How LSs determine UG GPAs are inflated

Graduate School Law School
1

<p>I'm going to post something that I've posted several times before. I acknowledge before doing so that many of the posters don't believe this. So, take it with a grain of salt. </p>

<p>In order to determine whether a particular college is grade inflated when compared to other colleges, law school admissions officers look at two numbers: the median LSAT for the students at the college and the median GPA of the students applying to law school from that college, as calculated by LSDAS. Please note these numbers are determined by looking at actual LSAT scores and actual transcripts; the same methodology is used to calculate a GPA for students, even if the college uses a different one. The median GPA used is NOT that for all students attending a college; it is only that for those students who get far enough along in the LS application process to send LSDAS their transcripts. </p>

<p>There is a theoretical perfect gpa distribution. In theory, the same student going to any college would get the same GPA, no matter where (s)he went to college. So, if Joe Schmoe went to Cal State Poly or DePauw or MIT or UNC-CH or Princeton IN THEORY he should get the same GPA. Because, Princeton is a more selective college, it "ought to" have a higher median gpa than Cal Poly, but the same INDIVIDUAL student should get the SAME gpa at either. </p>

<p>The LSAT is scored on a 120-180 basis to make it easy to combine it with your gpa. Drop the 1. Divide by 20. You'll end up with 1.0-4.0, historically the #s used to represent the D to A grading scale. These numbers theoretically schould correlate IN THE AGGREGATE with GPAs. </p>

<p>If we look at the Yale Class of '03 numbers posted elsewhere, for the class of '03 we see a median LSAT score of 165.6. If Yale had a perfect theoretical gpa distribution, that score whould equate with a median GPA of 3.28. (Drop the 1 in 165.6, divide by 20=3.28.) The actual median was 3.53. Yes, Yale is a bit grade inflated--grades are roughly .25 higher than they should be. </p>

<p>Now look at PennState's #s also linked elsewhere. It's not a completely perfect comparison, since Penn State doesn't seem to break its numbers down by year of graduation. But in the aggregage, the median LSAT is 152.2. If it has a theoretically perfect GPA distribution, the median GPA should be 2.61. It is 3.20. So, Penn State's grades are inflated--when compared to the perfect model--by .59. </p>

<p>Thus, to the extent that a LS admissions officer takes grade inflation into account, he will include that Penn State GPAs are more inflated than those of Yalies, even though Yalies applying to LS had a higher gpa than the Penn State kids applying to LS. The theory says that students with a median LSAT of 152.2 SHOULD HAVE a lower median gpa than students with a median LSAT of 165.6.</p>

<p>Note that the theory acknowledges that the LSAT is NOT a test of aptitude. People study for it. It just assumes that the median LSAT gives a very rough way to measure a combination of natural aptitude AND hard work and that these two factors also should show up in the GPA. </p>

<p>Note that if you attend college X, you can NOT just look at the median gpa's and median LSAT scores of some other school that posts its data on line and is the same general type or at the same level of selectivity as the one you attend and assume that the #s will apply to you. They really don't. </p>

<p>Now, I'm not claiming that ANY particular LS takes grade inflation into account--maybe very few do. That's another thread. But, when the do take it into account, this is how they measure it.</p>

2

<p>Not to muck up your thread, but a comment about the last paragraph:</p>

<p>Penn's admissions dean stated in Law School Confidential (Robert Miller, 2000) that they rank-order their students using quality of undergrad school. Many schools use some form of GPA/LSAT to rank their students (multiplying each by a certain factor - which, interestingly, should correlate strongly to your 1L GPA if you were to attend), then accept from the top down and reject from the bottom up.</p>

<p>"For us, the formula includes your LSAT percentile, your mean LSAT (the average LSAT score of students from your undergraduate school who have taken the LSAT in the last five years), and your "rank in class," which is computed by taking the percentile rank of your GPA compared to the GPAs of the other LSAT test takers from yoru undergraduate institution during the past five years."</p>

<p>So for some schools, the GPA you have just washes out - it's all about where you are in your class and how strong your school is.</p>

<p>My guess is that those factors are more important among the higher-ranking schools, which do not have to jockey for rankings the way that other schools do. If a second-tier school can manipulate the LSATs and GPAs of its incoming students and radically increase its rankings, life will be good for it. The Ivies and others have established reputations - they don't need USNews to do that for them.</p>

<p>Carry on, carry on.</p>

3

<p>"There is a theoretical perfect gpa distribution. In theory, the same student going to any college would get the same GPA, no matter where (s)he went to college."</p>

