# Yale Obsession

• 4399
• Back to my non-secret secret identity...
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #50 on: January 12, 2006, 08:34:07 AM »
One person from my undergrad.  Which I suppose is pretty good, considering our size.  I wonder if I know her/him.

#### JPhilmore

• 487
• This actually is me.
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #51 on: January 12, 2006, 08:47:47 AM »
This is a bit off topic, but related to the thread.  What is with Yale's admissions process?  I don't get why applicants are assigned a score of 2, 3, or 4 by each reader.  Why not rank them from 1-80, and use their average score to determine admission?  That way you are less likely to get screwed by one reader you happens to have 35 amazing candidates in their pile.  In such a case you could make up for a 36 by also scoring a 12 and 9.  Under the current system such a candidate would score a 4+4+3= 11 = possible rejection, while under a ranking system they would score a (9+12+36)/3= 19 (<20) = probable admission.

The current system is more likely to reject someone not because of their credentials, but rather because of an unlucky assignment of readers.  Is that obsessive enough for you?

#### curly

• 1742
• I'm sexy
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #52 on: January 12, 2006, 08:50:54 AM »
JPhil: I don't get your system. Maybe I'm just being really dumb, but, could you explain it a little more?

#### curly

• 1742
• I'm sexy
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #53 on: January 12, 2006, 08:52:05 AM »
JPhil: Forget it, figured it out. God, I'm slow today.

#### JPhilmore

• 487
• This actually is me.
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #54 on: January 12, 2006, 08:59:24 AM »
This is a bit off topic, but related to the thread.  What is with Yale's admissions process?  I don't get why applicants are assigned a score of 2, 3, or 4 by each reader.  Why not rank them from 1-80, and use their average score to determine admission?  That way you are less likely to get screwed by one reader you happens to have 35 amazing candidates in their pile.  In such a case you could make up for a 36 by also scoring a 12 and 9.  Under the current system such a candidate would score a 4+4+3= 11 = possible rejection, while under a ranking system they would score a (9+12+36)/3= 19 (<20) = probable admission.

The current system is more likely to reject someone not because of their credentials, but rather because of an unlucky assignment of readers.  Is that obsessive enough for you?

you would consider an 11 getting screwed?  an 11 IS a possible rejection, but it's also a probable admission, based on what i've read.  no?

This is true, but the numbers could come out so that you get a 10, while an average of rankings would still be under 20 (say 41, 9, and 9).  This may be unlikely, but the difference between a 10 and 11 is crucial.  Consider an applicant you scores a 4, 3, and 3, but would have been ranked 24, 21, and 9 (average of 18).  This candidate would probably be considered better than one ranked 19,19, and 38, no?  But this person would score an 11, and may be granted admission.

• 4399
• Back to my non-secret secret identity...
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #55 on: January 12, 2006, 09:01:48 AM »
The current system is more likely to reject someone not because of their credentials, but rather because of an unlucky assignment of readers.  Is that obsessive enough for you?

I admit I've thought about that too, but then again, how are you going to be placed with a group of yale applicants who got through the first cut and not be in a group full of insanely well qualified people?

The element of luck seems to present itself a lot more with what each reader is going for.  If I happen to get three readers who really value political activism, or who think Yale needs more feminists/lesbians/environmentalists/etc, I've got a nice shot.  If they're more into published articles, high GPAs, or advanced degrees (admittedly the more likely reader type), I'm SOL.

On the other hand, I may not even make it to the faculty review.  And I may never know.

That thought's gonna fester...

#### JPhilmore

• 487
• This actually is me.
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #56 on: January 12, 2006, 09:07:09 AM »
This is true, but the numbers could come out so that you get a 10, while an average of rankings would still be under 20 (say 41, 9, and 9).  This may be unlikely, but the difference between a 10 and 11 is crucial.  Consider an applicant you scores a 4, 3, and 3, but would have been ranked 24, 21, and 9 (average of 18).  This candidate would probably be considered better than one ranked 19,19, and 38, no?  But this person would score an 11, and may be granted admission.

okay but how easy is it to put people in such specific ranks?  they probably leave it somewhat vague in order to allow for this.  or maybe not, i don't know i haven't thought about it THAT much.

My guess is that is why they do it like they do.  However, while being easier, it is not the most mericratic way.

• 4399
• Back to my non-secret secret identity...
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #57 on: January 12, 2006, 09:10:58 AM »
fair enough compromise though.  these people are yale profs, they're not superhuman or anything.

Speaking of, I wonder just how closely each prof looks at the file.  I told my parents, who are professors, about the system, and their reaction was that if it were them and their colleagues, full apps would never get read and everybody would pick one element that they cared about to focus on.

But then again, profs at underfunded state schools probably get overworked more than Yale law profs.

#### A.

• 13843
##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #58 on: January 12, 2006, 09:13:48 AM »
I just find that to be very odd.  Why more Wharton people than SAS people?

I'm not really sure.  I thought it was because Wharton was more prestigious, but the more I think about it, the more I think that it's because they have special programs that allow students to look much more interesting on paper.  Let's take Huntsman as an example.  It's a program that allows a joint business/international studies degree that comes complete with a massive scholarship, forces people to become fluent in at least one foreign language and proficient in others, mandates a year of study abroad, and is often accompanied by internships with the CIA, NSA, and State Department.

Very interesting!

Quote
Quote
And even a minimal amount of research would reveal Yale's grading policy.

I think it depends on the kind of research.  When she was advising me, she told me to throw out the viewbooks, normal law school guides, and the USNWR and told me to look at professor bios, student spending, Vault 50 job placement (I never quite sure why she said this to me, the girl who wants to be a law professor, but maybe there was a logic to it), etc.  I suspect she advised other people to do the same thing.

And sadly, by those standards Harvard does with.  Since it has so many more faculty members in general, it has a lot more people focusing on health law.  (Although they don't have Daniel Kelves, who I have to admit, would be a huge lure.)

And this is why I avoided my pre-law advisor and encourage other people to do the same...

#### John Galt

##### Re: Yale Obsession
« Reply #59 on: January 12, 2006, 09:27:20 AM »
JPhil: I don't think every candidate is ranked by faculty members. I think some candidates (ie, the ones who were admitted very early) are selected by Megan Barnett for admission and just go to Dean Koh for final approval. Those individuals bypass the faculty rating process (thank God).