of Benito Cereno wrote: swampthang wrote:
of Benito Cereno wrote:HLS is being pretty strict about sub 3.8 gpas. It seems like the only sub 3.8s getting in are URM and HYP. Then again, probably only like 30% of the class is below 3.8 so URMs, HYP alums, and a bunch of people with great softs, can easily cover that.
and what's your take on sub-75% LSATs (which I guess would now be under-171)? same story?
I think Harvard probably has a lot more people with 169s and 170s than sub 3.8s in this class. From Harvard's perspective a 4.0 seems to compensate for a 169 or 170 more than a 179 compensates for a 3.65. But I think a very large percentage of the 15or20% let in with lsats under 170 are likely all URMs or 3.95 gpa +.
Sadness. Can we redefine URM? Because I really think people who grew up in the middle of nowhere and are still numerically strong candidates for admission are both a M and UR. Here's hoping you're right about the "4.0 compensating for 169/170" bit.
And actually, I think conceptually I would disagree. While the talk about the LSAT being "the great equalizer" is a bit overstated, I definitely think and high LSAT-splitter is going to get the nod over a high GPA-splitter simply because the LSAT is a standardized measure vs. having to compare GPAs across schools, majors, time periods, etc.