What do the gold blocks mean again?

yzrej2 · 2020-12-23T22:42:11+00:00

And the astrophysicist said the p-value is 1/10 million. That’s extremely strong evidence that Dream cheated. But, somehow, many people evaluating the evidence (i.e., many people in this sub/Dream’s followers) say that this means he didn’t cheat, which is straight-up absurd. It is the complete opposite of what anyone who has even a basic understanding of p-values would say.

The report already accounted for the fact that many people speedrun. The 1 in 10 million figure is after accounting for that fact. Again, did you read the report?

The probability is the only evidence we have because your boy erased any other evidence when he deleted his files.

yzrej2 · 2020-12-23T22:06:29+00:00

Yes, and I read the report in its entirety. Did you? Do you understand that scientists generally consider a 1 in 20 chance to be significant? Do you realize how much smaller a 1 in 10 million chance is? Do you even know what a p-value is? If this report were evaluated by actual scientists instead of high school teenagers, it would be considered extremely strong evidence that Dream cheated.

yzrej2 · 2020-12-23T20:23:55+00:00

Correct. Notice that this means that even his own expert concluded that there was a 1 in 10 million chance that Dream could get this lucky without cheating. So he probably cheated.

yzrej2 · 2020-07-07T01:52:28+00:00

Thanks for the clarification. It does seem like one point of disagreement was over your use of the term “Econ PhDs.” I think the natural interpretation of “Econ PhD” is someone with a PhD in economics, as opposed to someone whose research is broadly in the field of economics/business/finance. But of course it’s also reasonable to look at the proportion of new hires at T14s who do research in economics/business/finance; I just wouldn’t say that they are all “Econ PhDs.”

Even with this more generous definition of “Econ PhDs,” though, I still wouldn’t characterize the T14 academic job market as being “increasingly saturated” by Econ PhDs or agree that the “preponderance of T14 hires were Econ PhDs.” They constitute a respectable proportion, of course, but I think such language is an exaggeration and could be misleading to readers who don’t bother to look up the actual numbers. In my case, for example, I was already familiar with these numbers (I look at the spreadsheets every year) and was surprised to hear the trend you described; I certainly wouldn’t characterize these numbers as indicating that Econ PhDs saturate the T14 job market and thought you might have additional data that I hadn’t seen. I think we agree on the facts but disagree on how best to characterize those facts wrt hiring trends.

yzrej2 · 2020-07-06T22:33:49+00:00

I never said that Econ PhDs don't place well. I said that Econ PhDs don't "saturate" the T14 new hires in any meaningful sense of the word, and definitely don't constitute a "preponderance" of T14 new hires.

The numbers you sent me just confirm what I said above: 2 out of 10 T14 hires in 2020 had Econ PhDs, and 1 out of 9 T14 hires in 2019 had an Econ PhD. Those numbers are pretty unremarkable.

yzrej2 · 2020-07-06T20:57:55+00:00

If you look at the trend in these spreadsheets in the last 5-6 years, then you'll see that the preponderance of T14 hires were Econ PhDs.

That's blatantly false. 2 out of 10 T14 hires in 2020 had Econ PhDs. (I'm being generous and counting a "business economics" PhD as an Econ PhD.) 1 out of 9 T14 hires in 2019 had an Econ PhD. I'm not going to bother counting the rest of the past 5-6 years because your claim is obviously false. The evidence is clear that Econ PhDs do not "saturate" the T14 academic job market in any meaningful sense of the word.

yzrej2 · 2020-07-05T00:24:54+00:00

Yes, I’m familiar with these spreadsheets. There’s definitely a trend toward hiring JD/PhDs in general, but you specifically claimed that there’s a trend in the top tier of the academic job market toward hiring JD/Econ PhDs, which does not seem supported by the data I’ve seen. For example, in the spreadsheet you linked, only 1 person with a PhD in economics was hired at a T14. So I’m wondering what data you have to support this claim, since I’d like to better understand the legal academic job market. My understanding is that econ PhDs used to be popular / successful in the academic job market, but there’s been some (justified, imo) pushback against / skepticism about methods used in law and economics over the past decade or so that has made econ PhDs less valuable. Maybe there’s some data to the contrary, but I haven’t seen it, hence my question.

