<p>
[quote]
Schools notorious for grade deflation:
...
Reed
...
[/quote]
Reed has averaged about 3.0 for over 20 years. I would call that stable or constant, neither inflation nor deflation. Or does constant mean deflation in this context?</p>
<p>nspeds - I thought that Georgetown was grade deflated in SFS - nice to hear that from someone else besides my DD. I wonder how the LDAS figures that one out.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I wonder how the LDAS figures that one out.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think they do, but it doesn't really matter. If your DD has a high GPA from the college or the SFS, she is fine:)</p>
<p>Several of my friends were recently admitted at HLS, and they all applied from the college. If your DD is applying to HLS, I think it is pretty safe to argue that she needs to have a 3.8 or above to have a good chance (along with a killer LSAT).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Reed has averaged about 3.0 for over 20 years. I would call that stable or constant, neither inflation nor deflation. Or does constant mean deflation in this context?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i have always defined as how much a certain amount of work and quality are awarded. it's a harder question, but that seems what we are trying to get at. for example, putting together the pieces of UChicago being full of students who want to learn and are smart yet receive lower grades than do students in schools of similar caliber would mean deflation. so for the Reed question, it's just a judgment call of the students, their workload, and gpa.</p>
<p>As I've posted before, the way law schools get a "quick fix" on grade inflation/deflation is by comparing the median GPA earned by law school applicants from a given college with the median LSAT earned by those applicants. The LSDAS compiles that. It uses the SAME methodology to compute the median GPA for all colleges. It is NOT the median GPA reported by the college that matters---it is the median GPA for the college as calculated by LSDAS vs. the median GPA earned by applicants to law school--NOT all students--from a particular undergraduate institution. </p>
<p>This information is reported on the "score report" of applicants who take the LSAT. </p>
<p>Again, it is NOT the median GPA that matters. It is the median GPA vs. the median LSAT. </p>
<p>The LSAT is done on a scale that is easy to combine with a GPA to create an index. So, drop the 1 in the score and divide by 20. The "ideal" is for the GPA and the median LSAT to "match." Thus, at a school with a median LSAT of 160, the median GPA of law school applicants "should be" a 3.0. </p>
<p>If the median LSAT is 166, the median GPA "should be" a 3.3. So, in theory, a school where the median GPA of actual law school applicants is a 160 and the median gpa is a 3.0 and a school where the median LSAT is 166 and the median GPA is 3.3 are viewed as being equally grade inflated/deflated. </p>
<p>BTW,when this methodology is used, one of the colleges on nspeds "deflated" list does NOT qualify as grade deflated. And Harvard--which usually has a median LSAT of about 166--is NOT particularly grade inflated.</p>
<p>jonri,
I'd be curious to see the results of this analysis. Are they publicly available anywhere?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.jd2b.com/jdbundergradinfo.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.jd2b.com/jdbundergradinfo.php</a></p>
<p>here is another unverified list:</p>
<p>Average LSAT (2005-6 Administrations)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Harvard - 166</p></li>
<li><p>Yale - 165</p></li>
