lol, I noticed this while I was going through the LS Guide. I'm sure the schools make a lot of money from the application fees of people who don't stand a chance. If they published the LSAT/GPA grids, they would probably lo$e some of that money.
As if the top law schools weren't annoying enough ($85 app. fee anyone), most refuse to post the GPA/LSAT grid in LSAC's Official Guide to ABA-Approved Law Schools (Law School Description section). they all give some lame variation of "as a preeminent law school, the Admissions Committee considers a number of factors in assessing candidates...XYZ seeks to enroll a diverse student body that goes beyond undergraduate GPA and LSAT scores. ... blah blah blah. Really? Wow, according to their half page explanation, one could easily assume that they would want to have a grid to prove that they go beyond the numbers. Yet they don't. Why? Because a GPA/LSAT grid would prove them, for the most part, wrong. The grid would give many would-be applicants a sobering glimpse of just how important those numbers are; probably leading them to not apply. Less applicants = less rejections = lower rankings = pissed off administration.In all fairness, I think a few applicants who would otherwise be accepted wouldn't apply due to the grid, but that effect could be mitigated if what they say is true (i.e. "As shown by the GPA/LSAT grid .... we look beyond the numbers to...."They know that when the average joe sees that 7/346 people were accepted with a 3.56 and a 163, they'll opt to spend that $85 on something worthwhile (like a keg of labatt blue light to flush away the tears).
Yale publishes a grid to quiet the haters
To the 106 applicants who applied to Yale with >3.0 and >155, unless you cured colon cancer as an extracurricular, WTF were you thinking?
Quote from: Christopher Moltisanti on December 10, 2007, 11:52:09 PMYale publishes a grid to quiet the haterswhere?