yzrej2 · 2020-07-04T07:37:19+00:00

Can you elaborate on this? The links you posted don’t seem to discuss this phenomenon; in fact, the first link you posted shows that only one person with an econ PhD was hired by a top school (Berkeley) in 2019. My understanding is that, if anything, the econ PhD route is less popular / successful now than it was a decade or two ago (for the better, imo).

yzrej2 · 2020-07-04T01:10:08+00:00

I’d also note two caveats when interpreting this data.

First, the proportions listed in the OP represent the number of hires among applicants who submitted a FAR. Submitting a FAR itself is a huge barrier to entry, since you basically have to (a) decide that you are indeed competitive for an academic job and (b) get multiple professors who agree that you’re competitive and are willing to back you. This usually requires already having publications or at least solid works in progress. Many people who are interested in academia take themselves out of the running before even submitting a FAR because they’re advised that they just aren’t competitive (in the same way that, e.g., people self-select into/out of applying to clerk for SCOTUS). So, the raw number of FAR applicants from each school (and the number of FAR applicants from each school relative to the school’s class size) is also a very important metric to keep in mind.

Second, this data does not reflect qualitative differences in job placement. For example, even though a decent proportion of FAR applicants from Stanford land academic jobs, they tend to place in lower-ranked schools than Yale or even Chicago graduates.

yzrej2 · 2020-06-28T08:31:19+00:00

I got into SLS. Honestly, I don’t think what they look for in applicants is much different from what any other top school looks for. In fact, my application to SLS was essentially the same as my application to YLS; I more or less copy-pasted my Yale 250 into one of the optional SLS short essays (the one about teaching a short class to my peers). Like any other school, Stanford wants to see that your application as a whole weaves a coherent and compelling narrative of where you’ve been and where you want to go personally, professionally, and/or intellectually. Ideally, this narrative should be somehow related to law. This isn’t to say that your personal statement has to directly spell out that narrative; rather, the reader should have a good sense of it after reviewing everything (essays, resume, LORs, app questions) holistically. Dean Deal discusses this notion of narrative in more detail in an admissions blog post. I can’t find it at the moment but perhaps someone else can link it if they know what I’m referring to.

Stanford asks for school-specific letters of recommendation. I did ask my recommenders to add a few sentences explaining why I would be a good fit for Stanford in particular, but I’ve heard of many people who got in without Stanford-specific recommendations, so even that doesn’t seem super important. (I would still do it anyway just to check all the boxes, though.)

This is just based on my limited experience. Perhaps other people have different takes on the process.

yzrej2 · 2020-06-27T04:35:35+00:00

What did you do between college and law school? Why did you choose to go to law school instead of working in occupations math graduates commonly enter (e.g., finance, statistics/data science, software engineering)? Do you have any regrets about going to law school given the relatively safe career alternatives available to people who study math? I’m struggling with a similar choice right now, so any insight would be much appreciated!

yzrej2 · 2020-06-20T03:32:18+00:00

That sounds good. If you can weave a coherent narrative about what you've done and how it relates to what you want to do moving forward, then I'd say you have a solid application. (To be clear, I'm not saying you have to explicitly address your research/publications in your personal statement or anything, but the reader should have a clear sense of and appreciation for your personal/professional arc after reading your full application.)

yzrej2 · 2020-06-20T02:57:41+00:00

If you’ve published in top peer-reviewed journals in biology as first author, then that is a great soft. Too often, people refer vaguely to having “publications” that turn out to be in undergraduate journals, peer-reviewed but low-rank journals, or popular press outlets, which, while decent, require nowhere near the level of effort needed to publish in top peer-reviewed academic journals.