<li><p>Stanford - 164</p></li>
<li><p>MIT - 164</p></li>
<li><p>Duke - 164</p></li>
<li><p>Princeton - 163</p></li>
<li><p>Columbia - 163</p></li>
<li><p>Dartmouth - 163</p></li>
<li><p>Pomona - 163</p></li>
<li><p>Williams - 163</p></li>
<li><p>Amherst - 163</p></li>
<li><p>Brown - 162</p></li>
<li><p>UPenn - 162</p></li>
<li><p>Chicago - 161</p></li>
<li><p>Cornell - 161</p></li>
<li><p>Claremont McKenna College - 161</p></li>
<li><p>Rice - 161</p></li>
<li><p>Northwestern - 160</p></li>
<li><p>Georgetown - 160</p></li>
<li><p>Wesleyan - 160</p></li>
<li><p>Brandeis - 159</p></li>
<li><p>Grinnell - 159</p></li>
<li><p>Notre Dame - 159</p></li>
<li><p>Virginia - 159</p></li>
<li><p>William & Mary - 159</p></li>
<li><p>Vanderbilt - 158</p></li>
<li><p>Michigan - 158</p></li>
<li><p>McGill - 158</p></li>
<li><p>Macalester - 158</p></li>
<li><p>Emory - 158</p></li>
<li><p>BYU – 158</p></li>
<li><p>NYU - 158/155</p></li>
<li><p>Kenyon College - 158</p></li>
<li><p>UC-Berkeley – 158</p></li>
<li><p>Tufts - 158</p></li>
<li><p>Connecticut College - 158</p></li>
<li><p>Oberlin - 158</p></li>
<li><p>Davidson - 158 (in 2000)</p></li>
<li><p>UCLA - 157</p></li>
<li><p>UC-San Diego - 157</p></li>
<li><p>Wake Forest - 157</p></li>
<li><p>USC - 156</p></li>
<li><p>UMass-Amherst - 156</p></li>
<li><p>Smith – 156</p></li>
<li><p>Texas - 156</p></li>
<li><p>Trinity (TX) - 156</p></li>
<li><p>Wisconsin-Madison - 156</p></li>
<li><p>Boston University – 155</p></li>
<li><p>Lehigh - 155</p></li>
<li><p>University of Dallas - 155</p></li>
<li><p>Washington - 155</p></li>
<li><p>Boston College - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Florida - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Georgia - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Miami (OH) - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Missouri - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Southern Methodist - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Texas A&M - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Utah - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Western Washington Univ. - 154</p></li>
<li><p>Oklahoma - 153</p></li>
<li><p>Boston University - 153</p></li>
<li><p>Nebraska-Lincoln - 153</p></li>
<li><p>Minnesota-Twin Cities - 153</p></li>
<li><p>Butler Univ. (IN) - 153</p></li>
<li><p>UMD - 153/147</p></li>
<li><p>Montana State Univ. - 153</p></li>
<li><p>Utah State - 153</p></li>
<li><p>American - 153</p></li>
<li><p>Arizona - 152</p></li>
<li><p>Kentucky - 152</p></li>
<li><p>Hiram (OH) - 152</p></li>
<li><p>Pittsburgh - 152</p></li>
<li><p>St. Louis University – 152</p></li>
<li><p>Kansas State University - 152</p></li>
<li><p>Penn State - 152</p></li>
<li><p>Syracuse – 152/150</p></li>
<li><p>UConn - 151</p></li>
<li><p>Wisconsin-Milwaukee - 151
16, Loyola Marymount - 151</p></li>
<li><p>UMinn-Duluth - 151</p></li>
<li><p>University of North Florida - 151</p></li>
<li><p>Florida State – 150</p></li>
<li><p>Northeastern - 150</p></li>
<li><p>Ole Miss - 150</p></li>
<li><p>Wyoming - 150</p></li>
<li><p>Washington State - 150</p></li>
<li><p>DePaul - 149</p></li>
<li><p>Georgia State - 148</p></li>
<li><p>Stockton - 148</p></li>
<li><p>Temple – 148/146</p></li>
<li><p>University of New Orleans - 148</p></li>
<li><p>Middle Tennessee State - 147</p></li>
<li><p>City University of New York - 145</p></li>
<li><p>Howard - 145</p></li>
<li><p>West Georgia – 145</p></li>
<li><p>John Jay - 142</p></li>
</ol>
<p>A little quick work on Excel can give us standard deviations below the mean for the index described above:</p>
<p>(Negative numbers are grade deflated and positive numbers are inflated.)
