180 LSAT 3.4 GPA Forum

[mgregory3203]

I aced the LSAT but I'm worried my relatively low University of Oregon GPA and my transcript (5 withdrawals) will make it tough to get into a top-10 school. I graduated six years ago and have experience running a small business, does anyone think that will make up for the poor transcript, and should I think about an addendum for the withdrawals or will that just draw more attention to a negative? Really hoping for acceptance with $ at Northwestern or Georgetown to make my decision next spring easier. Appreciate the insight!

[Knock]

I aced the LSAT but I'm worried my relatively low University of Oregon GPA and my transcript (5 withdrawals) will make it tough to get into a top-10 school. I graduated six years ago and have experience running a small business, does anyone think that will make up for the poor transcript, and should I think about an addendum for the withdrawals or will that just draw more attention to a negative? Really hoping for acceptance with $ at Northwestern or Georgetown to make my decision next spring easier. Appreciate the insight!

I would say it's pretty safe that you will get into a top 10 school. As far as money I couldn't say. But i'd say you have a great shot at MVP on down, and I could see you getting one or multiple of CCN.

It looks like that might even have been a conservative estimate:
3.4 179, got accepted into Columbia non ED (+54k at U. Mich):
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/georgina

3.4 179, got NYU:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Blacklist

3.4, 179, got NYU:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Lago

Write an addendum for the withdrawals. You put some distance between yourself and your GPA with that great work experience. I would say you are a complete lock for money at Georgetown or Northwestern.

Here's 60k at NU, with a 172 and 3.6:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/lck06

Here's 36k, 175 and 3.5:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/happyhopes

60k, 174, 3.6:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/musketeerlady

50k, 175 and 3.48:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/bauerm

60k, 172 and 3.64:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/veeb

So with a 180 and 3.4, along with great work experience, you definitely have a good shot at money from NU. Make sure to apply broadly, as you should leverage your top choice for more money with whatever scholarship money you get from schools ranked close to it (whether slightly above or slightly below). and whatever you do APPLY EARLY!

[Woozy]

You definitely have decent chances at all but HYS, but you are in splittsville for the T14. Don't expect to get much $ from any T14. If you don't care where you end up you should probably pepper the T20 and see what kind of offers you get.

Definitely write a quick addendum to show what you have learned/what areas you have improved in since school.

[tommynobody]

With that LSAT, I'd say you're definitely in both places. But it's always difficult to get money as a splitter.

On a side note, those are two very different schools. What makes you pick those two in particular?

[rynabrius]

Apply to the top 10 and one safety and you are golden. Congrats on kicking the LSAT's ass.

[mgregory3203]

I aced the LSAT but I'm worried my relatively low University of Oregon GPA and my transcript (5 withdrawals) will make it tough to get into a top-10 school. I graduated six years ago and have experience running a small business, does anyone think that will make up for the poor transcript, and should I think about an addendum for the withdrawals or will that just draw more attention to a negative? Really hoping for acceptance with $ at Northwestern or Georgetown to make my decision next spring easier. Appreciate the insight!

I would say it's pretty safe that you will get into a top 10 school. As far as money I couldn't say. But i'd say you have a great shot at MVP on down, and I could see you getting one or multiple of CCN.

It looks like that might even have been a conservative estimate:
3.4 179, got accepted into Columbia non ED (+54k at U. Mich):
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/georgina

3.4 179, got NYU:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Blacklist

3.4, 179, got NYU:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Lago

Write an addendum for the withdrawals. You put some distance between yourself and your GPA with that great work experience. I would say you are a complete lock for money at Georgetown or Northwestern.

Here's 60k at NU, with a 172 and 3.6:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/lck06

Here's 36k, 175 and 3.5:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/happyhopes

60k, 174, 3.6:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/musketeerlady

50k, 175 and 3.48:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/bauerm

60k, 172 and 3.64:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/veeb

So with a 180 and 3.4, along with great work experience, you definitely have a good shot at money from NU. Make sure to apply broadly, as you should leverage your top choice for more money with whatever scholarship money you get from schools ranked close to it (whether slightly above or slightly below).

Sorry if I should know this, but I couldn't find any info on the links- are those $ #s the amount spread over three years or annual? The links are very helpful, thanks for those. My perception heading in is that I'll probably get accepted to some top 10 schools, money's a huge factor for me though (kid on the way, wife not thrilled about moving out of the Portland area into a one bedroom apartment!).

[Knock]

I believe it's spread out over 3 years. That's the only way when I see 160k full schollys on LSN could possibly make sense. You should be seeing some money, problem is it's hard to know from where. It depends what school wants to raise its LSAT median, needs your score, and would be willing to pay handsomely for it. Apply broadly. When you do get your acceptances and offers, leverage your top choice. Email them and tell them you are interested in attending their school, but are having trouble committing because School X has offered you X amount of money. If they want you bad enough, they may offer you some money or some more money (although generally they won't completely match the other school if it is lower ranked).

[mgregory3203]

With that LSAT, I'd say you're definitely in both places. But it's always difficult to get money as a splitter.