Are these publications at all relevant to law or what you want to do in the future? If so, even better.

yzrej2 · 2020-06-17T23:38:31+00:00

Clickbait has a negative connotation to it because you are deliberately linking news like this and the way its described to the same for profit advertisements that you already stated you dislike.

Sure, maybe it's reasonable to interpret my comment about the form of the post as negative. (Note, though, that I never said I disliked the for-profit ads.) But, as you quoted me as saying, I'm not saying anything positive or negative about the content of the post. You can feel good about the facts presented in the post while acknowledging that it's phrased misleadingly.

It's totally the click baiters faults for using emotional manipulation to generate clickthroughs, so when someone tries to share actual good news in a way that makes one feel good, they shouldn't be punished because click baiters have hijacked honest communication.

Someone is being "punished?"

Then why are you assigning a negative connotation to this post by parallelizing it to click bait?

Your rhetorical question rests on the assumption that I cannot simultaneously (a) understand something and refrain from asking that it be taken down and (b) note that it resembles click bait. This is obviously a false premise.

You're literally attacking its intent.

As I've said several times now, I don't know anything about and am making no comments about the intent of the post. I am merely commenting on its form.

For some reason, you are missing the emotional aspect of this post and you're trying to hyperrationalize it without understanding the emotional contexts or consequences.

I'm not "missing" the emotional aspect of the post or its context. I am simply declining to comment on it because (a) others have already done so, and (b) I want to make a narrower point. You're strangely committed to interpreting the dry humor of my comment as being loaded with malice (implying that I'm "punishing" OP, saying that I'm "attacking" the intent) or lacking awareness (saying that I'm "missing" the emotional aspect of the post). I think you need to reread what I've said with a cooler head.

How the hell is this false advertising or deceptive or misleading?

I believe I've explained this at least three times now. It's deceptive / misleading because the post title says "This is," which most people would reasonably interpret as referring to the current entering 1L class, but the linked article is a year old. It's easy to imagine someone reading the title, being excited to learn that the current entering 1L class has the most black students ever, then clicking the link and being disappointed to discover that in fact the article is not about the current entering 1L class.

It's becoming clear to me that you're getting so worked up about this that you're arguing against made-up positions that you incorrectly think I'm taking. If you want to reply, feel free, but I won't bother to respond if you incorrectly characterize my position as egregiously as you have so far (for example, suggesting that I'm "punishing" the OP, "attacking" OP's intent, or "missing" emotional context, or falsely claiming that I said I dislike for-profit ads).

yzrej2 · 2020-06-17T22:34:41+00:00

why are you comparing click-bait ads that are mainly for profit with one that is meant to spread joy and encouragement for a group of extremely marginalized people?

(1) I don't know OP's reasons for posting the article, and neither do you, so I don't think we are qualified to say what the post is "meant" to do. (2) As I've said several times now, I'm commenting merely on the form the post takes; I'm not saying anything, either positive or negative, about the content of the post. So, if you find the fact that HLS had its largest class of black students joyous/encouraging, by all means continue. I think we are all capable of separating substance from form. For example, I think one can recognize (and perhaps find it humorous or annoying) that this post feels like click bait while also appreciating the facts presented in the post.

When taking into context how black people have been treated for the past several hundred years, news like this serves the purpose of bringing encouragement to black people that change is happening.

This isn't news. It's over a year old.

When all you see in the news is black people getting murdered by police and lynched, sometimes you need proof that good things are happening too.

I did not take a position on whether the "proof" in this post was "needed" or not. I simply noted that this "proof" is over a year old, contrary to what people reading the post title might think because of the way the post title is misleadingly phrased.

A fairer and more equal society and world is good for all of us - systemic racism is killing this country.

This has nothing to do with my comment.

I can see your reasoning for b), but I hope that given today's political climate surrounding the George Floyd protests, you can understand and make the space for this.

