Weak Soft Matters? Forum

[PrayFor170]

Long story short.

I wasn't a really intellectually-curious student back in college, so apart from getting a moderately high GPA (around 3.8 a pretty easy major), I didn't really do anything excepting idling around and partying. So now when it comes to my resume, I only had two internships, three research projects involved. I also have a MA degree in a top university. Also, my LORs are pretty weak, I assume. Although my recommenders are faculty members from top university and can talk a great deal about me, neither of them are on tenure track. I think I've done a decent job in PS persuading the admissions why I want to pursue a law degree, but I'm not sure they'll buy that. They probably can't get evidence that I'm a hard-working student, although in later years I've changed to be a serious and diligent student in grad school.

So given my weak softs (which I'm afraid I can't compensate, since I can't retake undergrad), do you think if I get a 173+ on December LSAT I can stand a chance for T14? My PT average now is 172, and if I work hard for the two weeks it's hopeful I can raise 1 or 2 points. Even though you guys are constantly talking about law school admission as a "number game", but all of you seem to have outstanding softs.

[BigZuck]

GPA/LSAT are pretty much all that matters. If you did get 173+ you should be fine at least at Columbia on down

This is all moot when you bink like a 162. Just focus on the LSAT prep.

[ihenry]

Check in.

China -- Above Average
LSAT -- Signed up for December...

I mean I could be wrong but in your OP it seems you were talking like an applicant from a U.S. undergrad with a reportable GPA.

To answer your OP, I think softs matter more for bubble candidates (and internationals). With a 3.8/173 you are a presumptive admit in most places. And I don't think your soft is that weak either.

[malleus discentium]

Long story short.

I wasn't a really intellectually-curious student back in college, so apart from getting a moderately high GPA (around 3.8 a pretty easy major), I didn't really do anything excepting idling around and partying. So now when it comes to my resume, I only had two internships, three research projects involved. I also have a MA degree in a top university. Also, my LORs are pretty weak, I assume. Although my recommenders are faculty members from top university and can talk a great deal about me, neither of them are on tenure track. I think I've done a decent job in PS persuading the admissions why I want to pursue a law degree, but I'm not sure they'll buy that. They probably can't get evidence that I'm a hard-working student, although in later years I've changed to be a serious and diligent student in grad school.

So given my weak softs (which I'm afraid I can't compensate, since I can't retake undergrad), do you think if I get a 173+ on December LSAT I can stand a chance for T14? My PT average now is 172, and if I work hard for the two weeks it's hopeful I can raise 1 or 2 points. Even though you guys are constantly talking about law school admission as a "number game", but all of you seem to have outstanding softs.

Those aren't great softs but they're not bad enough to cause you to underperform your numbers. And it doesn't matter whether the professors are tenure-track. Don't use your PS to tell adcoms why you want a law degree, use it to tell them something important about yourself. The fact that you want to go to law school is probably not one of those things.

[PrayFor170]

Check in.

China -- Above Average
LSAT -- Signed up for December...

I mean I could be wrong but in your OP it seems you were talking like an applicant from a U.S. undergrad with a reportable GPA.

To answer your OP, I think softs matter more for bubble candidates (and internationals). With a 3.8/173 you are a presumptive admit in most places. And I don't think your soft is that weak either.

The school I'm applying will see my transcript, so at least there is a number.
I wrote the specific number here because I'm not sure if everyone understands the "AA" and "S".

[ihenry]

Check in.

China -- Above Average
LSAT -- Signed up for December...

I mean I could be wrong but in your OP it seems you were talking like an applicant from a U.S. undergrad with a reportable GPA.

To answer your OP, I think softs matter more for bubble candidates (and internationals). With a 3.8/173 you are a presumptive admit in most places. And I don't think your soft is that weak either.

The school I'm applying will see my transcript, so at least there is a number.
I wrote the specific number here because I'm not sure if everyone understands the "AA" and "S".

Okay, but I think the U.S./international distinction can matter more here; while there is a number, it is treated very differently. Still, I think you will have a good cycle if you master your LSAT.

[hangingtree]

GPA/LSAT are pretty much all that matters. If you did get 173+ you should be fine at least at Columbia on down

This is all moot when you bink like a 162. Just focus on the LSAT prep.

Those aren't great softs but they're not bad enough to cause you to underperform your numbers. And it doesn't matter whether the professors are tenure-track.

Credited responses here, but to elaborate:

I know someone who was rejected at HYS one year and the next accepted at all three with the same numbers. Granted, she acquired work experience that you will likely not have acquired, but this shows that softs matter. GPA/LSAT are pretty much all that matter, but admissions committees have to make calls beyond the numbers sometimes.

So, how will your softs impact you? Your resume is not great, but even for T14 it's not bad (perhaps just below average). More importantly, as anyone, you can make up a lot of ground in your essays. I would think of softs as everything non-GPA/LSAT in your application. If you craft a good narrative about yourself - one that makes you appear professional, intellectual, and pleasant (and I think I agree malleus's suggestion about your PS) - I think your "softs" will be at least average and you will not underperform your numbers.

[PrayFor170]

GPA/LSAT are pretty much all that matters. If you did get 173+ you should be fine at least at Columbia on down

This is all moot when you bink like a 162. Just focus on the LSAT prep.

Those aren't great softs but they're not bad enough to cause you to underperform your numbers. And it doesn't matter whether the professors are tenure-track.

Credited responses here, but to elaborate:

I know someone who was rejected at HYS one year and the next accepted at all three with the same numbers. Granted, she acquired work experience that you will likely not have acquired, but this shows that softs matter. GPA/LSAT are pretty much all that matter, but admissions committees have to make calls beyond the numbers sometimes.

So, how will your softs impact you? Your resume is not great, but even for T14 it's not bad (perhaps just below average). More importantly, as anyone, you can make up a lot of ground in your essays. I would think of softs as everything non-GPA/LSAT in your application. If you craft a good narrative about yourself - one that makes you appear professional, intellectual, and pleasant (and I think I agree malleus's suggestion about your PS) - I think your "softs" will be at least average and you will not underperform your numbers.

Thanks for the info! Really appreciate

Right now I am working as a research assistant on campus while prepping for LSAT (though an important role in the team, but not sure if that accounts for WE, probably not). I'm not really dead-set on applying this cycle. If I underperform in Dec. LSAT, I'll study for the Feb. one and work for a year to acquire WE, then apply next cycle. If I perform OK, I'll apply and see what happens.

There's really no time to regret . I'd rather think getting a 175+ is far easier than any of the rest.