<p>I see no reason for this theory.</p>

<p>"Because, Princeton is a more selective college, it 'ought to' have a higher median gpa than Cal Poly, but the same INDIVIDUAL student should get the SAME gpa at either."</p>

<p>Again, no reason for this. In the real world this obviously doesn't happen. Just because something happens in the real world, does not mean there is a theory behind it saying it should happen some other way "in theory."</p>

4

<p>Boalt Hall (the UC Berkeley law school) used to weight grades. They were forced to disclose the formulas in 1997, due to a lawsuit, and the results were published in the LA Times. There is a summary online at</p>

<p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000829094953/http://www.pcmagic.net/abe/gradeadj.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.archive.org/web/20000829094953/http://www.pcmagic.net/abe/gradeadj.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Higher scores = tougher grading. Schools in red got an upward adjustment, schools in black got no adjustment, schools in blue got a downward adjustment. </p>

<p>If you were wondering, the schools with the toughest grading policies (according to Boalt circa 1997) were:</p>

<p>Swarthmore (89.5)
Williams (89)
Duke (88.5)
Carleton, Colgate (88)
Johns Hopkins (87.5)
Chicago, Dartmouth, Wesleyan (87)
Cornell, Harvard (86.5)</p>

<p>Berkeley grades were lower rated (78.5), and got no adjustment.</p>

5

<p>It's kind of weird that you use cal poly as an example, since they have a rather selective student body(3.9, 1250) with a relatively low median student gpa(2.8).</p>

6

<p>
[quote]
Higher scores = tougher grading. Schools in red got an upward adjustment, schools in black got no adjustment, schools in blue got a downward adjustment. </p>

<p>If you were wondering, the schools with the toughest grading policies (according to Boalt circa 1997) were:

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, that's not quite true. That grading compensation scheme was not used solely to compensate for tougher grading. It was also used to correct for how well those undergrad programs prepare students for Boalt. For example, a theoretical school that was extremely highly grade inflated, but nonetheless prepared its students extremely well for Boalt anyway (either because the school produced people who turned out to be really really good at writing legal arguments or memorizing key legal facts or whatever), would nonetheless get high marks, despite the grade inflation. </p>

<p>For example, as you can see from the scores, Harvard gets a higher 'score' than MIT does, despite the fact that even most Harvard students would concede that MIT grades harder than Harvard does. The suggestion that Harvard gets a higher score because Harvard grades harder than MIT is not particularly believable. I think what is really happening is that Harvard students, despite the grade inflation, are better prepared for law school than are MIT students. </p>

<p>On the other hand, you can see that MIT clearly beats out Yale and Stanford. In these cases, I believe that the MIT grade deflation wins out. </p>

<p>Nevertheless, I would assert that to be on the safe side, you are probably better off going to a highly grade inflated school.</p>

7

<p>how can you determine if your school is grade inflated. Ive tried to find the median LSAT for my school and use the method as said by jonri, but cannot find the necessary info for my university.</p>

<p>If anyone can help, it would be much appreciated...
I go to St.John's- NY</p>

8

<p>so do law schools adjust for inflation at all, or just use the lsdas gpa?</p>

9

<p>Sakky's response seems very accurate.</p>

<p>I have heard of Berkeley undergrads benefitting from gpa deflation and getting a boost if they apply to other schools. However, after spending four years here, I know quite a few people that have very high gpa's yet know nothing and would do poorly in a truly competitive grad school counteracting that effect and the number for berkeley reflects this. So the number seems to merely reflect the average quality of a student which will be definitely be high in places like harvard even with the gpa inflation.</p>

10

<p>Fatjoe, Ask any student from St. John's who took the LSAT recently and registered with LSDAS. The information is given to each of them in the forms they receive when they register (or at least it was a couple of years ago when my favorite law student applied) or ask your career services office/pre-law adviser.</p>

<p>I wasn't commenting on the quality of the student bodies of any college given in my example. They aren't listed in any particular order. I was just trying to give examples of different types in different parts of the country. </p>

<p>The idea that students will get the same gpa no matter which college they attend is inherent in the ranking methodology used by US News and the data the law schools themselves release. It gives the 25-75% ranges and/or the median gpa's for all accepted or matriculated students, without regard to the colleges they attend. </p>

<p>Again, please understand that I am not advocating this system. I'm letting you know it's used by some law schools.</p>