The smart people that underachieved -- what did you do? Forum

[DerangedGoose]

I'd personally do it because that 3.2 in a major that really isn't that great is ugly I have friends who delayed graduation to boost their GPA and complete another major that was more useful.

If you can boost your GPA above a 3.0 it's worth it. It will be obvious, but the schools won't care because all that matters to them is your LSAC GPA.

Interesting. Wont they realize that all of the extra classes are non-major electives? And my community college GPA was around the same, so my LSAC gpa will be weighed down by that anyway. So if I'm taking extra, non-major classes, and all of them will be put into the same LSAC blender, shouldnt I at least graduate the UC to avoid paying extra for those classes?

[bk1]

Interesting. Wont they realize that all of the extra classes are non-major electives? And my community college GPA was around the same, so my LSAC gpa will be weighed down by that anyway. So if I'm taking extra, non-major classes, and all of them will be put into the same LSAC blender, shouldnt I at least graduate the UC to avoid paying extra for those classes?

They will realize. They probably won't care that much (for whatever weird reason it is they have a hard on for a 3.0 being drastically better than a 2.9).

[NYC Law]

Interesting. Wont they realize that all of the extra classes are non-major electives? And my community college GPA was around the same, so my LSAC gpa will be weighed down by that anyway. So if I'm taking extra, non-major classes, and all of them will be put into the same LSAC blender, shouldnt I at least graduate the UC to avoid paying extra for those classes?

Don't graduate, then the extra classes won't count.

[stylishlaw]

Retaking doesn't mean that much when your GPA is low. If you score 169+, there is little value to retaking since HYSCCN will always be out.

[DerangedGoose]

Don't graduate, then the extra classes won't count.

So anything before graduation, including community college, goes into LSAC, but anything after does not? Is the extra 5-6 grand for the GPA boost really worth it? If I were to ask an admissions counselor, would they say the same thing?

They will realize. They probably won't care that much (for whatever weird reason it is they have a hard on for a 3.0 being drastically better than a 2.9).

I already have >3.0, but will they care if the extra classes are community college or university?

Forum search "managamy." You'll find your situations nearly identical.

no results. banned user?

[bjsesq]

no results. banned user?

Oh, shit, he might have had a name change. Was it cardinal rules? Help me out, everyone.

[NYC Law]

So anything before graduation, including community college, goes into LSAC, but anything after does not? Is the extra 5-6 grand for the GPA boost really worth it? If I were to ask an admissions counselor, would they say the same thing?

Probably not, unless we're talking a .3+ bump.

Either way it will be a long shot to get a decent Cali school since they love high GPAs. Are you sure you want to be there? There are some solid Midwest/East Coast schools that would love to have you if you kill the LSAT.

no results. banned user?

Oh, shit, he might have had a name change. Was it cardinal rules? Help me out, everyone.

Yeah it is cardinal rules.

[DerangedGoose]

Either way it will be a long shot to get a decent Cali school since they love high GPAs. Are you sure you want to be there? There are some solid Midwest/East Coast schools that would love to have you if you kill the LSAT.

I lived in Jersey City, NJ, for 8 years before we moved out west. I love CA with the rabid fervor only a convert could have. The east coast has its charms, but I more or less planned on ending up in CA, so I thought it best to study in the state where I planned to take the bar and practice. Im not averse to spending a couple years elsewhere, however. Perhaps that is in my cards. Austin is looking promising, as they are open to more numerologically diverse applicants and their ED is non-binding...

[bk1]

I already have >3.0, but will they care if the extra classes are community college or university?

My bad, I was confusing you with someone else who had a low GPA. I get the feeling they probably won't care that much.

[stylishlaw]

UTexas has a 3.5 GPA floor. They'll probably toss out your application unless you score like 176+ on LSAT

[splitmuch]

UTexas has a 3.5 GPA floor. They'll probably toss out your application unless you score like 176+ on LSAT

If my experience is any guide, they'll toss it out even with 176+

[NYC Law]

Retaking doesn't mean that much when your GPA is low. If you score 169+, there is little value to retaking since HYSCCN will always be out.

What are you even talking about?

[Patriot1208]

Ya, it kind of works like 3.0 is a cut off for some schools, 3.5 is a cutoff for a lot of schools, then 3.7 is the cut off for HYS

[Stringer Bell]

UTexas has a 3.5 GPA floor. They'll probably toss out your application unless you score like 176+ on LSAT

If my experience is any guide, they'll toss it out even with 176+

Are you a TX resident?

[bjsesq]

Retaking doesn't mean that much when your GPA is low. If you score 169+, there is little value to retaking since HYSCCN will always be out.

What are you even talking about?

Looks like GPA and LSAT scores from here.

