Did I waste away four hard years? Forum

[JazzOne]

Low blow man, low blow. You go and try to find five star recruits who want to sign away five years of their life after college to fight in Afghanistan while being locked down like a six year old while in college. I'd say they're doing the best they can with what they've got.

Ya, I get all that. I just don't like the whole "we work harder than everyone else" mentality. Mostly because it's not true.

At any rate, I did not intend to offend anyone. I just wanted to agree with the other posters that OP was coming off badly here. I am the son of a Marine officer, and I thought your analysis of the military culture was spot on.

[midwest17]

3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

150% agree. As someone who went to a Carnegie Mellon/Gerogia Tech/Rice/Cal Tech/MIT, I find it so damn irritating when I hear about some bro who went to a state university or no-name school, ended up with a 3.7 and multiple acceptance in the T14 w ease. At these tech schools, we are forced to take loads of Programming and Science courses that wreck our GPA. Hell, getting a 3.4+ at a reputable school is more respectable than a 3.8 in a joke major at a unviersity outside the top30.

Get over yourself.

[wiz]

3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

150% agree. As someone who went to a Carnegie Mellon/Gerogia Tech/Rice/Cal Tech/MIT, I find it so damn irritating when I hear about some bro who went to a state university or no-name school, ended up with a 3.7 and multiple acceptance in the T14 w ease. At these tech schools, we are forced to take loads of Programming and Science courses that wreck our GPA. Hell, getting a 3.4+ at a reputable school is more respectable than a 3.8 in a joke major at a unviersity outside the top30.

Get over yourself.

Lol at grouping these schools together.

[splitcity]

3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

150% agree. As someone who went to a Carnegie Mellon/Gerogia Tech/Rice/Cal Tech/MIT, I find it so damn irritating when I hear about some bro who went to a state university or no-name school, ended up with a 3.7 and multiple acceptance in the T14 w ease. At these tech schools, we are forced to take loads of Programming and Science courses that wreck our GPA. Hell, getting a 3.4+ at a reputable school is more respectable than a 3.8 in a joke major at a unviersity outside the top30.

Sounds like you're bitter because you went to a tech school thinking you were a genius tech geek but were severely outperformed by your classmates and now you can't get that job at google because those programming classes "wrecked" your gpa so you're deciding to go to law school instead and you're taking out your anger and disappointment at applicants that studied in the humanities from the beginning simply because they're more qualified than you are.

[AllTheLawz]

You're making the military sound weak.

Personal responsibility.
Overcoming adversity.

Keeping your room squared away, waking up at 0630, "playing a sport 4x a week", and not being able to cheat? waaaaah. Cry me a river.

This. A 2.7 is pretty terrible regardless of whatever you think about how hard your academic work was compared to other schools (hint, it wasn't that hard).

[jordan15]

3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

150% agree. As someone who went to a Carnegie Mellon/Gerogia Tech/Rice/Cal Tech/MIT, I find it so damn irritating when I hear about some bro who went to a state university or no-name school, ended up with a 3.7 and multiple acceptance in the T14 w ease. At these tech schools, we are forced to take loads of Programming and Science courses that wreck our GPA. Hell, getting a 3.4+ at a reputable school is more respectable than a 3.8 in a joke major at a unviersity outside the top30.

Sounds like you're bitter because you went to a tech school thinking you were a genius tech geek but were severely outperformed by your classmates and now you can't get that job at google because those programming classes "wrecked" your gpa so you're deciding to go to law school instead and you're taking out your anger and disappointment at applicants that studied in the humanities from the beginning simply because they're more qualified than you are.

+1. Also lol @ the idea that top30 is "reputable" and outside isn't. I've taken classes at a community college that are graded more harshly than the classes at a top school with strict grade deflation.

Lots of the top schools inflate their grades anyway. But if you're really so much more superior than everyone in a joke major then you should get that 180 easily and your GPA won't matter.

[Kevinlomax]

I was not trying to come off as a jerk, simply venting my frustration sorry if I offended anyone.

