dpk711 wrote:Applying_Late wrote:cc.celina wrote:Applying_Late wrote:Someone with at least a 3.7 has shown some form of dedication. Someone with a 3.7 and a 175+ shows dedication and intelligence.
Yeah, I'm going to join in with the others and say this is not really true. I have a ~3.9 and my roommate has a ~3.4, but she works way harder than me because she's an engineering major. Extenuating circumstances can severely affect your GPA, as can your undergrad institution, and I think you're forgetting that many if not most of the people applying to law school have spent quite a few years out of undergrad, and they and their work ethics are far removed from their crazy college selves.
OP, I understand you want to work with people with similar goals and study habits, which makes perfect sense. You might have a better study group, and risk offending less people, If you instead ask that people be PT'ing at a certain level, since it has a much more consistent correlation with LSAT performance than GPA.
Your roommate and I have something in common. Engineering isn't nice, but then again, if you get the math, if you get the problem solving, you should be OK. And by that I mean pulling a 3.7 at least. To get a 3.4 in engineering is not very good. You're not even pulling cum laude at most schools with that GPA, and by that I mean the engineering school's cum laude list.
I agree that extenuating circumstances, undergrad institution and all that jazz can affect your GPA, but I don't care and often times HYS doesn't either if you fall below a certain threshold. It's also nice that people learn how to discipline themselves after college, but again, HYS doesn't pity them as we see from their floors. OP wants kids who really had their shit together from day 1, and I don't blame them. If OP has a vision of creating this "elite" study team, why attack him for setting standards that don't appear to be arbitrary?
because they are arbitrary
Tell that to HYS. Maybe they will let you in with that argument.