i

[Slow Blues]

do u guys think there will be any significant changes?  are there ever really any suprises?  I predict a tome T-14s changing spots and maybe UT pulling ahead of UCLA to be the only #15 with UCLA #16- purely a guess, however.

I do think that Texas is trying to get into the Top 14 by using the extra non-resident spots to boost their numbers.

I doubt it, except Emory should probably return to its rightful place somewhere in the Top 20 or so.

[vir]

I think they should use the median. I'm pretty sure they are going to as well.  If you look at some t14s on lsn you see that this is a much better number for judging your chances.  For example, Duke's 25/75 is 165/169, but their median is 168.  Almost all of the admits on lsn were at 168 and the a lot were above the median with fewer below (though the lsn selfselection helps explain that a bit).  Cornell too, 164/168, median of 167.  Most people with 166 were waitlisted and below that it gets tougher.  If you are below the median you really need the boost from soft factors.  I think the median is a much better way to decide which schools to apply to.  You can say, well 25% of the class was below 164 so I have a chance with my 162.  Yes you have a chance, but it seems to me that this is harder to say when you look at it as half the class is below/above 168. Your 162 looks a lot worse then. 

[RocketBot]

do u guys think there will be any significant changes?  are there ever really any suprises?  I predict a tome T-14s changing spots and maybe UT pulling ahead of UCLA to be the only #15 with UCLA #16- purely a guess, however.

I do think that Texas is trying to get into the Top 14 by using the extra non-resident spots to boost their numbers.

No way.  Texas is less selective, worse student/faculty ratio, worse GPA and LSAT, and is in Texas.  The only thing holding it up there is the lawyer/judge ranking, which will erode over time.  UCLA will be the only #15 soon.

[98765432]

I do think that Texas is trying to get into the Top 14 by using the extra non-resident spots to boost their numbers.

This will boost their numbers, but won't show up this year.  UCLA overenrolled last year and so found themselves being able to give some scholarship money to some students who would agree to defer.  If they chose to, and I don't know that they did, they could have made sure their numbers were high enough to possibly pass Texas in the next batch of rankings.

[LawyersGunnersnMoney]

I think they should use the median. I'm pretty sure they are going to as well.  If you look at some t14s on lsn you see that this is a much better number for judging your chances.  For example, Duke's 25/75 is 165/169, but their median is 168.  Almost all of the admits on lsn were at 168 and the a lot were above the median with fewer below (though the lsn selfselection helps explain that a bit).  Cornell too, 164/168, median of 167.  Most people with 166 were waitlisted and below that it gets tougher.  If you are below the median you really need the boost from soft factors.  I think the median is a much better way to decide which schools to apply to.  You can say, well 25% of the class was below 164 so I have a chance with my 162.  Yes you have a chance, but it seems to me that this is harder to say when you look at it as half the class is below/above 168. Your 162 looks a lot worse then. 

Using only the median would allow schools to admit more people w/ low #s.  in the cornell example, they could keep the median @ 167 and lower the 25% to 160 and people wouldnt know except for anecdotal evidence.   

[98765432]

I think the best system would include BOTH the mean and the 25/75.  That way schools couldn't game it as much.  25/75 means make sure to get 25% really awesome numbers and then worry about everything else.  Median means focusing on a lower cut-off but more aggressively.  If you combine them, they may just have to give up and accept some qualified applicants.

I know that doesn't make sense.

You are describing the current system.  They already use Median, 25, and 75.  If they dropped 25&75 and only used medians, then schools would only be beholden to USNews to the point of accepting one traditionally understood solid candidate (solid by the numbers) for every candidate that they admit based on non-traditional factors.

[RocketBot]

I thought the current system showed both, but ranked based on medians?  Is that not correct?

As a matter of fact, I think that the traditionally understood candidates are good candidates for a good reason.  I think that soft factors are the easiest to game/falsify/embellish.  That said, I'm not against advantages for the sake of diversity...

I'm not really interested in clear thinking right now.

Only for the most recent rankings did US News switch to averaging a schools 25/75 instead of taking their actual median.  This next cycle, actual medians will be used again, which means there will definitely be some changing around in rank.

It's also the reason why ppl think students with low stats have a better shot this cycle, as adcomms won't be watching out for their 25/75 as much, since they will be ranked on the medians again.

[LawyersGunnersnMoney]

so if its 'good' for applicants w/ lower #s, it could be bad for applicants w/ great #s?

[RocketBot]

so if its 'good' for applicants w/ lower #s, it could be bad for applicants w/ great #s?

Yep, exactly.  So it matters less if you're above their 75%ile...

[98765432]

Whoever mentioned that they don't use 25/75 in the methodology is right.  Last year it did, because it determined the calculated median, which is used in the method.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/about/06law_meth_brief.php


This Wall Street Journal article talks about the change that happened last year.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB111279937006999640.html?mod=2_1125_1

But I can't find any mention of USNews going back to the old method, nor can I find any mention of the ABA going back to collect the data, which is why USNews stopped using the reported median and started calculating the median.

Can anyone else post a link so we don't just spread rumors?