Top Law Schools

Redacted

No. Your LSAT is a huge piece of the pie. Secure a 170+ ad you'll haw a nice little set of options.

You won't get a GPA bump due to class difficulty or tough schedule. One of the harsh realities of law school admissions is that a 3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon. That's because the law schools report the median undergraduate GPA of their incoming class to U.S. news and world reports, and it affects their ranking. Slams goes for LSAT. this is why you always hear the mantra that the only thing that really matters in law school admissions is GPA and LSAT score.

That said, your other experience will likely give you some kind of soft boost. It's worth applying to the lower T14, IMO.

I can say with a great deal of certainty that you would at least be in at UVA with a 170+. PM me.

3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

Kevinlomax wrote:3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

Truth.

However, the LSAT is the equalizer between applicants, which is why it matters slightly more. Cop a good LSAT score bro.

Harsh Reality. Thanks... According to my PT's I should do fairly well.

Kevinlomax wrote:3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

It's crazy but it makes sense, if you think about it. If you're the dean of admissions for, say, BU, you're constantly at war with the other law schools in the top 30ish range to improve your rank. Improved rank correlates with increased interest from applicants, which means better applicant pools, which means (eventually) higher rank. There aren't many parameters of the ranking system that you, as dean of admissions, can directly control. But what you CAN do is maximize those GPA and LSAT numbers. You want as many 4.0s and 180s as you can get, or as close to those perfect scores as possible. How applicants actually achieve their scores doesn't matter that much to you, because it doesn't matter much to USNWR. So the pothead basket weaving kid who took 7 years to finish UG at Shitsville U but managed a 4.0 is more valuable to your rank than the brilliant engineering major from West Point with a 2.7 (all LSATs being equal).

Crazy, but that's the way the cookie crumbles. You have to CRUSH the LSAT with your GPA. The good news is it sounds like your practice tests are going awesomely. But if you get below 170 on game day, retake. It sucks but it's worth it.

Adcoms know how grading works at USMA and the other academies. Yes it is still a big numbers game, but your GPA is going to be recognized as being from that environment. Congrats on the LSAT score.

Kevinlomax wrote:training on Saturday, an honor code to prevent cheating, drug tests so no adderall etc.

Sounds like ya did, but that has nothing to do with law school.

In an attempt to make you feel better, let me explain why a high LSAT score is going to be far more important than your GPA at T14 schools. Borrowing from the earlier examples, let me start off with this nugget of truth:

From a pure numbers standpoint, a 1.0 GPA, 170 LSAT student is better for University of Michigan than a 3.7 GPA, 168 LSAT score student.

Top 14 schools need to protect both medians (LSAT and GPA). Your GPA will most certainly be below their target median. This means that if an adcom wants to let you in, they are going to have to find another student with a GPA above median to balance you out. This won't be too hard. There are TONS of people walking around with high GPA's. 3.7 GPA communications majors, for example.

What most of those people don't have, however, is a high LSAT to go along with it. The curved nature of the test means there are a limited number of high scores to go around. If 100,000 people take the LSAT in 2013 (probably going to be less), around 1000 scores will be 99th percentile (by definition). With roughly 4400 spots (http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&t=141338) at top 14 schools, there just aren't enough high LSATs to go around. As well, not all of those 1000 99th percentile scores are going to be attached to amazing GPA.

Your experience at West Point adds a unique perspective to the incoming law class. I'm sure some schools are eager to give you a chance. Of course, adcoms still need to play the numbers game, so your GPA is a liability. However, pair it with an LSAT score that helps their median out, and suddenly that GPA isn't such a big deal. They could pick up someone with a high GPA and ANY LSAT score and still be on track!

Good luck on the test, and I hope that helps you feel a little better about the situation. Also hopefully it motivates you to study like crazy for the LSAT.

You're making the military sound weak.

Personal responsibility.
Overcoming adversity.

Keeping your room squared away, waking up at 0630, "playing a sport 4x a week", and not being able to cheat? waaaaah. Cry me a river.

Do you mean real engineering or Pretengineering?

Obviously you would be in a better situation with a better GPA but splitters seem to be doing really well, more so each year and IMO you are the best type of splitter. There is a huge difference between your 2.7 and other 2.7s. However, you'll still need to be an actual splitter to gain this benefit- which means that your LSAT needs to be above the 75% of any school you apply to. I'd keep studying until I got a 175+ if I were you. FYI, every school will get a profile of the average GPA for that school so they will know that your 2.7 is not the same as a 2.7 from a different school.

They won't discount the GPA just because the classes were engineering based, but you will get a military bump.

I'd apply to every T14 and assume to get into most if you can get the LSAT higher.

BTW, I thank you for your service, but are you serious with this post? No you didn't waste 4 years; you went to a military school, presumably to be a military person, and succeeded in doing so. Now you want to go to law school, if it doesn't happen, it was all a waste?