On a side note, those are two very different schools. What makes you pick those two in particular?

Both are largely based on location- I love Chicago and D.C., and obviously on the rankings. They're also up there because from what I've read they both weigh LSAT a bit heavier than some other schools, so I'm hoping they'll be the ones to come through with decent scholarship offers.

[mgregory3203]

Side question- on a scale of 1-10 how crazy would it be to turn down a top-15 school and go to Lewis and Clark (ranked 64th here) to keep my family in Portland?

[CanadianWolf]

Would they be allowed to visit you in the asylum ?
To answer your question, it would be either a 2 or a 9.

[Knock]

Side question- on a scale of 1-10 how crazy would it be to turn down a top-15 school and go to Lewis and Clark (ranked 64th here) to keep my family in Portland?

Depends on your career goals, etc. If you're happy working in Portland, it might be the right choice for you, especially if it means not uprooting your family. Many people on these boards, however, would say you were pretty crazy.

[d34d9823]

Side question- on a scale of 1-10 how crazy would it be to turn down a top-15 school and go to Lewis and Clark (ranked 64th here) to keep my family in Portland?

Pretty crazy. Keeping food on the table because you have a job after LS > location. Admittedly, you can get local jobs from local schools, but you need to be top of class ITE and that's no guarantee anywhere.

[Slimpee]

Side question- on a scale of 1-10 how crazy would it be to turn down a top-15 school and go to Lewis and Clark (ranked 64th here) to keep my family in Portland?

People on TLS will call you crazy but that's a decision between you and your family. If you have any desire for biglaw go T14. But, if you get a full-ride from L&C and love Portland (and would be cool working there) it's not the worst idea in the world.

I know that i'll get lit up for saying this (TLS hates anecdotal evidence, usually for good reason) but my aunt gave up Boalt for USD and couldn't be happier about it. Yes, I know that it was a different time (she graduated around '90) and blah blah blah but she doesn't regret it one bit...

I think w/ your age, maturity level, obvious intelligence, and assumed business acumen, you would be able to get a decent job out of school...if you were a 22 yr-old recent grad I would say otherwise.

Good luck!

[thecilent]

Side question- on a scale of 1-10 how crazy would it be to turn down a top-15 school and go to Lewis and Clark (ranked 64th here) to keep my family in Portland?

People on TLS will call you crazy but that's a decision between you and your family. If you have any desire for biglaw go T14. But, if you get a full-ride from L&C and love Portland (and would be cool working there) it's not the worst idea in the world.

I know that i'll get lit up for saying this (TLS hates anecdotal evidence, usually for good reason) but my aunt gave up Boalt for USD and couldn't be happier about it. Yes, I know that it was a different time (she graduated around '90) and blah blah blah but she doesn't regret it one bit...

I think w/ your age, maturity level, obvious intelligence, and assumed business acumen, you would be able to get a decent job out of school...if you were a 22 yr-old recent grad I would say otherwise.

Good luck!

No matter how many blahs you put, it still was a different time and different economy.

[Pip]

I aced the LSAT but I'm worried my relatively low University of Oregon GPA and my transcript (5 withdrawals) will make it tough to get into a top-10 school. I graduated six years ago and have experience running a small business, does anyone think that will make up for the poor transcript, and should I think about an addendum for the withdrawals or will that just draw more attention to a negative? Really hoping for acceptance with $ at Northwestern or Georgetown to make my decision next spring easier. Appreciate the insight!

To be honest, you haven't given enough information to get a real useful answer.

Top law schools have unwritten quotas. They want a mix of students that fits their profiles and if you look at statistics from schools like Harvard or Yale you will find very little deviation from 1 class to another. Do you really think its an accident? It isn't. These quotas that they have are not just geographic but also based on gender and race. You might not like to hear it but I recall a big stink at Yale years ago when someone released the LSAT and GPA scores of students along with their race. At the time it was very apparent that there were black students that were admitted with much lower numbers than any other group and it cause a bit of an uproar in the law school at the time.

Those things still go on.

For you, if you are a male your chances are dropped a bit, if you are minority they go up a bit... likewise you aren't really competing against everyone in the country, you are competing against other people in whatever state you live in that are also applying. On the upside, some schools do give some added credit for people that have been out of school for a while and working in the real world, so that will go in your favor.

[mgregory3203]

Thanks for the thoughts everyone! Any thoughts on how to write a good addendum about withdrawals on an undergrad transcript? Wish I had a better excuse, but basically I was not very focused my first two years as an undergrad; that was seven years ago so I know I'd be a much more focused, mature student in grad school. I'm a little worried about drawing attention to a negative, especially since there aren't really any extenuating circumstances other than being a dumb 19 year old, but I know than many Ws will raise a red flag on my transcript.

[Pip]

Thanks for the thoughts everyone! Any thoughts on how to write a good addendum about withdrawals on an undergrad transcript? Wish I had a better excuse, but basically I was not very focused my first two years as an undergrad; that was seven years ago so I know I'd be a much more focused, mature student in grad school. I'm a little worried about drawing attention to a negative, especially since there aren't really any extenuating circumstances other than being a dumb 19 year old, but I know than many Ws will raise a red flag on my transcript.

