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 do think that Texas is trying to get into the Top 14 by using the extra non-resident spots to boost their numbers.
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.
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.
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.
so if its 'good' for applicants w/ lower #s, it could be bad for applicants w/ great #s?
Page created in 0.505 seconds with 19 queries.