Pre-law adviser said NOT to take all easy classes Forum

[iluvcash]

Hi all, I'm a hot mess right now and need your input on a situation.

Basically, I'm an AA male with a 3.6+ LSAC GPA, I'm currently studying to take the June LSAT. I am staying on for a 5th year (2 semesters) of college in order to take easy (intro, 100 level) courses to raise my LSAC GPA to a 3.7. I'm taking a full credit courseload of easy classes to achieve this purpose. At the same time, I'm continuing to study the LSAT for June. I plan to apply in the fall of next year.

Is this a right strategy?
My pre-law adviser says no.

The adviser suggests that top law schools will see the easy courseload and that it will reflect negatively on me. The adviser explained that this strategy will definitely put much more emphasis on my LSAT score. The adviser suggests that I drop a few intro 100 level classes, and add upper level classes instead.

I really don't want to add upper level classes because I'm trying to get A+s in order to raise my GPA, the easy classes that I'm taking make that a possibility. My record shows that I have taken difficult upper level classes before, and have done well in them, getting A+, and As. If I take upper level classes, it makes the job of getting A+s and studying for the LSAT much more difficult.

What does TLS say?

[ilikebaseball]

idk if it helps your question, but my pre law advisor told me that i needed to study for my lsat for around a month in order to properly be prepared and then he told me that thomas cooley and Arkansas- Little Rock were fine schools that he'd be happy to see me go to.

So there's that.

[MidwestLifer]

Pre-law advisors don't actually know anything because they're used to funneling kids to T2 U School of Law instead of top schools.

Take the easy classes, although schools that interview may ask why you stayed for another year - are you taking any courses you actually still need in order to graduate?

[McAvoy]

Hi all, I'm a hot mess right now and need your input on a situation.

Basically, I'm an AA male with a 3.6+ LSAC GPA, I'm currently studying to take the June LSAT. I am staying on for a 5th year (2 semesters) of college in order to take easy (intro, 100 level) courses to raise my LSAC GPA to a 3.7. I'm taking a full credit courseload of easy classes to achieve this purpose. At the same time, I'm continuing to study the LSAT for June. I plan to apply in the fall of next year.

Is this a right strategy?
My pre-law adviser says no.

The adviser suggests that top law schools will see the easy courseload and that it will reflect negatively on me. The adviser explained that this strategy will definitely put much more emphasis on my LSAT score. The adviser suggests that I drop a few intro 100 level classes, and add upper level classes instead.

I really don't want to add upper level classes because I'm trying to get A+s in order to raise my GPA, the easy classes that I'm taking make that a possibility. My record shows that I have taken difficult upper level classes before, and have done well in them, getting A+, and As. If I take upper level classes, it makes the job of getting A+s and studying for the LSAT much more difficult.

What does TLS say?

If you are not gunning for HYS (which as an AA you pry should be) then fuck that. Take the easy classes. Come here for advice henceforth.

[KMart]

idk if it helps your question, but my pre law advisor told me that i needed to study for my lsat for around a month in order to properly be prepared and then he told me that thomas cooley and Arkansas- Little Rock were fine schools that he'd be happy to see me go to.

So there's that.

Lol.

Schools have to report the LSAC GPA to the ABA. That's what affects their ranking. Raising that GPA for them will likely help, although you will want a better answer than, "I wanted to raise my GPA" for law schools that might ask about it.

[iluvcash]

Pre-law advisors don't actually know anything because they're used to funneling kids to T2 U School of Law instead of top schools.

Take the easy classes, although schools that interview may ask why you stayed for another year - are you taking any courses you actually still need in order to graduate?

I only need one more course in order to graduate.

Actually, I really want to be at Uni for another year because I want to become more involved in clubs, organizations, and really volunteering for many causes. In my past 4 years I haven't been involved in much, and I really want to take this chance to work for a cause. Taking easy classes, also gives me more time to commit to those things.

[iluvcash]

Hi all, I'm a hot mess right now and need your input on a situation.

