Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
SlackOff

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:25 am

Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby SlackOff » Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:37 pm

I know that in most cases it makes no difference, I realize that, I realize that people will say anyone who worries about this is being anal, I realize that in 99% of cases this is true, but there are cases in which it does matter. Schools with hard GPA floors, or scholarships with "no exceptions" requirements for consideration.

I've read that the LSAT doesn't round up at .005 (like normal math dictates :roll:), but at .007 -- for instance, a 3.495 would stay a 3.49, but a 3.497 would become a 3.5. Is this true? If so, what about a 3.4967? The "final" digit there is a 7, does it round up, changing that to 3.497, which rounds up? Or does it not round up, because LSAC math is not just weird and illogical, but doubly weird and illogical?

I've seen cases of people saying "well I had a 3.496 and they rounded it up," but I'm assuming that this is just because the people hadn't calculated it the way LSAC does to begin with, and don't really know what they're talking about. Or am I wrong, and LSAC uses actual math, and these people are correct?

And I've read elsewhere that LSAC doesn't calculate quality points for each class/grade, add them all up, and divide by the number of credit hours, like a normal school does or a normal person would. :roll: I've read they calculate your GPA "per year" and round that using normal math (.005 would round up to .01), then multiply the number of credits you earned that year by the rounded GPA for that year, and add it all up, and divide by the total number of credit hours? Is any of this right? Is some of this right? Where does the .007 factor in here? Is the person wrong about the .005, or does the .007 rule only factor in for rounding the final GPA? Or is the .007 thing even a thing at all? Is it really academic year, or do they mean semester? Year would be very odd and arbitrary. Where would summer semesters fall in, also?

What do they actually do? What part of this is correct? Any of it? All of it? Does anyone know anything about any of this for a FACT? I need to know this, not because I'm anal, but because I'm in one of the aforementioned situations. I know this is a ridiculous question, an utterly ridiculous question, an absolutely asinine question, but which of the above arcane policies they use determines whether or not I need to register for another semester. I know this is ridiculous, but it's not my fault. :roll: :(
Last edited by SlackOff on Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.

sparkytrainer

Silver
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby sparkytrainer » Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:39 pm

A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

SlackOff

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:25 am

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby SlackOff » Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:39 pm

sparkytrainer wrote:A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

That was an example. A 2.99 versus a 3.0 would.

sparkytrainer

Silver
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby sparkytrainer » Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:43 pm

SlackOff wrote:
sparkytrainer wrote:A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

That was an example. A 2.99 versus a 3.0 would.


Probably not, but that might be the 1 situation it does. But you gotta give us more info my friend.

cavalier1138

Platinum
Posts: 5063
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby cavalier1138 » Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:49 pm

How does a 3.496 not already round up under general rules of math?

But yes, this is an absurd question.

User avatar
Platopus

Silver
Posts: 1482
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 11:20 pm

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby Platopus » Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:02 pm

.
Last edited by Platopus on Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SlackOff

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:25 am

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby SlackOff » Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:06 pm

sparkytrainer wrote:
SlackOff wrote:
sparkytrainer wrote:A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

That was an example. A 2.99 versus a 3.0 would.


Probably not, but that might be the 1 situation it does. But you gotta give us more info my friend.

Check out Michigan on MyLSN... Every single non-URM 2.9 gets waitlisted or rejected, not a single one gets in, but that's not the case once you hit 3.0.
Not even a 180 will get you in if you're a non-URM and below a 3.0, apparently. Possibly the same for NYU, but no one with a 2.9 and a 171+ applied, so GPA may not be the only factor at work there, whereas it definitely is at Michigan. At other schools, the jump has a big effect, but it isn't absolute. It definitely seems to be absolute at Michigan.

Plus, like I said, I believe there are some scholarships with hard and fast "no exceptions" policies... As in a 3.6 will be considered, but a 3.59 will not be. I can't name any off the top of my head, though.

SlackOff

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:25 am

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby SlackOff » Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:07 pm

cavalier1138 wrote:How does a 3.496 not already round up under general rules of math?

Don't ask me, (maybe) ask LSAC.
This is what I'm trying to figure out.

User avatar
Platopus

Silver
Posts: 1482
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 11:20 pm

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby Platopus » Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:20 pm

.
Last edited by Platopus on Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SlackOff

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:25 am

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby SlackOff » Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:48 am

I take it this means no one knows for sure how they calculate it?
(Which is understandable given how asinine this question is on its face, lol.)

Looks like I might be spending some time on the phone with them soon.

doggozeg

New
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:22 pm

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby doggozeg » Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:53 pm

Just call. It’s no big deal. Breathe. Be calm.
Last edited by doggozeg on Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Veil of Ignorance

Bronze
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2016 9:22 pm

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby Veil of Ignorance » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:23 pm

From what I can see on LSN, .01 seems to make a difference in some cases, so your question isn't just you being a worry wart. For example, you see more than a few Hamilton scholarships at Columbia with exactly a 3.8 and 175+, but virtually none with a 3.70-3.79 and 175+. But obviously the only way to find out is just to submit your transcripts and see what happens.

icechicken

Bronze
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:09 pm

Re: Okay... LSAC GPA and Rounding Policy, Definitive Answer?

Postby icechicken » Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:10 pm

Veil of Ignorance wrote:From what I can see on LSN, .01 seems to make a difference in some cases, so your question isn't just you being a worry wart. For example, you see more than a few Hamilton scholarships at Columbia with exactly a 3.8 and 175+, but virtually none with a 3.70-3.79 and 175+. But obviously the only way to find out is just to submit your transcripts and see what happens.


They're probably using their 75th percentile (3.81) as a soft cutoff. If you're only below that mark because of a rounding error, and otherwise the kind of candidate Columbia wants to spend Hamilton money on, you're probably fine.



Return to “Law School Admissions Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 16 guests