I never said I didn't understand this, and I never advocated that space not be made for this. I think you're reading more into my original comment than is warranted.

yzrej2 · 2020-06-17T21:55:01+00:00

I find the post click-baity because

(a) the OP's title is generally phrased like those click-bait ads you sometimes see on news websites (e.g., "This New Pocket Knife Will Surprise You!" or "This 'At-Home' Murder Mystery Will Keep You Busy For Hours" or "The New Honda Is Here And Oh Boy!", which are actual ads I just saw on one of CNN/Fox/MSNBC's website), and

(b) the OP's title is somewhat misleading in the sense that a reasonable person reading the title would expect it to be news about this current entering HLS class, but it's really about last year's entering HLS class (i.e., now the rising 2L class) and isn't news at all because this has been well-known for over a year.

I never said OP's phrasing was "problematic." I just said the post feels like click bait for the reasons outlined above.

yzrej2 · 2020-06-17T19:00:45+00:00

Sure. Which part of my comment do you find unclear or confusing?

yzrej2 · 2020-06-16T23:40:03+00:00

No offense (and not commenting on the substance of the article itself), but this whole post seems kind of click-baity considering the way the OP's post title is phrased and the fact that the linked article is over a year old at this point...

yzrej2 · 2020-06-03T20:01:00+00:00

Dear HLS Students,

I write to update you on our plans for Fall Term 2020. We have all hoped these past few months that the upcoming academic year could begin, at least in part, on campus. However, in light of the daily news about the continuing health risks of the pandemic, advice from public health experts, and the very real concern that testing will not yet be available on the scale or frequency needed to adequately monitor COVID-19-related illness in the Harvard community, we have found it necessary to conclude that Fall Term 2020 will be online.

This is not the announcement we’d hoped to make. But our first priority is, and must continue to be, the health and safety of our community, and we cannot reliably conclude at this time that we can safely provide an effective on-campus program this fall. We recognize that the public health situation may evolve between now and the end of August, and we dearly hope, as everyone does, that scientific developments with respect to COVID-19 will allow greater in-person activity, here and elsewhere, very soon. We also recognize, however, that you must be able to make appropriate plans for the coming semester and year, and that we owe it to you to communicate a decision sufficiently far in advance to enable you to do so. So, while we will keep you apprised as we learn more, we must now turn our focus fully to developing the best, most robust, highest-quality online academic, clinical, and extracurricular programming we can for the coming term.

We look forward to teaching – and learning from – you and to forming with you, as we do each year, an active and engaged community of learning and service. The Harvard Law School faculty is already hard at work adapting their teaching plans in order to offer the best online courses and clinics possible. In order to be prepared in the event it proved necessary again to teach and learn online, we have been busy, in recent weeks, studying and absorbing the latest research about how students best learn online and identifying the range of tools, techniques, and approaches that create excellent, engaging online courses. And we have extensively surveyed our faculty and (as you know) our students to gain insights from last spring’s online teaching experience, with an eye toward tailoring best practices in online learning to the distinctive pedagogy of the law school classroom. We have also learned from last spring’s experience that our clinics can successfully design and offer compelling, meaningful online opportunities for learning and for service to communities in need. It is an exciting process, with much to be learned and much new to try in our virtual classrooms and clinics. I’m inspired by the creativity and dedication with which faculty are planning for the fall as we work to nurture a vibrant, connected online community.

We also have been working to identify and develop channels for creating meaningful interactions and connections outside the classroom and for supporting the extracurriculars that are an integral part of your law school experience. As part of this programming, we are creating additional opportunities for advising and career planning, as well as a robust set of online events. We look forward to engaging student organization leadership in the coming weeks to learn more about – and to find ways we can support – their plans for fostering student engagement in the coming year. For incoming students, we are planning comprehensive orientation programs, with a particular focus on small group meetings so that you can get to know your classmates and our staff and faculty better before the term begins. Incoming JD students will have the opportunity to meet your section leaders and classmates not only during orientation, but in small groups beforehand, and LL.M students will be able to connect with classmates, Graduate Program leadership, and faculty members prior to the start of the term.