Basically, I'm an AA male with a 3.6+ LSAC GPA, I'm currently studying to take the June LSAT. I am staying on for a 5th year (2 semesters) of college in order to take easy (intro, 100 level) courses to raise my LSAC GPA to a 3.7. I'm taking a full credit courseload of easy classes to achieve this purpose. At the same time, I'm continuing to study the LSAT for June. I plan to apply in the fall of next year.

Is this a right strategy?
My pre-law adviser says no.

The adviser suggests that top law schools will see the easy courseload and that it will reflect negatively on me. The adviser explained that this strategy will definitely put much more emphasis on my LSAT score. The adviser suggests that I drop a few intro 100 level classes, and add upper level classes instead.

I really don't want to add upper level classes because I'm trying to get A+s in order to raise my GPA, the easy classes that I'm taking make that a possibility. My record shows that I have taken difficult upper level classes before, and have done well in them, getting A+, and As. If I take upper level classes, it makes the job of getting A+s and studying for the LSAT much more difficult.

What does TLS say?

If you are not gunning for HYS (which as an AA you pry should be) then fuck that. Take the easy classes. Come here for advice henceforth.

Ha! Maybe I should drop all of those easy classes and just take 2-3 upper level ones. Might as well gun for HYS right?

[Rigo]

As a URM, I don't think there's really much difference between a 3.6x and a 3.7. You'll be pretty desirable with a high LSAT score, regardless of .1 difference in GPA. Spend time and energy on your LSAT. (Maybe a December or a February take would be possible without BS classes to worry about?)
Looking at the T14, a 3.7 would still leave you between 25% and median for most schools...the exact same place you would be with a 3.6. An extra year of classes seems more trouble than it's worth for someone in your situation.

And prelaw advisors generally suck and/or have boomer era idealizations of all law schools as leading to prosperity. At my undergrad, Albany law is "HARVARD ON THE HUDSON [River]"

[Rigo]

Actually, I really want to be at Uni for another year...

Ah okay then. If you want to stay in, then stay in with easy classes. Better to bump up your GPA than jeopardize it with harder classes, which would also take time away from LSAT prep.

Australian, by the way? I'm watching Big Brother Australia 2012 now (best season ever!! Way better than BB USA) and they keep saying "uni." The lingo is growing on me.

Edit: Also, just because something is above 100 level doesn't mean it's necessarily harder. Rate my Professor classes before signing up. Reminds me of when I took AP History in high school and it was such a joke, whereas the non-AP kids had it rough with another teacher. All we did was write creative stories about how mice and bugs would crawl into our founding fathers' wigs. It was so bizarre.

Okay. I've been way too chatty in this thread.

[McAvoy]

Hi all, I'm a hot mess right now and need your input on a situation.

Basically, I'm an AA male with a 3.6+ LSAC GPA, I'm currently studying to take the June LSAT. I am staying on for a 5th year (2 semesters) of college in order to take easy (intro, 100 level) courses to raise my LSAC GPA to a 3.7. I'm taking a full credit courseload of easy classes to achieve this purpose. At the same time, I'm continuing to study the LSAT for June. I plan to apply in the fall of next year.

Is this a right strategy?
My pre-law adviser says no.

The adviser suggests that top law schools will see the easy courseload and that it will reflect negatively on me. The adviser explained that this strategy will definitely put much more emphasis on my LSAT score. The adviser suggests that I drop a few intro 100 level classes, and add upper level classes instead.

I really don't want to add upper level classes because I'm trying to get A+s in order to raise my GPA, the easy classes that I'm taking make that a possibility. My record shows that I have taken difficult upper level classes before, and have done well in them, getting A+, and As. If I take upper level classes, it makes the job of getting A+s and studying for the LSAT much more difficult.

What does TLS say?

If you are not gunning for HYS (which as an AA you pry should be) then fuck that. Take the easy classes. Come here for advice henceforth.

Ha! Maybe I should drop all of those easy classes and just take 2-3 upper level ones. Might as well gun for HYS right?

I can't comment on getting into HYS but I would still say the easy classes are a better bet, generally speaking. But yeah the LSAT is what's going to make or break you either way here. Make sure that is your #1 priority the next year.