Yeah, unfortunately, deans don't get to put footnotes in the USNWRs: "But our applicants had hard majors at real schools, so our 2.7s are like 3.9s from grade inflating online shitholes!" Don't get me wrong, I agree it's fucked up, but that's the way it is.

That said, you're not in a horrible position or anything. You can at least put your mediocre grades in context, and your military service will provide a nice boost. You're also presumably 100% post 9/11 GI Bill eligible, so even if you barely squeak into UVA, Berkeley, Michigan, or Penn, you essentially have a full ride scholarship.

Just focus on crushing your LSAT. Expect to drop a few points on test day, so keep studying and keep your practice tests strictly timed. If you end up in the 170s, you will definitely have some good options.

TheSpanishMain wrote:Yeah, unfortunately, deans don't get to put footnotes in the USNWRs: "But our applicants had hard majors at real schools, so our 2.7s are like 3.9s from grade inflating online shitholes!" Don't get me wrong, I agree it's fucked up, but that's the way it is.

That said, you're not in a horrible position or anything. You can at least put your mediocre grades in context, and your military service will provide a nice boost. You're also presumably 100% post 9/11 GI Bill eligible, so even if you barely squeak into UVA, Berkeley, Michigan, or Penn, you essentially have a full ride scholarship.

Just focus on crushing your LSAT. Expect to drop a few points on test day, so keep studying and keep your practice tests strictly timed. If you end up in the 170s, you will definitely have some good options.

I just wanted to point out that the bolded isn't correct. He's spent the last four years paying back the government for his college, not accruing GI Bill. He won't start accruing credit towards Post 9/11 until he gets past his 5 year point, which was his minimum required service. The rules specifically discuss ROTC and Service Academy graduates with regard to their initial commitment.

https://gibill.custhelp.com/app/answers ... 54/kw/ROTC

OP, if you want the personal experiences of someone in a somewhat similar position as you a year ago, feel free to PM me.

Ah, yes, good catch. You are correct.

I'd also look outside the T14, depending on where the OP has ties and wants to practice. Just depends on how debt averse you are, I suppose.

Kevinlomax wrote:At West Point, the core curriculum was heavily Engineering based and as my GPA reflects, I am not the greatest Math and Science student. Besides the fact I was forced to take so many engineering classes, we also had to be up at 630 am, keep our rooms clean for inspection, play a sport 4x a week, take military classes, have mandatory military training on Saturday, an honor code to prevent cheating, drug tests so no adderall etc.

I had many friends who went to their local state school and barely attended class, majored in Communications and had gpa of 3.7+ ... with a few months of studying on the LSAT they could easily get into a T14.

Hint: the bolded makes you look like a jerk.

Also, are you seriously complaining about the fact that you had an anti-cheating honor code?

midwest17 wrote:

Kevinlomax wrote:At West Point, the core curriculum was heavily Engineering based and as my GPA reflects, I am not the greatest Math and Science student. Besides the fact I was forced to take so many engineering classes, we also had to be up at 630 am, keep our rooms clean for inspection, play a sport 4x a week, take military classes, have mandatory military training on Saturday, an honor code to prevent cheating, drug tests so no adderall etc.

I had many friends who went to their local state school and barely attended class, majored in Communications and had gpa of 3.7+ ... with a few months of studying on the LSAT they could easily get into a T14.

Hint: the bolded makes you look like a jerk.

Also, are you seriously complaining about the fact that you had an anti-cheating honor code?

He should write an addendum letting adcomms know he would have cheated had the code not existed. "My 2.7 is not reflective of my ability to succeed at a school like yours where cheating and drug use are not frowned upon."

OP you have to turn the question around. Instead of "Did I waste four years working hard?" think of it as "Can I, by simply putting a little bit of effort into one exam, erase four years of poor grades?"

Tiago Splitter wrote:

midwest17 wrote:

Kevinlomax wrote:At West Point, the core curriculum was heavily Engineering based and as my GPA reflects, I am not the greatest Math and Science student. Besides the fact I was forced to take so many engineering classes, we also had to be up at 630 am, keep our rooms clean for inspection, play a sport 4x a week, take military classes, have mandatory military training on Saturday, an honor code to prevent cheating, drug tests so no adderall etc.

I had many friends who went to their local state school and barely attended class, majored in Communications and had gpa of 3.7+ ... with a few months of studying on the LSAT they could easily get into a T14.

Hint: the bolded makes you look like a jerk.

Also, are you seriously complaining about the fact that you had an anti-cheating honor code?

He should write an addendum letting adcomms know he would have cheated had the code not existed. "My 2.7 is not reflective of my ability to succeed at a school like yours where cheating and drug use are not frowned upon."