However, arguing that all majors/ schools require the same amount of work of their students is laughable...


My best friend goes to a local state school and is a journalism major. He tells me bluntly that he barely studies, he is off from class on Fridays, attends maybe 25% of his lectures and currently has a 3.5 GPA. No he is not a genius either, from what he tells me this is the Norm.


I understand that this is how the law school application works and I will work to the best of my ability in the system, but I still think the admissions process is slightly flawed.

[Void]

I understand that this is how the law school application works and I will work to the best of my ability in the system, but I still think the admissions process is slightly flawed.

Out of curiosity, why do you think the system would be improved if GPAs were somehow weighted more comparatively? What benefit to the law schools? In other words, what would be better about a system that gave preference to "harder" majors from "better" schools (assuming you could somehow quantify these)?

[xRON MEXiCOx]

3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

150% agree. As someone who went to a Carnegie Mellon/Gerogia Tech/Rice/Cal Tech/MIT, I find it so damn irritating when I hear about some bro who went to a state university or no-name school, ended up with a 3.7 and multiple acceptance in the T14 w ease. At these tech schools, we are forced to take loads of Programming and Science courses that wreck our GPA. Hell, getting a 3.4+ at a reputable school is more respectable than a 3.8 in a joke major at a unviersity outside the top30.

WTF type of school grouping is this?

[redsox]

WTF type of school grouping is this?

One that is supposed to make Georgia Tech look good.

[Balthy]

I was not trying to come off as a jerk, simply venting my frustration sorry if I offended anyone.

However, arguing that all majors/ schools require the same amount of work of their students is laughable...


My best friend goes to a local state school and is a journalism major. He tells me bluntly that he barely studies, he is off from class on Fridays, attends maybe 25% of his lectures and currently has a 3.5 .

No one is saying that all all majors/schools are the same. It's just not so clear that there's a correlation between rank/prestige and difficulty. You're believing that because it makes you feel better. Your friend's courses may not be representative of all state school degree plans.

[Kevinlomax]

I understand that this is how the law school application works and I will work to the best of my ability in the system, but I still think the admissions process is slightly flawed.

Out of curiosity, why do you think the system would be improved if GPAs were somehow weighted more comparatively? What benefit to the law schools? In other words, what would be better about a system that gave preference to "harder" majors from "better" schools (assuming you could somehow quantify these)?

Success in a rigorous academic environment such as a difficult major or school, should illustrate work ethic, motivation, and overall the ability to be successful both in law school and as a lawyer

Why would (the best, don't forget we're speaking about the best) schools care about scores, but not intelligence and ability and motivation to do the work in law school? (Pause for a moment and recognize the absurdity of that proposition.) ---- stolen from another thread

[redsox]

No one is saying that all all majors/schools are the same. It's just not so clear that there's a correlation between rank/prestige and difficulty. You're believing that because it makes you feel better. Your friend's courses may not be representative of all state school degree plans.

The way to handle different schools would probably be to gather data on every school's mean GPA/standard deviation, use SAT scores as a proxy for student quality, and then weight each student's z-score by student quality in their university/major.

[SemperLegal]

Success in a rigorous academic environment such as a difficult major or school, should illustrate work ethic, motivation, and overall the ability to be successful both in law school and as a lawyer

Why would (the best, don't forget we're speaking about the best) schools care about scores, but not intelligence and ability and motivation to do the work in law school? (Pause for a moment and recognize the absurdity of that proposition.) ---- stolen from another thread

Because they want to be ranked highly so they can attract more applicants in a dwindling market.

[Void]

I understand that this is how the law school application works and I will work to the best of my ability in the system, but I still think the admissions process is slightly flawed.

Out of curiosity, why do you think the system would be improved if GPAs were somehow weighted more comparatively? What benefit to the law schools? In other words, what would be better about a system that gave preference to "harder" majors from "better" schools (assuming you could somehow quantify these)?