[hillz]

IMO, I think it would be better for you to spend the next year: 1) focusing on the LSAT and making an excellent score 2) getting some work experience. You can still do something meaningful for the causes you care about, whether it's actually working full time for a non-profit or working somewhere else and being involved in your community outside of work. When it comes time for you to apply for jobs after law school, interviewers will look more favorably on someone who has job experience. Not to mention that it will also benefit you in that it might clarify what exactly you want to do with your law degree.

[TheSpanishMain]

Pre-law advisors are generally dumb.

[HYSorBust3]

GPA
LSAT

[ilikebaseball]

not even gonna lie i dont even make eye contact with mine anymore. His advice is either useless or detrimental. It takes two seconds to google more helpful information. Take easy classes. Get a high GPA. With a high GPA the sky's the limit. Or Yale.

[McAvoy]

LSAT
GPA

FTFY

[butlerraider1]

At my undergrad, Albany law is "HARVARD ON THE HUDSON [River]"

UA?

[Rigo]

At my undergrad, Albany law is "HARVARD ON THE HUDSON [River]"

UA?

The one and only.

[DiniMae]

If you are not gunning for HYS (which as an AA you pry should be) then fuck that. Take the easy classes. Come here for advice henceforth.

I would say that this is for T6 in general; not just HYS. I went to the LAWS Workshop (which I recommend for the OP) and they somewhat addressed this strategy. If OP is aiming for T14 in general, then this is a great plan. If he wants T6, he needs to take courses that are at least related to his major or can be explained. For a KJD to take on an extra year of classes that are 100 and have nothing to do with his major won't go over well.

Honestly, for a KJD with no real softs, he should worry about the LSAT more than the extra .1 on a GPA. If he wants an easy spring semester, finish classes this December, intern all spring and study for the June LSAT.

[Nova]

let tls b ur pre-law advisior

[gnomgnomuch]

As a URM, I don't think there's really much difference between a 3.6x and a 3.7. You'll be pretty desirable with a high LSAT score, regardless of .1 difference in GPA. Spend time and energy on your LSAT. (Maybe a December or a February take would be possible without BS classes to worry about?)
Looking at the T14, a 3.7 would still leave you between 25% and median for most schools...the exact same place you would be with a 3.6. An extra year of classes seems more trouble than it's worth for someone in your situation.

And prelaw advisors generally suck and/or have boomer era idealizations of all law schools as leading to prosperity. At my undergrad, Albany law is "HARVARD ON THE HUDSON [River]"

...do you go to a SUNY or CUNY?

Also, if you're familiar with KCC, we call it Harvard by the Bay.
=D

[20141023]

.

[MKC]

Is "prelaw advisor" actually a full-time position at universities? If so, why are they getting paid for giving such shitty advice?

You're surprised university employees are out of touch at all levels? These people work at a place where it is literally impossible to get fired, there's no danger their "company" will ever go out of business, and no one ever demands results of any kind.

Ghostbusters said it best.
[youtube]RjzC1Dgh17A[/youtube]

[DiniMae]

This is taken straight out of a T10 application for 2015:

In evaluating your undergraduate GPA, the following factors may be considered: the age of the grades, exceptionally high grades, difficulty of coursework, time commitments while attending college, dependent care during school, grading patterns at the school attended, and grade trends or discrepancies among your grades.

[delusional]

You're pre-law adviser is wrong. Take the easiest courses possible. .1 on GPA affects what they report to US News. Difficulty of your courses affects how they think they ought to think about you when they are lying in bed and can't fall asleep. Which one do you think matters for your application?

One more hint: No admissions person was ever called on the carpet to explain why she accepted people whose courses weren't difficult enough. Admissions personnel are fired every year for GPA drops.

However, everyone else is right that the LSAT is even more important.

[delusional]

Is "prelaw advisor" actually a full-time position at universities? If so, why are they getting paid for giving such shitty advice?

You're surprised university employees are out of touch at all levels? These people work at a place where it is literally impossible to get fired, there's no danger their "company" will ever go out of business, and no one ever demands results of any kind.

Ghostbusters said it best.
[youtube]RjzC1Dgh17A[/youtube]

Your confusing what they claim to care about with what they actually care about.