Top Law Schools

?

you're probably out of the top 50 with the 2.4 GPA. grad school is a big plus, but a 3.7 in grad school isn't seen like a 3.7 in UG (i heard it's easier to get high grades in grad school or whatever), and their ranked off your UGPA.

i know people with a similar GPA and 175+ LSAT's who got into top 25 schools. with a 163, just a random school of the top of my head i think you'd be good at is U of Miami. you're basically only going to be real material at schools where your LSAT will put you over the 75th percentile, unless you have ethnic diversity or some other golden ticket to point to.

http://www.lawschoolpredictor.com

Start here.

Grad school is not a "big plus". It's at best a weak soft. B school is not academically challenging and 3.7 is not a spectacular GPA considering the huge grade inflation @ grad schools so you're at the lower end of that weak soft spectrum as far as that goes. All that said you still have a shot at going to a school that's not a complete and utter waste of your money and time but for that you need to score 170+ on the LSAT. With a 163 and a 2.4 UGPA you'll be better off doing something else with your life.


Edit: use LSN to get an idea of how people in your GPA range have done in the past

i have heard that most of those predictors arent so great predictors. basically it tells you if you fall within the medians of schools. if you have an interesting application/history with close to median scores i have heard of people getting in places they were projected by predictors they wouldnt get in. anyone hear something similar?

Did you receive a MBA degree ? If not, will you complete the degree requirements prior to entering law school ? If you dropped out of the MBA program, then that may be viewed as a negative to law school admissions officers.

lolol10 wrote:i have heard that most of those predictors arent so great predictors. basically it tells you if you fall within the medians of schools. if you have an interesting application/history with close to median scores i have heard of people getting in places they were projected by predictors they wouldnt get in. anyone hear something similar?

I wouldn't put to much stock in this hearsay... schools mostly go off the numbers. It may get you off a waitlist at a few schools you'd normally stay just waitlisted at, but that's about it.

lolol10 wrote:i have heard that most of those predictors arent so great predictors. basically it tells you if you fall within the medians of schools. if you have an interesting application/history with close to median scores i have heard of people getting in places they were projected by predictors they wouldnt get in. anyone hear something similar?

If by interesting application you mean black then yes.

d34dluk3 wrote:

lolol10 wrote:i have heard that most of those predictors arent so great predictors. basically it tells you if you fall within the medians of schools. if you have an interesting application/history with close to median scores i have heard of people getting in places they were projected by predictors they wouldnt get in. anyone hear something similar?

If by interesting application you mean black then yes.

Heyy!! I resent that.

i don't think he meant to be racist, but he could have phrased it better. it doesn't only apply to black or any one group, just what law schools consider to be URM which is info you can get anywhere.

as to whether or not that's true --

in the words of a former U of Chicago Adcom in a tell all book, "Don't bother applying with a 160 unless you're a minority in which case we'll throw in a scholarship."

there is no doubt softs matter as if they didn't, law schools wouldn't waste a million dollars plus in adcom salaries a year as a computer would be more cost effective and less prone to mistakes. i do think law schools work hard to put together a diverse class representing people from all socioeconomic backgrounds, college and life experiences, but it is self-selecting in that you must have their #'s unless you're URM because a school like Virginia with a 169 median is gonna benefit on 2 fronts on the rankings from an A.A. with a 170 opposed to a non-URM with a 180.

It's not racist, it's straight up true. URMs aren't created equal - your chances of admission are dependent on how many people "like you" are qualified. If you're a black male, you are competing with far fewer other applicants. If that stings, hopefully getting accepted to a great school because of it will assuage your hurt feelings.

d34dluk3 wrote:It's not racist, it's straight up true. URMs aren't created equal - your chances of admission are dependent on how many people "like you" are qualified. If you're a black male, you are competing with far fewer other applicants. If that stings, hopefully getting accepted to a great school because of it will assuage your hurt feelings.

Haha I was just kidding man.. The whole URM boost thing doesnt offend me at all.(mostly b/c Ive experienced firsthand why it exists, not just that it does exist.)

tkgrrett wrote:

d34dluk3 wrote:It's not racist, it's straight up true. URMs aren't created equal - your chances of admission are dependent on how many people "like you" are qualified. If you're a black male, you are competing with far fewer other applicants. If that stings, hopefully getting accepted to a great school because of it will assuage your hurt feelings.

Haha I was just kidding man.. The whole URM boost thing doesnt offend me at all.(mostly b/c Ive experienced firsthand why it exists, not just that it does exist.)

Yeah, I figured you were kidding. Replying to the other guy, mostly.