Top Law Schools

Hey guys I've been browsing a while now and based off some recent reads here and elsewhere it seems that schools are purposefully trying to select applicants solely to fill certain gpa/lsat quotas. If this is really the case, as others seem to agree, then how much does the personal statement, c&f, rec letters, etc. really matter? And is it fair to say they don't matter at all? Is the process really that mechanical or do these things ever matter for these schools trying to fill the quotas?

There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

This sounds about right, but I do think it is worth mentioning, that you may get the equivalent to a 1-2 lsat increase IF you have a VERY unique story AND an already competitive LSAT.

The Everything Else matters if a school has to decide between you and someone else with the same numbers. That's where you can get a bump. I don't think a unique story gets you a bump in a vacuum, just compared to someone else.

.

smccgrey wrote:I think if a PS is poorly written or has a lot of grammatical mistakes, it would have a bigger impact than an excellent, beautifully constructed PS.

If your numbers are strong and your application is decent overall, you're fine. If your numbers are strong and your PS or LORs are a disaster, you'll probably get dinged.

Agreed. They can't really help you that much, but a terrible PS or negative LOR could def ding you.

whitespider wrote:

smccgrey wrote:I think if a PS is poorly written or has a lot of grammatical mistakes, it would have a bigger impact than an excellent, beautifully constructed PS.

If your numbers are strong and your application is decent overall, you're fine. If your numbers are strong and your PS or LORs are a disaster, you'll probably get dinged.

Agreed. They can't really help you that much, but a terrible PS or negative LOR could def ding you.

Doesn't this kind of contradict what you were just saying though? I mean, if a school is so intent on meeting certain number quotas and have a limited applicant pool, then why would they ding someone for this stuff given their numbers being sufficient? I guess the same applies to behavioral issues then too?

marcsf092 wrote:Doesn't this kind of contradict what you were just saying though? I mean, if a school is so intent on meeting certain number quotas and have a limited applicant pool, then why would they ding someone for this stuff given their numbers being sufficient? I guess the same applies to behavioral issues then too?

I think my first comment applies to the vast majority of applicants. As long as you write somewhat coherently in your ps, you don't have C&F or Academic behavioral issues, and none of your recommenders actively sabotage you, then its all about numbers.

But if theres a serious red flag on your application, then things start to change. Keep in mind, things like employment and bar passage also influence USNWR rankings. If they suspect you're going to be a problem, they might not want you.

LSAT/GPA are pretty much 100% of the picture. Stuff like personal statements, LOR, etc. aren't really positives...they can only be negatives if they're done poorly or reflect badly on you as an applicant.

Law schools exist for two reasons: 1) to rise in the rankings, and 2) to cash in on the federal loan money your digital signature will release into their bank accounts. And the only admissions criteria that matter in the rankings are LSAT and GPA.

The breakdown for non-numerical app components is probably like:

85% no effect
10% help
5% hurt

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

id weight LSAT more

james.bungles wrote:

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

id weight LSAT more

Yeah, since splitters generally have more success than reverse-splitters.

Dirigo wrote:

james.bungles wrote:

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

id weight LSAT more

Yeah, since splitters generally have more success than reverse-splitters.

which is a result of there being a lot more high GPAs than high LSATs

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

Generally agree, although URM status throws a wrench in that formula. There are a few softs that provide a legitimate boost, too.

TheSpanishMain wrote:

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

Generally agree, although URM status throws a wrench in that formula. There are a few softs that provide a legitimate boost, too.

(Thinks military service got him in at GULC)

Being a resident of Texas or North Carolina probably affects the equation for UT and UNC, respectively, right?

jcdetroit wrote:Being a resident of Texas or North Carolina probably affects the equation for UT and UNC, respectively, right?

Definitely UT and UVA.

I didn't know about UNC, but possible. Do they have a % resident matrics threshold requirement?

Mal Reynolds wrote:

TheSpanishMain wrote:

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

Generally agree, although URM status throws a wrench in that formula. There are a few softs that provide a legitimate boost, too.

