Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Admissions  (Read 840 times)

kslaw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62
    • View Profile
Admissions
« on: March 09, 2004, 09:59:42 AM »
So...I was trying to get an idea of how the admissions process would work at the school to which I applied. And I came to the process I would use if I was running admissions.

Top schools can afford to be very picky. Schools at the bottom of the top fifty, or below the top fifty, can't be as picky, yet have to find ways to raise their standings.

If I were running the process...I'd start each year taking into consideration what our weakness was the year before (median GPA too low, median LSAT too low). That would determine my criteria for starting out. So maybe in the beginning, I'm very LSAT heavy.

I'd take all the students who had both GPA and LSAT over my 75th percentile from the year before.

I'd take all students who had LSAT over the 75th percentile, and GPA between the median and 75th percentile.

I'd reject all students who had both LSAT and GPA under 25th percentile unless they had something really exciting to contribute.

Everyone else, I'd not make a decision on. I'd then evaluate the group of admitted students, consider what the 25th percentile, median and 75th percentile are for that group, and then re-evaluate my criteria. Maybe I put too much emphasis on LSAT and now my GPA numbers are hurting.

So now...I need LSAT scores around the median of the already admitted group, and GPAs above the 75th percentile of the already admitted group. At this stage, someone with a high LSAT and low GPA is probably not going to get accepted unless the median LSAT drops from accepted students deciding on other schools, or high GPA students having less than stellar LSATs.

once I got all stats to where I want them to be, I'd start to only accept students whose scores (both scores) were over the median.

So...what all this would mean is that schools that were LSAT-heavy in the beginning of the process may become GPA-heavy at the end of the process, and vice versa. Which could put those of us with split scores at a great advantage or disadvantae, while giving those with solid but not extraordinary numbers a slightly more than fair shot, but not until the end.

i guess i'm just babbling. does anyone know that I'm wrong?

ebrumm

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 203
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Admissions
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2004, 11:04:34 AM »
well I hope thats not how they'll do it - cause im in the middle/lower sections of most of my picks! LOL

dsds3581

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
Re: Admissions
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2004, 11:08:03 AM »
I just really don't understand why that would change top schools from being so picky and help low schools raise their standings, though. I can see it lessening the impact of pickiness in top schools, but what it sounds like is that top schools would THEN be focusing too much more on numbers than they already do...which some people do want, so that might not be bad to them...but, like a Georgetown admissions officer once said to me...you know, you pay all that money to apply to those top schools. The least they can do is sit down and devote 5-10 minutes of serious time/attention to your application, to look beyond numbers and see what you might contribute to their class and if they think you really can do the work (a paraphrase of her words).

In this way, it doesn't seem like it'd change lower-ranking schools that much because it seems like they already basically just take people as long as they have the numbers with some exceptions and sometimes reject those with higher numbers, possibly anticipating that person views their school as a safety.

I see the slight variations of "your school," though.

kslaw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62
    • View Profile
Re: Admissions
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2004, 11:21:42 AM »
Let me clarify. This isn't how I think it *should* be, this is how I think it probably is in the schools in the bottom of the first tier or lower. I know I said, if I were running the admissions process. A better way to explain would be to say that...putting myself in their shoes, I would imagine this would be my point of view.

Now...having been on the other side of it, if I were to ever be in that position, I would not do it for moral/compassionate reasons. I would, personally, view applicants as individuals.

Top tiers can be picky, they are where they want to be.

it's the ones trying to raises their numbers that I think may do it this way. That instead of looking at applications individually, the admissions process is designed to bring in a class with the averages, etc, that will help them raise their standings.

Does that make any sense?

nathanielmark

  • Guest
Re: Admissions
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2004, 12:58:20 PM »
I think you are on to something.  Ive noticed that some up and coming schools in the lower end of the first tier use indexes that give greater weight to LSAT scores, which makes up 45% of the UNWR ranking criteria.