To be honest, you could simply lie.

Yes it might not sound good. But the reality is many people lie on law school applications or bend the truth to such a degree that it might as well be a lie.

My favorite example was a woman in Yale Law School who had claimed she was Hispanic to give herself an edge. Now she claimed this because she was born in Mexico, of course what she did not note was that she was born in Mexico because her parents were on vacation there. She was in fact a Jewish New Yorker that was no more Hispanic than Mel Gibson. But she knew what facts the school could look at and spun the story in her favor.

If you have qualms about lying, realize that other students are stretching the truth past the breaking point and if you don't do it too you will simply not get in. Look at it as your first experience being a lawyer. It is all a matter of spinning the best application that will pass cross examination...

So in your case the question is whether you were going through some sort of personal issue that impacted your grades early on... perhaps you were having to work to support a sick parent or sibling... never underestimate the properly turned sad story of despair. People reading applications are looking for lies, they are looking for things that set you out from the crowd.... if that was turning tricks as a male prostitute to pay for your little sisters heart surgery, well frankly that might just give you an edge over the guy in Portland that aced the LSAT and had a perfect GPA because he was able to devout all his time to class because he was rich.

What you do know is that if you stick with the honest truth that you were a slacker and didn't really care, well you know you wont get in. When you see the stats of schools that show people with low GPAs and high LSATs it isn't because they were just slacking off it was because of some situation that they explained away.

Lastly, don't include some addendum that says hey my grades sucked but this was the reason. You will do much better if you don't even mention that fact, simply make sure that during your personal essay that you mention the story of why you were a slacker (or male prostitute with a heart) and let the admission reader put the two things together. It makes it look less like BS and sounds more real.

[Tifoso]

With that LSAT, I'd say you're definitely in both places. But it's always difficult to get money as a splitter.

On a side note, those are two very different schools. What makes you pick those two in particular?

Both are largely based on location- I love Chicago and D.C., and obviously on the rankings. They're also up there because from what I've read they both weigh LSAT a bit heavier than some other schools, so I'm hoping they'll be the ones to come through with decent scholarship offers.

Just a little note on this. I don't think this is a reliable strategy or way to set up expectations. I was a splitter the other way (is that reverse splitter?) - my LSAT was low for T14, my GPA good, very 'interesting' softs etc etc.. and very left leaning. In short I would have seemed like the perfect Boalt candidate. I was rejected from Boalt and accepted to a bunch of higher ranked schools.

[Tifoso]

Also, don't lie. You can't make lying a universal maxim and so it is impermissible.

[TheBigMediocre]

.

[mgregory3203]

Also, don't lie. You can't make lying a universal maxim and so it is impermissible.

Lol. I don't think I'm going to bs and make something up, not really my style. I wouldn't do the addendum at all if it wasn't for the withdrawals on the transcript, what I'm debating is whether it's worth writing one addressing the fact that I was immature my first couple of years as an undergrad and given the fact that it was 8 years ago I've grown a lot since and would be a much more serious student. Not sure if that's a bad idea to even bring more attention to the Ws or if I should just include something about personal growth in my p.s. and hope they can figure it out for themselves. Thanks for the input guys and gals!

[d34d9823]

Also, don't lie. You can't make lying a universal maxim and so it is impermissible.

Lol at you trying to push Kant on everyone else's business.

[Woozy]

To be honest, you could simply lie...

I'm not sure whether this was some sort of joke/flame, but if not it is seriously some of the worst advice ever.

OP: I had your score, a significantly lower GPA, and slightly less time between it and my application. Here's my advice:

You should definitely write an addendum about your academic record. It should provide persuasive arguments that your performance in undergrad is not a reliable indicator of your performance in law school. This could be because of differences in maturity, outlook, you have a family now, etc. The important thing is to use evidence and construct a logical argument that your poor undergrad performance will not be repeated and is not indicative of your law school potential. This also gives you a perfect opportunity to show the school that you are capable of constructing strong arguments, which is difficult to to with the other writing samples you have to submit. This sort of addendum, if well done, is much more persuasive to a rational creature (such as an adcom) than a stupid sob story. And that's not even taking into account the other downsides of outright lies on your application (ethics, C&F issues, etc.)

[Jack Smirks]

Also, don't lie. You can't make lying a universal maxim and so it is impermissible.

Lol at you trying to push Kant on everyone else's business.

I LOL'd

[Pip]

My favorite example was a woman in Yale Law School who had claimed she was Hispanic to give herself an edge. Now she claimed this because she was born in Mexico, of course what she did not note was that she was born in Mexico because her parents were on vacation there. She was in fact a Jewish New Yorker that was no more Hispanic than Mel Gibson. But she knew what facts the school could look at and spun the story in her favor.

I really wish this See You Next Tuesday would get C&F pwned when she tries to sit for the bar.

You don't have to worry about her sitting for the bar. She never wanted to be a lawyer, her goal was simply to get in to meet her future husband... when she accomplished that goal, she dropped out... as far as I know she never went back to complete her degree.