OP you have to turn the question around. Instead of "Did I waste four years working hard?" think of it as "Can I, by simply putting a little bit of effort into one exam, erase four years of poor grades?"

I'm not giving him an excuse, but more qualifying what he said. This sort of sentiment is far too prevalent at the service academies. You're told from the very beginning that you're the best of the best, the future leaders of this country and sent an endless onslaught of sunshine blown up your butt. You're told that no one at regular colleges has to endure the intense rigor you do, that you work harder, longer and more efficiently than everyone else out there. It's sort of the warrior culture that is developed and that build up of a person's ego. It's entirely not true and some come to realize that while others keep that "oorah" (or hooah, yut, hoorah, etc) attitude for life.

The OP comes off pretty badly with what he said, I agree, but I just figured I'd give a little context to what he said and why he said it.

dowu wrote:

Kevinlomax wrote:3.8 in basket weaving from Potamoker University beats a 3.6 in physics from Carnegie Melon.

Mind= Blown

150% agree. As someone who went to a Carnegie Mellon/Gerogia Tech/Rice/Cal Tech/MIT, I find it so damn irritating when I hear about some bro who went to a state university or no-name school, ended up with a 3.7 and multiple acceptance in the T14 w ease. At these tech schools, we are forced to take loads of Programming and Science courses that wreck our GPA. Hell, getting a 3.4+ at a reputable school is more respectable than a 3.8 in a joke major at a unviersity outside the top30.

matthewsean85 wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:

midwest17 wrote:

Kevinlomax wrote:At West Point, the core curriculum was heavily Engineering based and as my GPA reflects, I am not the greatest Math and Science student. Besides the fact I was forced to take so many engineering classes, we also had to be up at 630 am, keep our rooms clean for inspection, play a sport 4x a week, take military classes, have mandatory military training on Saturday, an honor code to prevent cheating, drug tests so no adderall etc.

I had many friends who went to their local state school and barely attended class, majored in Communications and had gpa of 3.7+ ... with a few months of studying on the LSAT they could easily get into a T14.

Hint: the bolded makes you look like a jerk.

Also, are you seriously complaining about the fact that you had an anti-cheating honor code?

He should write an addendum letting adcomms know he would have cheated had the code not existed. "My 2.7 is not reflective of my ability to succeed at a school like yours where cheating and drug use are not frowned upon."

OP you have to turn the question around. Instead of "Did I waste four years working hard?" think of it as "Can I, by simply putting a little bit of effort into one exam, erase four years of poor grades?"

I'm not giving him an excuse, but more qualifying what he said. This sort of sentiment is far too prevalent at the service academies. You're told from the very beginning that you're the best of the best, the future leaders of this country and sent an endless onslaught of sunshine blown up your butt. You're told that no one at regular colleges has to endure the intense rigor you do, that you work harder, longer and more efficiently than everyone else out there. It's sort of the warrior culture that is developed and that build up of a person's ego. It's entirely not true and some come to realize that while others keep that "oorah" (or hooah, yut, hoorah, etc) attitude for life.

The OP comes off pretty badly with what he said, I agree, but I just figured I'd give a little context to what he said and why he said it.

You would think that the performance of the service academy football teams would be enough to convince cadets that they don't have a monopoly on hard work. But no, the brainwashing is tough to shake.

JazzOne wrote:

matthewsean85 wrote:

Kevinlomax wrote:At West Point, the core curriculum was heavily Engineering based and as my GPA reflects, I am not the greatest Math and Science student. Besides the fact I was forced to take so many engineering classes, we also had to be up at 630 am, keep our rooms clean for inspection, play a sport 4x a week, take military classes, have mandatory military training on Saturday, an honor code to prevent cheating, drug tests so no adderall etc.

I had many friends who went to their local state school and barely attended class, majored in Communications and had gpa of 3.7+ ... with a few months of studying on the LSAT they could easily get into a T14.

I'm not giving him an excuse, but more qualifying what he said. This sort of sentiment is far too prevalent at the service academies. You're told from the very beginning that you're the best of the best, the future leaders of this country and sent an endless onslaught of sunshine blown up your butt. You're told that no one at regular colleges has to endure the intense rigor you do, that you work harder, longer and more efficiently than everyone else out there. It's sort of the warrior culture that is developed and that build up of a person's ego. It's entirely not true and some come to realize that while others keep that "oorah" (or hooah, yut, hoorah, etc) attitude for life.

The OP comes off pretty badly with what he said, I agree, but I just figured I'd give a little context to what he said and why he said it.

You would think that the performance of the service academy football teams would be enough to convince cadets that they don't have a monopoly on hard work. But no, the brainwashing is tough to shake.

[/quote]

Low blow man, low blow. You go and try to find five star recruits who want to sign away five years of their life after college to fight in Afghanistan while being locked down like a six year old while in college. I'd say they're doing the best they can with what they've got.