Success in a rigorous academic environment such as a difficult major or school, should illustrate work ethic, motivation, and overall the ability to be successful both in law school and as a lawyer

Why would (the best, don't forget we're speaking about the best) schools care about scores, but not intelligence and ability and motivation to do the work in law school? (Pause for a moment and recognize the absurdity of that proposition.) ---- stolen from another thread

Maybe success at a difficult major indicates success in law school, but it doesn't necessarily correlate to success on the LSAT, which of course is a test exclusively designed to measure potential for success in law school:

http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... rgrad.html

Note that philosophy/religion, international relations, Government/Service, Anthropology/Geography, History, and English are all in the top 10, despite typically being regarded as joke majors- especially compared to STEM studies. Also note that engineering is not on this list.

Also, why should law schools accept students based upon their ability to perform well in law school? Because they want to produce successful alumni in order to be perceived as a good law school, right? And how do law schools improve public perception about their caliber? USNWR rank. So until "number of awesome, hardworking, and smart attorneys in alumni base" becomes a ranking criteria, schools won't be very motivated to recruit students holistically.

[Ramius]

I understand that this is how the law school application works and I will work to the best of my ability in the system, but I still think the admissions process is slightly flawed.

Out of curiosity, why do you think the system would be improved if GPAs were somehow weighted more comparatively? What benefit to the law schools? In other words, what would be better about a system that gave preference to "harder" majors from "better" schools (assuming you could somehow quantify these)?

Success in a rigorous academic environment such as a difficult major or school, should illustrate work ethic, motivation, and overall the ability to be successful both in law school and as a lawyer

Why would (the best, don't forget we're speaking about the best) schools care about scores, but not intelligence and ability and motivation to do the work in law school? (Pause for a moment and recognize the absurdity of that proposition.) ---- stolen from another thread

Your school doesn't work on a forced curve, people did get 4.0s across most majors and others performed above pretty much all top law school GPA medians, so while your claim is somewhat valid that success at a top school should be regarded well, it doesn't change the fact that you weren't a top performer while at West Point. In fact, you were below average. So even if they weighted your GPA up from a 2.7 to, say, a 3.0, do you think it would make any difference in your outcomes? Frankly, you're delusional if you think so.

I firmly believe the service academies are as academically rigorous as most of the elite colleges and universities across the country, but that wouldn't change the fact that your GPA was subpar. Learn to live with it, it's never going to change.

[TheJanitor6203]

Hi Mike and Karen,

To what degree is there extra consideration for the difficulty of one's school/major, especially at the top schools that tend to have somewhat rigid GPA floors? A 3.55 is considered summa cum laude (top 10%) at my dedicated engineering school, whereas I fully understand that the same 3.55 might be considered below average, especially when A+ grades are given, at some universities. I'm just pretty worried that my decision to get an electrical engineering degree at a school known for grade deflation, albeit one that provides a great education, will penalize me at top tier law schools.

Thanks so much!

Huey,
There are a number of factors that can mitigate a lower GPA, including a difficult major, attending a school with grade deflation, having a rough start and an upward trend. It is often easy for admissions offices to see these things. The US Military Academies are a great example of tough grading and Princeton is an example of a school that took a stand against grade inflation. If your school has enough people applying to law school, your CAS report will let the schools know where you stand in relation to other applicants, otherwise, you can figure out a way to make sure the school knows that a 3.55 is in the top 10%.
And, fwiw, a 3.55 is not the floor at all top schools. It really depends on the circumstances behind that number and the other factors in your application.

Hope that is helpful!
Cheers,
Karen

[Tiago Splitter]

Success in a rigorous academic environment such as a difficult major or school, should illustrate work ethic, motivation, and overall the ability to be successful both in law school and as a lawyer

So what would a lack of success in that environment indicate? Because you clearly didn't succeed.

