dryuasd wrote:Sorry if this has already been covered.
Clearly, while Berkeley has the lowest median LSAT in the T14, it's definitely not the easiest T14 to get into. Do we have a summary of what makes Berkeley's admissions criteria unique? I'm guessing that it has something to do with greater emphasis on recs/personal statements, diversity, work experience, etc.?
I went to Berkeley/Boalt and thought I'd help out. I've been reading through this site for a while and thought this was a good time to finally sign up.
You're right about the relatively low median LSAT, and the previous posters above are right about the high GPA median. But there's a reason to it. The LSAT measures your performance at a single test-taking event. There's already enough published studies out there showing that test takers from disadvantaged or marginalized backgrounds underperform not because they aren't capable but because of the test-taking environment itself. This same environment actually psychologically, and unfairly, boosts the performance of socially privileged test takers. And you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that if you and your family have the money, you can get enough materials, tutors, and LSAT programs to go from a 145 to a 175 within months. So the LSAT isn't a really good predictor of success during or after law school. It just indirectly proxies for socioeconomic privilege. A person who performs a 170, then, isn't necessarily smarter or more capable than someone who performs a 165, even by the tiniest measure.
The GPA, though, results from a history of work, typically three years of undergraduate work before applying to law school. And this work likely wasn't measured by a single LSAT-like test per subject. It covers the student's work on papers, projects, performances, and other activities different from just a regular old test. This gives students more options to show their capabilities and potential, and to be graded more accurately on those capabilities and potential (although definitely not a perfect process to be sure). So the GPA, then, is more likely to proxy for actual ability, and less likely to proxy primarily for socioeconomic status, than the LSAT.
I know a lot of schools out there pretend like they care about diversity and the person behind the application. But, let's be honest, a high portion of them don't. If you have the money to get that 175, then your application will beat one with a 173 at a lot of law schools merely because of the score. And it's hard to blame them, because the rankings depend on median LSAT scores, and failure to keep them up can cause a drop in ranking, which has negative consequences with respect to future applicants, reputation, employment prospects, etc. And test-taking and the LSAT itself especially is so ingrained in the law school application process, and there are so many socially inept people who treat scores as a measure of their self worth, that any attempt by schools to try to lower the reliance on the LSAT is met with a lot of friction. If you don't believe me, go over to the "2018 LSAT Medians" thread on this forum and see all the low self-esteem, internally fragile commenters freaking out that Berkeley's LSAT median dropped by a single point, and that Berkeley somehow must not be a good school because of it (where the correlation, let alone causation, comes from I have no idea).
Berkeley is very socially aware, and so, I think, it values GPA over the LSAT score, and puts an emphasis on the personal statements. When I went there, just about every single classmate of mine had some unique story behind them, and I actually never met a classmate who was so socially inept from privilege that they boasted about their scores or attributed, even indirectly, their self-worth on false measures like grades or admission test scores. (Don't get me wrong. Students knew the importance of grades in the legal field generally so there was healthy competition). And you don't get this type of environment, this type of diversity, talent, and genuineness, by taking a 175 over a 173 merely because of that difference, especially if the applicant who scored the 175 hasn't had a blemish or a day of real world experience (i.e. some challenge) in their life.
I'm not sure how to tell you what the golden ticket to Berkeley is. It's weird, like an aura. There was something about a lot of the people there that I could sense just being around them, but I can't really put it into words. People were just.... beyond. I don't know how to explain it, but it sure wasn't the LSAT or even the high GPAs.
Good luck!