Interview Strategy for Splitters Forum

[india45]

Does anyone have tips or experience effectively shaking the slacker status that's often attributed to splitters in their interview? I've looked for specific strategies but haven't been able to find much. Sorry if I'm missing something!

I have a couple interviews coming up and I know I'm going to have to address my splitter status (GPA 3.72, LSAT 174). I am six years out of school and while I have learned a lot about time management and so on since graduating, my mediocre performance is college wasn't because I couldn't manage time but in effect, because I didn't care/was deeply unhappy/didn't work hard enough. Do you think it would be a terrible idea to address this head-on?.. As in, I was immature, but that was 6 years ago and I have changed my priorities since or is it a better move just focus on the strategies I have learned for success and distance myself from college in general.

Has anyone successfully pulled this off?

[Alive97]

Your GPA is not mediocre and you are not a splitter. You did not perform poorly and therefore you have nothing to explain (nor will they expect you to based on your numbers).

[fliptrip]

Getting a 3.72 in college is not a mediocre performance by any reasonable standard. For the school's you're interviewing with, you may be a splitter, but your grades would in no way indicate that you are a slacker.

I think you will do a lot better portraying confidence in yourself and pride in your performance. If you go in there talking about how you didn't really try or care or whatever, you're going to not come off well at all. You'll either sound like a jerk who sleepwalked through college on your intellect or you'll really raise questions about what exactly was going on at your college with respect to grades.

Folks who need an "explain the grades" strategy are the 3.0/175 types.

[EnderWiggin]

while 'splitters' who are in a similar situation may be able to add some perspective, I think you need to take stock of your situation. Assuming 3.72 is your actual LSAC GPA, your gpa is only < 25ths for YHS, it's between 25th and median at GULC, Cornell, NU, Mich, Duke, Berk, UVA, Penn, NYU, and Chicago, and you're above median at Columbia. not to mention your LSAT is above median for every T14. you are fine.

even though it's not the perfect gpa you may wish you had, there are a ton of people in these fora who would kill to have a 3.72. in the highly unlikely event you get asked about it, sure, quickly address it and move on, but it doesn't seem like something you should reflexively/defensively bring up on your own. you are 6+ years removed from school. if you have at least one good academic rec and come from a school that's regarded as decent, even better.

[Lexaholik]

Does anyone have tips or experience effectively shaking the slacker status that's often attributed to splitters in their interview? I've looked for specific strategies but haven't been able to find much. Sorry if I'm missing something!

I have a couple interviews coming up and I know I'm going to have to address my splitter status (GPA 3.72, LSAT 174). I am six years out of school and while I have learned a lot about time management and so on since graduating, my mediocre performance is college wasn't because I couldn't manage time but in effect, because I didn't care/was deeply unhappy/didn't work hard enough. Do you think it would be a terrible idea to address this head-on?.. As in, I was immature, but that was 6 years ago and I have changed my priorities since or is it a better move just focus on the strategies I have learned for success and distance myself from college in general.

Has anyone successfully pulled this off?

Lol is this a typo? Do you mean 2.72?

I'm a former splitter who once conducted interviews for my law school. I never mentioned it when I was interviewing and neither should you. Don't talk about it unless asked directly about it. Spend your time highlighting what you've done since then, what you bring to the table, etc. Bad grades are best addressed in an addendum.

[Mullens]

If you have a 3.72, it would be a terrible idea to address this head on. The interviewers will think you are pretty socially incompetent. Everyone assumes you have matured in 6 years since college, you don't need to tell them.

[Clearly]

If you have a 3.72, it would be a terrible idea to address this head on. The interviewers will think you are pretty socially incompetent. Everyone assumes you have matured in 6 years since college, you don't need to tell them.

I already think s/he's socially incompetent so thats not a great start.

Seriously though, if you think you're a splitter and you should act apologetic about a 3.7 GPA you're an idiot.

[fliptrip]

If you have a 3.72, it would be a terrible idea to address this head on. The interviewers will think you are pretty socially incompetent. Everyone assumes you have matured in 6 years since college, you don't need to tell them.

I already think s/he's socially incompetent so thats not a great start.

Seriously though, if you think you're a splitter and you should act apologetic about a 3.7 GPA you're an idiot.

Damn. Layin' 'em low, but yeah +100000.

[india45]

Thanks everyone for the perspective. Will not address head on. Was only wondering because I'd read somewhere about someone with a similar GPA being asked about it.

[fliptrip]

Thanks everyone for the perspective. Will not address head on. Was only wondering because I'd read somewhere about someone with a similar GPA being asked about it.

This is amazing to me. This question is akin to "why aren't you perfect?" The difference between a 3.7 and a 3.9 is probably just a matter of A's vs. A-'s or an A- vs a B+.

I could see being asked about a crooked looking grade or two, but to be asked to in general explain a 3.7? My less developed side would be very tempted to tell that interviewer to kiss my ass. A 3.7 should not need explaining.

[drblakedowns]

I am very much a splitter (3,27; 173), and I have only had one live interview (so small sample size), but I wasn't really asked about my undergrad gpa (though I did write and addendum about it). I did get a question asking if I was prepared for all of the reading, which may have been getting at if I was a slacker in undergrad, but it presented as "Law school requires quite a bit of reading compared to STEM, are you prepared for that."

[fliptrip]

I am very much a splitter (3,27; 173), and I have only had one live interview (so small sample size), but I wasn't really asked about my undergrad gpa (though I did write and addendum about it). I did get a question asking if I was prepared for all of the reading, which may have been getting at if I was a slacker in undergrad, but it presented as "Law school requires quite a bit of reading compared to STEM, are you prepared for that."

Nah, I think that question should be taken at face value. I doubt they were implying you were a slacker.