what you and I would do, i.e. divide the Chico GPA into half.  3.5 CAL vs. 3.6 Chico is debatable but anything like 3.3 CAL vs. 3.9 Chico, Harvard will have no regrets in choosing the Chico guy. 

On top of that, LSAT exists to standardize the applicant's abilities.  Believe me, 4 years at Chico (no offense...seriously no offense) analyzing sesemi streets will dumb you down compared to reading Vagavad Gita in Harvard.  LSAT disparities speak for itself.  Check out the median LSAT difference, the general shape of the bell curve, between Harvard and Chico. 170 in Chico is GOD but 170 in Harvard is just good (not excellent) 

I guess these left wing law school adcom people just wants to be nice and check your effort when they look at your GPA and check your abilities for LSAT.  And that is why Boalt (the epitomi (spelling) of cali communists) is such a GPA whore where as semi-elitist like..Harvard.. say "LSAT is the *&^%."       



06hopeful

Re: chiashu
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2005, 08:12:58 PM »
Granted, chiashu does not take into account the other factors that are part of an application, and thus should not be taken too seriously when asked to predict chances on a completely binary scale. However, it is still useful. I think the 'ridiculousness' of chiashu mirrors the somewhat arbitrary nature of some aspects of the admissions process.

To answer your question, I don't think it's intrinsically conservative, but those figures are from 2003, and law school applications were up due to a crappy economy. So in that sense, yes, they're consrvative as far as a 2006 applicant is concerned. The LSAC calculator is definitely more up-to-date, but what the heck do you do with that ridiculous range of possibility that it gives you?  


jkang2

  • ****
  • 223
    • View Profile
Re: chiashu
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2005, 09:09:02 PM »
Granted, chiashu does not take into account the other factors that are part of an application, and thus should not be taken too seriously when asked to predict chances on a completely binary scale. However, it is still useful. I think the 'ridiculousness' of chiashu mirrors the somewhat arbitrary nature of some aspects of the admissions process.

To answer your question, I don't think it's intrinsically conservative, but those figures are from 2003, and law school applications were up due to a crappy economy. So in that sense, yes, they're consrvative as far as a 2006 applicant is concerned. The LSAC calculator is definitely more up-to-date, but what the heck do you do with that ridiculous range of possibility that it gives you? 



Very well said.  I agree 100% except that "conservative" part.  Wht I meant by conservative was that 50% is a good chance and not a half-half chance.  I guess what I am trying to say is that the way people view the numbers are little different from how they should view them.  60% is GOOD but people might think its just decent. 

In mathematics: let X=(0~100 | score from chiashu).  Let Y be X's co-domain.  Y= (good, bad, okay, excellent).  Then people map X into Y, they do it conservatively. Sorry, I can't explain it any better.