MIT -2.646136
Penn -1.486136
Carnegie Mellon Univ. -1.446136
Johns Hopkins -1.246136
Swarthmore -1.246136
UC Irvine -1.046136
Dartmouth -1.046136
Rutgers College -1.006136
William and Mary -1.006136
Princeton University -0.966136
Univ. of Chicago -0.966136
Univ. of Michigan -0.966136
Harvard University -0.926136
Williams College -0.886136
Princeton -0.806136
Yale -0.766136
Carleton College -0.686136
Cornell -0.686136
Duke University -0.686136
Trinity College CT -0.686136
Stanford -0.646136
UC - Berkeley -0.646136
Haverford College -0.646136
Oberlin College -0.646136
Pomona -0.646136
Pace Univ. -0.566136
Univ. of Virginia -0.526136
Middlebury College -0.506136
Rice -0.446136
Northwestern University -0.406136
Emory -0.406136
Columbia Univ. - Columbia College -0.326136
Univ. of Texas -0.286136
Georgetown University -0.246136
Boston University -0.206136
Middlebury -0.206136
UC - San Diego -0.206136
Univ. of Michigan - Ann Arbor -0.206136
Brown -0.166136
Emory -0.166136
Univ. of Notre Dame -0.166136
Notre Dame -0.126136
Bryn Mawr College -0.046136
Purdue University -0.046136
Tufts University -0.006136
Univ. of Rochester 0.033864
Tufts 0.073864
Univ. of California - Los Angeles 0.073864
Brandeis University 0.113864
Michigan State Univ. 0.153864
UCLA 0.153864
Univ. of Southern California 0.193864
Villanova University 0.353864
Baylor Univ. 0.353864
Univ. of Massachusetts - Amherst 0.353864
Boston College 0.373864
St. John's Univ.-Jamaica 2.353864
Temple University 2.353864
Univ. of North Texas 2.753864
Jackson State University 3.153864</p>
<p>For those looking for a more mathematical explanation (I have been PMed about this):</p>
<p>Raw calculation:
The link posted by sreis has GPA and LSAT data for all applicants from a variety of schools. Under the formula described above:
[GPA-(LSAT-100)/20], each school was given a "raw" score.</p>
<p>Mean adjustment:
I then computed the mean (which turned out to be approximately .44) and subtracted that from each of the schools, so that the middlemost schools would get a 0, schools that were more deflated got negative numbers, and schools that were more inflated got positive numbers. (Previously, most schools had been positive.)</p>
<p>SD adjustment:
Finally, in order to get some idea of how important the variation was, I calculated the standard deviation, which turned out to be approximately .25. By multiplying all the values by 4, I converted that SD into 1. What this means is that you can instantly look at the index and see how inflated or deflated a school is relative to the mean in terms of standard deviations.</p>
<p>MIT is 2.6 "standard deviations" below the mean for grade indexing by this standard, etc.</p>
<p>What this is not:
This does NOT represent any kind of grade correction. For example, it does NOT tell you how much you should add to your GPA to see what you would have gotten had you attended MIT, or Jackson State University, or whatnot. (The raw scores would have been useful for that purpose, and you can reproduce that calculation very easily using the website.)</p>
<p>Wow guys, nice work.</p>
<p>Um, the raw score for Wesleyan should be 161</p>
<p>On 12/20/06 sreis said:
"
7. Northwestern - 160
7. Georgetown - 160
7. Wesleyan - 160
"</p>
<p>for what year?</p>
<p>sez here, 2001:
<a href="http://www.jd2b.com/jdbundergradinfo.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.jd2b.com/jdbundergradinfo.php</a></p>
<p>O, and the LSAC GPA does not count 2 credit classes "half as much" as 4 credit classes - credit hours do NOT weigh on LSAC GPA whatsoever.</p>
<p>
[quote]
credit hours do NOT weigh on LSAC GPA whatsoever.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes they do. There is no way an A from 3 hours is equivalent to an A from 2 hours for LSAC. </p>
<p>I know this because I've been running an LSAC calculator in Microsoft Excel: To determine your GPA, you need to multiply the GPA for the grade of a course (4.0 if A, 3.67 if A-, 3.33 if B+, and so forth) with the number of hours of the course for which that grade was earned. For instance, an A in a 3 hour course would be (3x4), which equals 12. An A- in a 2 hour course would be (3.67x2). Sum the results and divide it by the total number of hours you've completed, and that should be your GPA. If I'm not mistaken, then, the hours one takes definitely does factor in one's LSAC GPA.</p>
<p>nspeds: Nowhere on the LSAC site nor on the unofficial LSAC GPA calculator does it say that. The calculator only asks for grades, not grades and semester hours. The LSAC's "computing GPA" page only says that your number of credit hours will be reported, not that it in any way impacts your GPA.</p>
<p>Huh? </p>
<p><a href="http://www.lawpad.com/gpa_calculator/%5B/url%5D">http://www.lawpad.com/gpa_calculator/</a></p>
<p>There is a column for you to input your hours/credits.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In calculating a GPA, LSAC uses the
grades and credits for every course that can
be converted to the 4.0 scale, although the
institution issuing the transcript may
exclude some of the courses from its own
calculations. Courses excluded from the
LSDAS summary are not included in the
GPA calculation.
[/quote]
<p>This stupidity must stop.</p>
<p>Edit: Also, quarter-hours are weighed differently. So you might want to look into that.</p>
<p>ok i guess you didn't see what i was saying</p>
<p>"sez here, 2001:"</p>
<p>from the post</p>
<p>"Average LSAT (2005-6 Administrations)"</p>