cesium wrote: teampeeta wrote:
gma221 wrote:I'm curious about the stats for people who are still UR, if any of you are willing to share. If there are any "special snowflakes" among you (i.e., people with crazy high numbers and/or extraordinary softs who have been accepted to a number of other T14s), then I think we'll be seeing some more straight admits.
I don't have crazy high numbers. My GPA is < 25th and while my LSAT is > 75th, Berkeley doesn't care about the LSAT. My score is between 170 and 175. I am an URM.
I think I have a strong resume with some interesting WE/ college experiences, but I don't think it's stronger than the resumes of the people who got FR'd.
I'm curious what you mean by "Berkeley doesn't care about the LSAT". You mean it doesn't care as much about the LSAT as compared to its peer schools? Is that true?
actually, dean tom addresses this in that '06 interview:
"I know that there is a perception out there in the cyberspace world that we value GPAs a lot more than LSATs, and I’m not sure where people get that. Because if you look at our index formula, we are purposeful in weighting it so that GPA and LSAT are roughly equivalent. So, if I had to characterize our review process, it’s about one-third LSAT score, about one-third academic record—I prefer to call it academic record because GPA is just so narrow, whereas with academic record we consider all of the factors that impacted the GPA: work responsibilities, extracurricular activities, rigor of major, and so on. The last third is the subjective factors—what one says in their personal statement, and what others say about them in their letters of recommendation. So, no, I don’t think either of the two quantitative factors is more important than the other."
take that as you will.