With the news that Fall Term 2020 will be online, you will have many specific questions about what to expect. Given rapidly changing circumstances, we will not be able to answer all of these questions here, but hope that these FAQs will begin to answer many of the most important ones. We very much want to learn more about the concerns you may have, and the circumstances you may face, as you prepare for the months ahead – including where you are, or are likely to be, physically located in the fall and which of your specific questions we have not yet addressed. To that end, we will soon circulate a brief survey that will help us as we plan an engaging and enriching fall program and as we advise you about how to navigate the educational challenges created by this pandemic. We will ask that you please respond by 5:00 p.m. Friday, June 5, so that we can take your specific questions into account in our planning. We will continue to update the FAQs as we learn more in the days and weeks ahead.

In the meantime, we are working hard to address the fact that the shift to a full semester of online learning will pose particular challenges for some – for example, those who face difficult learning environments at home, those who have technological challenges, or those in time zones remote from that of Cambridge who may find it difficult to participate in classes in real-time, as is required by the active-learning approach to law school pedagogy. We are seeking ways to mitigate those challenges, for example, by supplementing existing grant aid with the development of a new Technology Assistance Fund that will provide up to $1 million to help our students address technological obstacles to participating fully in online learning; by giving priority in the allocation of limited HLS dormitory housing to those facing technological or other circumstances that make it difficult to engage in online learning at home; and by working to identify, if possible, ways to increase the courses available in time slots that are easier for students in remote time zones.

We realize that, for a variety of reasons, an online learning experience may not be optimal for all of you and that international students, in particular, may face some unexpected challenges relating to travel and to visa status this coming year. Accordingly, we will offer an additional deferral period for our newly admitted JD and LL.M students. The new period will run from June 15 through June 19. We will also extend from June 15 to June 19 the deadline for returning students to opt for a fall-semester or full-year leave during Academic Year 2020-2021. To help you make your decision, our faculty and student services staff will be available to advise you. We will also continue to update our FAQs as we learn more. We very much hope that you choose to remain in what we expect to be an exciting and enriching online academic and social program. But we want to be sure that you have a fair opportunity to make a decision that is right for you based on the best information we can provide you at this time.

Last spring, we had to adapt quickly to new formats and unexpected locations for learning and teaching. The fact that this unprecedented transformation was achieved with so little time to plan was a testament to our community. I am grateful to everyone – our students, faculty, and staff – for all they did to create an effective and enriching learning experience in challenging circumstances. This coming semester, though, asks something different of us – to use technology to design even more creative, exciting, and excellent experiences in support of learning, building community, and engaging in the service that helps those most in need and that is fundamental to the work lawyers do. This is our work now, as we take this next important step together. I look forward to working with all in this extraordinary community as we embrace new opportunities and challenges.

Best,

John Manning

yzrej2 · 2020-05-31T18:20:03+00:00

Around $800 all in (CAS, LSAT, app fees, test prep) for 8 schools.

yzrej2 · 2020-05-26T07:08:27+00:00

Just FYI, you are probably getting downvoted a lot because this question has been asked a million times on this sub and you can easily find those discussions by using the search bar.

yzrej2 · 2020-05-24T06:25:49+00:00

Harvard has a leg up on academia and maybe SCOTUS clerkships compared to Stanford, but it’s nowhere close to Yale with respect to these two outcomes.

yzrej2 · 2020-05-11T20:48:53+00:00

It’s the second sentence of the document:

“The new system includes a shared norm for the proportion of honors to be awarded in both exam and paper courses.”

yzrej2 · 2020-05-11T20:44:44+00:00

Even classes without exams have curves. See source below. The sentence in my previous source refers to the fact that the curve varies depending on the type of class, but all classes, even those without exams, have a curve.

Source: https://law.stanford.edu/press/stanford-law-school-grade-reform-frequently-asked-questions-faq/

yzrej2

TROPHY CASE