[splitmuch]

UTexas has a 3.5 GPA floor. They'll probably toss out your application unless you score like 176+ on LSAT

If my experience is any guide, they'll toss it out even with 176+

Are you a TX resident?

No...OP isn't either, though, right? UT actually gave me a crazy quick turn around time, too. It was about 3 weeks from submission until I got the reject letter, and I applied late. UCLA actually put me on the WL and I'm not a Cali resident so maybe a 176+ can make up for the GPA there.

[DerangedGoose]

My friends dad went to southwestern in the 60s and grew to run the largest PI law firm in LA at the time. He told me that because he didnt have the scores to get into a better school, he went to a lower tier school and instead graduated with the top of his class. To what extent is this a viable alternative?

[bk1]

My friends dad went to southwestern in the 60s and grew to run the largest PI law firm in LA at the time. He told me that because he didnt have the scores to get into a better school, he went to a lower tier school and instead graduated with the top of his class. To what extent is this a viable alternative?

It's not a viable alternative at all because you can't guarantee you will get good grades even at a worse school.

[JoeFish]

My friends dad went to southwestern in the 60s and grew to run the largest PI law firm in LA at the time. He told me that because he didnt have the scores to get into a better school, he went to a lower tier school and instead graduated with the top of his class. To what extent is this a viable alternative?

It's not a viable alternative at all because you can't guarantee you will get good grades even at a worse school.

And I'd be willing to be that it's even harder to do something like this today. Unless you know someone and have crazy connections.

[longhornlaw]

These are my favorite threads.

*Subtle brag*
*Excuse*
*Subtle Brag*
*Excuse*
*Subtle Brag*
*Why I will pwn law school*
*Subtle brag*

The explainabrag.

[NYC Law]

My friends dad went to southwestern in the 60s and grew to run the largest PI law firm in LA at the time. He told me that because he didnt have the scores to get into a better school, he went to a lower tier school and instead graduated with the top of his class. To what extent is this a viable alternative?

It's not a viable alternative at all because you can't guarantee you will get good grades even at a worse school.

It does happen though. There was just a #1 posting who went to a lower T1 instead of a T14 and did very well. I think it would be slightly easier at a lower ranked school, and some transfers have confirmed there are some differences in competition.

But yeah, TLS wisdom is that it's a stupid idea. It can very easily bite you in the ass if you find out you aren't great at law exams and end up doing miserably. The safest way to think about it is to go to a school where you wouldn't mind graduating at median.

[xyzbca]

My friends dad went to southwestern in the 60s and grew to run the largest PI law firm in LA at the time. He told me that because he didnt have the scores to get into a better school, he went to a lower tier school and instead graduated with the top of his class. To what extent is this a viable alternative?

It's not a viable alternative at all because you can't guarantee you will get good grades even at a worse school.

I dunno.... The OP is smart but lazy and promises he has his act together now....

[sunynp]

My friends dad went to southwestern in the 60s and grew to run the largest PI law firm in LA at the time. He told me that because he didnt have the scores to get into a better school, he went to a lower tier school and instead graduated with the top of his class. To what extent is this a viable alternative?

I love it when the reference to the friend of a family member who made good from a bad start gets trotted out. These are my favorite threads. You are really funny. Please keep going.

[DerangedGoose]

My friends dad went to southwestern in the 60s and grew to run the largest PI law firm in LA at the time. He told me that because he didnt have the scores to get into a better school, he went to a lower tier school and instead graduated with the top of his class. To what extent is this a viable alternative?

It's not a viable alternative at all because you can't guarantee you will get good grades even at a worse school.

At least grades are something I have control over. I can either do well or poorly on law exams, and I doubt the institution plays a large role in it( it probably comes down to individual professors). Assuming Im ready and capable to perform, does it make more sense for me to attend a lower ranked CA school and save money on in-state tuition and living expenses, than to leave the state for a higher ranked school? How big should the ranking gap be to justify leaving? And does a top-class graduate from Southwestern enjoy relatively similar opportunities as a mid to lower range graduate from a higher ranked institution?

[stylishlaw]

Retaking doesn't mean that much when your GPA is low. If you score 169+, there is little value to retaking since HYSCCN will always be out.

What are you even talking about?

He was talking about hypothetically killing the LSAT. I was trying to imply in a nice way that killing the LSAT doesn't mean much when you are a splitter with a low GPA. HYSCCNB will always be out. As is probably D. He has no work experience so N is out. So basically you are fighting for ED to MVP or RD to CG. Given these options, the difference between a ~170ish LSAT and a 176+ LSAT is much smaller than you would think. In cases like that I advise against delaying a cycle to improve the LSAT and just taking a T15-20 that gives you $.