Top Law Schools

For a splitter applying to a particular school, is there a "point of diminishing returns" when it comes to LSAT scores? In other words, are you that much more attractive with an LSAT that's 9-10 points above the school's 75th percentile as opposed to "only" being 3-4 points above their 75th?

I'm curious because it seems like as long as you're significantly above their mean, you're not going to improve their mean any further by being *way* above it.

Also, I know the correct response is "look at different schools where you're not so far above their mean", but let's assume that the choice of potential schools is fixed due to other criteria.

ScottRiqui wrote:For a splitter applying to a particular school, is there a "point of diminishing returns" when it comes to LSAT scores? In other words, are you that much more attractive with an LSAT that's 9-10 points above the school's 75th percentile as opposed to "only" being 3-4 points above their 75th?

I'm curious because it seems like as long as you're significantly above their mean, you're not going to improve their mean any further by being *way* above it.

Also, I know the correct response is "look at different schools where you're not so far above their mean", but let's assume that the choice of potential schools is fixed due to other criteria.

It depends on how low your GPA is. I'd say that there are diminishing returns once you hit 175+ for almost everyone, but there will always be a difference between a 173 and a 176.

..

It depends. Colleges use indices (see https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... li=1#gid=0) to help compare applicants' GPA +LSAT. However, the USNWR only takes into account the median LSAT score and GPA, so a 178 moving up to a 180 doesn't help at all. That being said, they are under significant pressure to keep their average LSAT and GPA up, and us splitters are a very economic way to do so.
It's easier to get two students who have a 4.0/166 and 3.4/176 respectively than two students who have a 3.7/171. Although these numbers average out the same, the first applicant pool will have no net effect on the median GPA and LSATs, assuming that those medians are between the bounds of 3.4-4.0 and 166-176.

togepi wrote:Has any of the schools shifted to be more splitter friendly in the face of decreasing admissions?

I'm wondering the same, especially considering recent reasons to believe applications are down rather drastically. I'd love to hear someone's thoughts on this, especially in terms of T14 and the schools close by.

.

UCLA, traditionally unfriendly to splitters, admitted me, a non-urm, sub 3.0, 170+.

I was surprised.

chill wrote:Iowa also took me, as of this morning. So for any future splitters reading through this, both W&M and Iowa took a sub-3.0 student who had a 179. Overall, neither should be red, I think.

Bumping Iowa quickly, two of my friends got into Iowa with GPA's that were lower than the floors. However, both are in-state native residents so that could have impacted the decision (maybe hoping they wouldn't leave the state, similar to the push the undergraduate college tries to make with low in-state tuition).

Iowa's in-state tuition is low and so is COL so it's one of the school's I am definitely applying to but I'm worried about being able to get out of the Midwest by going. This chart helps a lot, thanks again to the OP!

Has the distinction between which colleges are considered splitter-friendly and not changed since this was first posted? Any updated chart available for 2016?

Tag

I know a lot of schools LSAT numbers are dropping, does anybody think this makes them more favorable for splitters? Or could this even affect their GPA 'floors' (higher/lower)?

I'm interested to hear people's thoughts on changes to the validity of this post since 2011

GoGreen17 wrote:I know a lot of schools LSAT numbers are dropping, does anybody think this makes them more favorable for splitters? Or could this even affect their GPA 'floors' (higher/lower)?

I'm interested to hear people's thoughts on changes to the validity of this post since 2011

Also curious because I haven't been keeping up with the news, stats, polls, etc since im studying. tagging for reference

Would love to see updated thoughts on this topic

Would still love to see updated thoughts on this topic

I bet this is insightful: http://admissionsbythenumbers.blogspot. ... el-in.html.

The guy's methodology is sound. His data is somewhat poor, but it's the best available. He determines that Penn applicants gain statistically insignificant benefits from applying ED only if they are splitters, while applying early helps.

In other words, splitters are unique as Penn applicants in that only they gain no advantage by applying ED, rather than simply applying RD early.

GoGreen17 wrote:I know a lot of schools LSAT numbers are dropping, does anybody think this makes them more favorable for splitters? Or could this even affect their GPA 'floors' (higher/lower)?

I'm interested to hear people's thoughts on changes to the validity of this post since 2011

It is impossible to tell what benefit this would bring to a splitter with a certain LSAT score. Assuming the benefit would be solely based on where you fall in the schools LSAT percentiles, you would have to know the distribution of LSAT scores being accepted to the school in order to know whether your specific LSAT score would affect the school's percentiles or simply get lost in the data.

For example, if the 75th percentile LSAT scores are all clustered at a 174 except one score, which is a 170, then that school has to represent their 75th percentile as 170. However, if one person can get added to bump out that person at 170, then then new percentile becomes either 174, or it becomes whatever that new person's LSAT score is, whichever is lower. In this situation, the new applicant is very attractive.

But take the other situation, where all the scores are clustered at 170 except one score, which is a 174. Then that school still has to represent their 75th percentile as 170, but the situation for a new applicant is very different. Say a new applicant shows up with a 179 LSAT, and another new applicant shows up with a 171 LSAT. Either applicant will affect the percentiles in the exact same way: either one will bump one guy with a 170 into the lower percentile group, and either one will keep the 75th percentile exactly the same. Strictly speaking in terms of the percentile distribution, the 179 applicant has no advantage over the 171 applicant.

I am basically just using the two extremes, and some necessary assumptions, to illustrate how percentiles work, and how based on three percentiles alone it is impossible to fully understand how a particular score benefits the distribution. Therefore, it is impossible to answer your first question.