UCLA LAw

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
tlabrum3
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:07 pm

UCLA LAw

Postby tlabrum3 » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:10 pm

gg
Last edited by tlabrum3 on Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

acrossthelake
Posts: 4431
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby acrossthelake » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:14 pm

As high as possible. So shoot for a 180.

law_noob
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 8:23 am

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby law_noob » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:14 pm

lawschoolnumbers.com

lawschoolpredictor.com

have fun

User avatar
lennonist
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 9:38 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby lennonist » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:15 pm

169+

acrossthelake
Posts: 4431
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby acrossthelake » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:17 pm

lennonist wrote:169+


169/3.4 admission is too optimisic.

The real answer here is that unless the OP has stellar softs, he/she is probably not getting in. West Coast law schools are, in general, very GPA-emphasis heavy in comparison to the rest of them. Stanford, UC-Berkeley, UCLA, and UW are all fairly unforgiving of low GPAs and tend to forgive not with high LSATs, but with good softs.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby bk1 » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:22 pm

I think you're a tad pessimistic, ATL. 3.4 is likely on the cusp of possibility at GPA-centric schools like Boalt/UCLA/UT/etc even without softs. I would say that an LSAT above median makes it possible though still likely a waitlist.

acrossthelake
Posts: 4431
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby acrossthelake » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:24 pm

bk1 wrote:I think you're a tad pessimistic, ATL. 3.4 is likely on the cusp of possibility at GPA-centric schools like Boalt/UCLA/UT/etc even without softs. I would say that an LSAT above median makes it possible though still likely a waitlist.


This is true. I should add that I think the most likely result is waitlist. (which, in my eyes, is almost the same as a rejection since most WL become rejections in the end). A very high LSAT would be a necessity for a shot, but wouldn't really save it, imo. There would have to be more.

ETA: I should also note that I'm in general a pessimistic person when it comes to admissions. I'm pessimistic about my own chances as well.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby bk1 » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:26 pm

acrossthelake wrote:
bk1 wrote:I think you're a tad pessimistic, ATL. 3.4 is likely on the cusp of possibility at GPA-centric schools like Boalt/UCLA/UT/etc even without softs. I would say that an LSAT above median makes it possible though still likely a waitlist.


This is true. I should add that I think the most likely result is waitlist. (which, in my eyes, is almost the same as a rejection since most WL become rejections in the end). A very high LSAT would be a necessity for a shot, but wouldn't really save it, imo. There would have to be more.


I think an out of the park LSAT could do it, mid 170's or better.

acrossthelake
Posts: 4431
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby acrossthelake » Wed Sep 29, 2010 2:27 pm

bk1 wrote:
acrossthelake wrote:
bk1 wrote:I think you're a tad pessimistic, ATL. 3.4 is likely on the cusp of possibility at GPA-centric schools like Boalt/UCLA/UT/etc even without softs. I would say that an LSAT above median makes it possible though still likely a waitlist.


This is true. I should add that I think the most likely result is waitlist. (which, in my eyes, is almost the same as a rejection since most WL become rejections in the end). A very high LSAT would be a necessity for a shot, but wouldn't really save it, imo. There would have to be more.


I think an out of the park LSAT could do it, mid 170's or better.


Small sample size, but it doesn't seem to help too much:

http://ucla.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/0910/

JJDancer
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby JJDancer » Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:47 pm

UCLA likes GPAs. If it was 3.5 I'd say you have a good chance with a 167. With a 3.4 I think you need 169/170.

3.4: Even with a 171+, that seems like WL country.

3.5/170+ seems like there's a chance.
Last edited by JJDancer on Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby Grizz » Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:48 pm

law_noob wrote:lawschoolnumbers.com

lawschoolpredictor.com

have fun


First post, and you're already TLSing like a veteran.

law_noob
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 8:23 am

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby law_noob » Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:56 pm

Thx! But I have been silently stalking TLS for some time now...

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby Hannibal » Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:59 pm

UT is splitter unfriendly? Boo.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby Grizz » Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:01 pm

Hannibal wrote:UT is splitter unfriendly? Boo.


Same with USC and Vandy.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby bk1 » Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:02 pm

Hannibal wrote:UT is splitter unfriendly? Boo.


Severely. Looks like sub-3.4's are fucked.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby Grizz » Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:04 pm

bk1 wrote:
Hannibal wrote:UT is splitter unfriendly? Boo.


Severely. Looks like sub-3.4's are fucked.


It's weird that there are several splitter-friendly T14 (UVA ED, NW ED, GULC PT ED) but no splitter schools ranked 15-18. Not until you hit WUSTL and the midwest schools. And Emory.

User avatar
adamdroog
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 1:56 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby adamdroog » Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:29 pm

I applied to UCLA January of last cycle with 3.38/174 and was waitlisted. I re-applied September 1st this cycle early decision. UCLA does not like low GPAs but hopefully ED will help me out. Apply as early as possible.

User avatar
fugitivejammer
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:34 am

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby fugitivejammer » Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:34 pm

I think u need a 171/172

JJDancer
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby JJDancer » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:59 pm

adamdroog wrote:I applied to UCLA January of last cycle with 3.38/174 and was waitlisted. I re-applied September 1st this cycle early decision. UCLA does not like low GPAs but hopefully ED will help me out. Apply as early as possible.


I'm just curious what you did after you were on the WL since you said it was your top choice.
Did you update anything in your file/send LOCI/visit etc?
Had you applied to USC as well? If so were you accepted?

User avatar
adamdroog
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 1:56 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby adamdroog » Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:59 pm

JJDancer wrote:
adamdroog wrote:I applied to UCLA January of last cycle with 3.38/174 and was waitlisted. I re-applied September 1st this cycle early decision. UCLA does not like low GPAs but hopefully ED will help me out. Apply as early as possible.


I'm just curious what you did after you were on the WL since you said it was your top choice.
Did you update anything in your file/send LOCI/visit etc?
Had you applied to USC as well? If so were you accepted?


While on the waitlist I visited the school and made it clear that UCLA was my top choice through a few e-mails. I did apply to USC and was rejected. I also applied to Loyola LA and NYU. Accepted with no money at Loyola and waitlisted at NYU. I have learned that being a splitter means unexpected results, especially applying as late as I did.

JJDancer
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby JJDancer » Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:17 pm

adamdroog wrote:While on the waitlist I visited the school and made it clear that UCLA was my top choice through a few e-mails. I did apply to USC and was rejected. I also applied to Loyola LA and NYU. Accepted with no money at Loyola and waitlisted at NYU. I have learned that being a splitter means unexpected results, especially applying as late as I did.


Thanks so much for sharing your experience. Good luck this cycle. even though UCLA is at the top of my list too

mst
Posts: 925
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:01 am

Re: UCLA LAw

Postby mst » Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:38 pm

To the original poster:

Seems like they waitlist basically everyone below 3.6 regardless of LSAT. Hard to say whether this is a yield protect move or simply a GPA thing. I think if you are SET on ucla you need to get mid 170's and ED. You have an OK shot with better schools with a mid 170's/3.4 gpa either way though, especially with work experience (Virginia or NW), so my bet is that UCLA is just yield protecting at that point. Hard to tell though.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: arthrod, tuesdayninja and 6 guests