(Thinks military service got him in at GULC)

(is open to other explanations for a white guy with a 3.3 and a 168 getting UVA and Northwestern)

Dirigo wrote:

jcdetroit wrote:Being a resident of Texas or North Carolina probably affects the equation for UT and UNC, respectively, right?

Definitely UT and UVA.

I didn't know about UNC, but possible. Do they have a % resident matrics threshold requirement?

Definitely help. I got UT, but not UNC. Am a Texas resident with an LSAT>UNC's 75th.

TBF, I'd consider it more like 60% LSAT, 35% GPA, 5% other special snowflake factor at the majority of schools.

Attax wrote:

Dirigo wrote:

jcdetroit wrote:Being a resident of Texas or North Carolina probably affects the equation for UT and UNC, respectively, right?

Definitely UT and UVA.

I didn't know about UNC, but possible. Do they have a % resident matrics threshold requirement?

Definitely help. I got UT, but not UNC. Am a Texas resident with an LSAT>UNC's 75th.

TBF, I'd consider it more like 60% LSAT, 35% GPA, 5% other special snowflake factor at the majority of schools.

Do you have reason to believe your situation wasn't YP though? A 168 is very high for UNC.

Dirigo wrote:

Attax wrote:

Dirigo wrote:

jcdetroit wrote:Being a resident of Texas or North Carolina probably affects the equation for UT and UNC, respectively, right?

Definitely UT and UVA.

I didn't know about UNC, but possible. Do they have a % resident matrics threshold requirement?

Definitely help. I got UT, but not UNC. Am a Texas resident with an LSAT>UNC's 75th.

TBF, I'd consider it more like 60% LSAT, 35% GPA, 5% other special snowflake factor at the majority of schools.

Do you have reason to believe your situation wasn't YP though? A 168 is very high for UNC.

I was WL -> released from WL last week. It very well might have been, but I was also GPA <25th for everywhere worth attending which could have contributed as well. Ultimately, the numbers are the best way to gauge the cycle. I slightly outperformed my numbers, but that is likely due to a variety of factors such as a very very slight LGBT URM bump and unique PS that I'd discuss details via PM.

But OP, #s are the best predictors for 99% of all applicants (other than the olympic athlete thread)

TheSpanishMain wrote:

Mal Reynolds wrote:

TheSpanishMain wrote:

whitespider wrote:There's no way to really effectively quantify it, but that's sure not going to stop me...

LSAT - 50%
GPA - 45%
Everything Else - 5%

(Note: That 5% only usually matters at YS)

Generally agree, although URM status throws a wrench in that formula. There are a few softs that provide a legitimate boost, too.

(Thinks military service got him in at GULC)

(is open to other explanations for a white guy with a 3.3 and a 168 getting UVA and Northwestern)

Because they're really not that selective. Schools are desperate for LSAT scores even between median and 25th.

Mal Reynolds wrote:
Because they're really not that selective. Schools are desperate for LSAT scores even between median and 25th.

Maybe. If that's true, though, LSN is way pessimistic. I just checked and it puts my odds at UVA at 0% (5 rejected, not even a WL) and NU at 11% (2 accepted, 4 WL, 11 rejected). I think another vet (Rotor, maybe?) got Berkeley with a 166.

It's almost like there is an underreporting problem on MyLSN.

Also schools are trying to stabilize their enrollment so if anyone was going to get in, it would be the people with slightly not good enough LSATs.

Mal Reynolds wrote:It's almost like there is an underreporting problem on MyLSN.

Also schools are trying to stabilize their enrollment so if anyone was going to get in, it would be the people with slightly not good enough LSATs.

You'd think they'd throw a bone to a reverse splitter, then, rather than someone who hurts both medians.

Anyway, this is obviously anecdotal but most vets I've talked to report overperforming their numbers a little. Not drastically, but somewhat. You could be right, though. No skin in this one for me at this point.