Top Law Schools

I am going into my junior year at Princeton, and I currently have a 3.44. However, we have a (quite unpopular) policy of grade deflation, and I was wondering if law schools will take that into account when I apply...

Also, I'm a biology major, and my GPA is mostly brought down by grades in my math and physics classes - will law schools take such things into account, or do they just look at the cumulative GPA?

Thanks in advance for the help. ^^

sfreuden wrote:I am going into my junior year at Princeton, and I currently have a 3.44. However, we have a (quite unpopular) policy of grade deflation, and I was wondering if law schools will take that into account when I apply...

Also, I'm a biology major, and my GPA is mostly brought down by grades in my math and physics classes - will law schools take such things into account, or do they just look at the cumulative GPA?

Thanks in advance for the help. ^^

Attending Princeton sounds like the only legitimate excuse for deflating grades (definitely more legit than taking "difficult" classes). These schools get a lot of Princeton applicants, so they're likely familiar with that phenomenon. However, the leeway this grants you will be limited — you will still likely have to be within a school's ranges to be considered.

You might get a little leeway, but you aren't getting YHS, and CCN will be impossible without a decent LSAT (172+), and even with it will be hard.

Ok, thanks for the response. ^^

Desert Fox wrote:You might get a little leeway, but you aren't getting YHS, and CCN will be impossible without a decent LSAT (172+), and even with it will be hard.

On planet TLS, 172+ is "decent".

Hannibal wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:You might get a little leeway, but you aren't getting YHS, and CCN will be impossible without a decent LSAT (172+), and even with it will be hard.

On planet TLS, 172+ is "decent".

On a planet where engineers who weren't even required to take English classes in undergrad are scoring in the mid 170s, 172 is decent.

..

acrossthelake wrote:

Hannibal wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:You might get a little leeway, but you aren't getting YHS, and CCN will be impossible without a decent LSAT (172+), and even with it will be hard.

On planet TLS, 172+ is "decent".

Well it is TopLawSchools, so the standard of what's "average" is decided by the standards for admission at the top law schools.

stratocophic wrote:

Hannibal wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:You might get a little leeway, but you aren't getting YHS, and CCN will be impossible without a decent LSAT (172+), and even with it will be hard.

On planet TLS, 172+ is "decent".

On a planet where engineers who weren't even required to take English classes in undergrad are scoring in the mid 170s, 172 is decent.

I haven't taken an English course in undergrad either. I don't really feel like it would make a difference.

I don't disagree at all, I'm just saying we could have gone 4 years without reading a single anything, literally nothing, and are still doing this. 172 is decent. Practice makes perfect, kids.

..

acrossthelake wrote:

stratocophic wrote: I don't disagree at all, I'm just saying we could have gone 4 years without reading a single anything, literally nothing, and are still doing this. 172 is decent. Practice makes perfect, kids.

You had to read the directions on your problem sets.

Anyway, I feel like you can develop the skills (reading comprehension, analytical reasoning, logical reasoning) needed to do well on the LSAT well before college, so yeah, for a fair number of people, what they do during college won't matter.

pwned. Well played. Again, I don't disagree, but at least for me, it took a little while to get back in the habit of reading obscure BS at high speed due to the long layoff. I'm just saying everyone else should have an advantage in that regard. If we can do it, and if their lib arts degrees are truly worth anything, they should be able to do it. 172 is a little harsh, but there should be no reason that a native English speaker of reasonable intelligence can't score mid-160s without an excessive amount of practice.

..

stratocophic wrote:
I haven't taken an English course in undergrad either. I don't really feel like it would make a difference.

I don't disagree at all, I'm just saying we could have gone 4 years without reading a single anything, literally nothing, and are still doing this. 172 is decent. Practice makes perfect, kids.[/quote]

The only book I've read in the past 3 years had pictures. I got 1 wrong on RC. 172 is decent.

Desert Fox wrote:

stratocophic wrote:
I haven't taken an English course in undergrad either. I don't really feel like it would make a difference.

I don't disagree at all, I'm just saying we could have gone 4 years without reading a single anything, literally nothing, and are still doing this. 172 is decent. Practice makes perfect, kids.

The only book I've read in the past 3 years had pictures. I got 1 wrong on RC. 172 is decent.[/quote]I can't make the same claim, but somehow I knew you'd verify my position And there you have it, folks.

Engineers: bridge-building, quote-failing.

TBF the book had 200 pages of real words.

stratocophic wrote:

Hannibal wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:You might get a little leeway, but you aren't getting YHS, and CCN will be impossible without a decent LSAT (172+), and even with it will be hard.

On planet TLS, 172+ is "decent".

On a planet where engineers who weren't even required to take English classes in undergrad are scoring in the mid 170s, 172 is decent.

Hey, we had to take two semesters of English (or a reading & composition equivalent)!

I got an A in Business Writing and a decent school for undergrad business programs. That should shock and appall you.