[wiz]

3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

150% agree. As someone who went to a Carnegie Mellon/Gerogia Tech/Rice/Cal Tech/MIT, I find it so damn irritating when I hear about some bro who went to a state university or no-name school, ended up with a 3.7 and multiple acceptance in the T14 w ease. At these tech schools, we are forced to take loads of Programming and Science courses that wreck our GPA. Hell, getting a 3.4+ at a reputable school is more respectable than a 3.8 in a joke major at a unviersity outside the top30.

WTF type of school grouping is this?

As someone who went to Princeton/Cornell/Cooley/Harvard/University of Phoenix, I approve of this school grouping.

[wiz]

Success in a rigorous academic environment such as a difficult major or school, should illustrate work ethic, motivation, and overall the ability to be successful both in law school and as a lawyer

So what would a lack of success in that environment indicate? Because you clearly didn't succeed.

That he has moral integrity because he didn't cheat.

[DrStudMuffin]

I am currently in a dilemma and hopefully the ever cheerful TLS crowd can help me out.

Brief Bio:

I am a West Point Graduate, was a platoon leader in the Army, did a deployment to Afghanistan and was elected Secretary of my Class at school. I have a total of four years in the military.

2.7/ 170 (practice tests)

I am leaving the Army and want to attend law school, however after reading many posts on this board it seems I do not have a shot at a decent law school (T14) because of my GPA.

At West Point, the core curriculum was heavily Engineering based and as my GPA reflects, I am not the greatest Math and Science student. Besides the fact I was forced to take so many engineering classes, we also had to be up at 630 am, keep our rooms clean for inspection, play a sport 4x a week, take military classes, have mandatory military training on Saturday, an honor code to prevent cheating, drug tests so no adderall etc.

I had many friends who went to their local state school and barely attended class, majored in Communications and had gpa of 3.7+ ... with a few months of studying on the LSAT they could easily get into a T14.

The questions I have are:

1. In your opinion, should I even wasted my time applying to a T14 with those numbers, secondly will i receive any kind of gpa bump due to the difficulty level of the school and classes attended?

Will my application just get thrown out once the low GPA is discovered?


Thanks so much for the help everyone. I do not mean to make it sound as if I am whining because I am sure alot of other people share my frustration ( ivy league grads, engineering majors etc.)

A 2.7 from West Point is still not impressive. Even a modest bump from adcomms wouldn't do you much good.

Bear in mind that all West Point students go through the extraneous stuff you mention. So while it certainly sucks, it's not like you were more disadvantaged than your peers or anything.

[Ramius]

To get this thread back on track...

OP, you need to do whatever it takes to kill the LSAT, apply with the most polished app you can put together and let the Admissions Committees decide. You may be out at some of the top schools, but with a strong LSAT you won't be out at all of them. Apply and see what happens.

[midwest17]

I was not trying to come off as a jerk, simply venting my frustration sorry if I offended anyone.

However, arguing that all majors/ schools require the same amount of work of their students is laughable...

My best friend goes to a local state school and is a journalism major. He tells me bluntly that he barely studies, he is off from class on Fridays, attends maybe 25% of his lectures and currently has a 3.5 GPA. No he is not a genius either, from what he tells me this is the Norm.

I understand that this is how the law school application works and I will work to the best of my ability in the system, but I still think the admissions process is slightly flawed.

No one's arguing that all majors and schools require the same amount of work. Check your RC.

A few things to bear in mind: derogatory use of the label "state school" is a pretty good indicator of arrogance and ignorance. Some of the best law schools in the country are at state schools, which also happen to be top-notch universities with rigorous undergraduate programs.

Also, your friend may or may not be telling you the truth. People often understate the amount of effort they put in to school in order to appear cool - this effect could be exacerbated if your friend has detected your (subtly hidden, I'm sure) disdain for his school and major.

Even if your friend is telling the truth, a 3.5 is not a particularly impressive GPA.

[Kevinlomax]

To get this thread back on track...

OP, you need to do whatever it takes to kill the LSAT, apply with the most polished app you can put together and let the Admissions Committees decide. You may be out at some of the top schools, but with a strong LSAT you won't be out at all of them. Apply and see what happens.

Got it, thanks, this is what I was looking for.