Top Law Schools

Just got my Academic Summary Report online on LSAC.org, and LSAC completely trashed my GPA!!!

I failed a bunch of classes my freshman and sophomore years in undergrad, which I repeated over the span of the next 3 years, replacing all of the Fs with As and Bs to end up with a somewhat decent Cum GPA upon graduation... For the classes that I repeated, the previous class grade does not count towards my credits or GPA (at least in my school)... When you retake the class a second time, the first grade stays on the transcript, but that first class no longer weighs in on your GPA -- whatever you got in the repeat is not considered towards your GPA.

However, it seems that LSAC just threw in all of the grades I've ever gotten in undergrad (retake, or not), and averaged them up! Is this how they normally compute someone's GPA for the Academic Summary Report, or are there just a bunch of idiots there that don't know how to calculate GPA??? Also, they put my Degree GPA the same as my Cumulative GPA... Isn't degree GPA only for those classes that count towards my degree?? I switched majors halfway through undergrad, so some of the classes that I took wouldn't even count AT ALL towards my degree!

This is normal. They did not mess up your gpa. That is your true cum. gpa.

No takebacksies in LSAC

That's correct, LSAC's policy is to count all grades that appear on the transcript, regardless of how your school counts them in its GPA or toward your degree. Your cum and degree GPAs would only differ if you had grades from other institutions.

im_blue wrote:That's correct, LSAC's policy is to count all grades that appear on the transcript, regardless of how your school counts them in its GPA or toward your degree. Your cum and degree GPAs would only differ if you had grades from other institutions.

Or if your school doesn't count + and -.

But yes, LSAC averages all grades. Makes sense if you think about it, given that you don't really get a do-over in the legal profession either.

Is this how law schools look at Cum GPA also, or is this just LSAC's way of doing it??

JohnstonMMM wrote:Is this how law schools look at Cum GPA also, or is this just LSAC's way of doing it??

Law schools look at GPA the same way LSAC reports it.

.

srb wrote:

im_blue wrote:That's correct, LSAC's policy is to count all grades that appear on the transcript, regardless of how your school counts them in its GPA or toward your degree. Your cum and degree GPAs would only differ if you had grades from other institutions.

Or if your school doesn't count + and -.

But yes, LSAC averages all grades. Makes sense if you think about it, given that you don't really get a do-over in the legal profession either.

Yeah, makes sense if you can compare being 18 and first year of undergrad to working in a legal profession...

to continue...does LSAC weigh withdraws?

srb wrote:

im_blue wrote:That's correct, LSAC's policy is to count all grades that appear on the transcript, regardless of how your school counts them in its GPA or toward your degree. Your cum and degree GPAs would only differ if you had grades from other institutions.

Or if your school doesn't count + and -.

But yes, LSAC averages all grades. Makes sense if you think about it, given that you don't really get a do-over in the legal profession either.

+1

I can't believe how many people fail classes in college and complain about its effect on the LSAC GPA...

The +/- complaints I can understand, but failing a class is hardly something to be ignored.

JohnstonMMM wrote:

srb wrote:

im_blue wrote:That's correct, LSAC's policy is to count all grades that appear on the transcript, regardless of how your school counts them in its GPA or toward your degree. Your cum and degree GPAs would only differ if you had grades from other institutions.

Or if your school doesn't count + and -.

But yes, LSAC averages all grades. Makes sense if you think about it, given that you don't really get a do-over in the legal profession either.

Yeah, makes sense if you can compare being 18 and first year of undergrad to working in a legal profession...

It's great if you re-took your classes, received top grades, and ultimately graduated with an upward trend. Law schools will acknowledge and appreciate that.

However, it's hard to argue that law schools should completely disregard failed classes as part of your GPA...

randyn wrote:to continue...does LSAC weigh withdraws?

Non-punititive withdraws don't factor in

Are you seriously suggesting that people should be able to retake classes as many times as they want until they get a 4.0?

utmguy wrote:Are you seriously suggesting that people should be able to retake classes as many times as they want until they get a 4.0?

sounds good to me.....and we should get an extra 5 mins on each LSAT section!

I never said "ignore" and never said "completely disregard"... The failing grades are there on the transcript for everyone to see, and they do not go away. No doubt this would count against an applicant when the admissions council looks at the transcript... But to count all those grades into one of the two main criteria that determine your chances of acceptance is ludicrous... How can you have 2 or 3 grades factoring into your gpa from one class? You retake stuff for a reason...

Compare this with someone taking an LSAT cold, with no plans of going to law school, in their freshman year of college and getting a 120... Then 5 years later, they take it for real and score a 170. Is their reported LSAT score now 145???

.

paratactical wrote:

JohnstonMMM wrote: Compare this with someone taking an LSAT cold, with no plans of going to law school, in their freshman year of college and getting a 120... Then 5 years later, they take it for real and score a 170. Is their reported LSAT score now 145???

LSAC keeps your scores for 5 years and when schools used to average them, this could very well have been the case.

Failed all those classes more than 5 years ago... I've been out of school for a number of years.

JohnstonMMM wrote:I never said "ignore" and never said "completely disregard"... The failing grades are there on the transcript for everyone to see, and they do not go away. No doubt this would count against an applicant when the admissions council looks at the transcript... But to count all those grades into one of the two main criteria that determine your chances of acceptance is ludicrous... How can you have 2 or 3 grades factoring into your gpa from one class? You retake stuff for a reason...

Compare this with someone taking an LSAT cold, with no plans of going to law school, in their freshman year of college and getting a 120... Then 5 years later, they take it for real and score a 170. Is their reported LSAT score now 145???

I think it's done out of respect for the fact that there are some students who never retook a class, and who don't have failing grades on their transcripts. It's unfair for those students to have the same GPA and same consideration from adcomms as someone who took several classes over to eliminate bad grades. You know adcomms wouldn't care about retakes if it didn't affect LSAC GPA, because they only care about what changes their ranking.

srb wrote:

JohnstonMMM wrote:I never said "ignore" and never said "completely disregard"... The failing grades are there on the transcript for everyone to see, and they do not go away. No doubt this would count against an applicant when the admissions council looks at the transcript... But to count all those grades into one of the two main criteria that determine your chances of acceptance is ludicrous... How can you have 2 or 3 grades factoring into your gpa from one class? You retake stuff for a reason...

Compare this with someone taking an LSAT cold, with no plans of going to law school, in their freshman year of college and getting a 120... Then 5 years later, they take it for real and score a 170. Is their reported LSAT score now 145???

I think it's done out of respect for the fact that there are some students who never retook a class, and who don't have failing grades on their transcripts. It's unfair for those students to have the same GPA and same consideration from adcomms as someone who took several classes over to eliminate bad grades. You know adcomms wouldn't care about retakes if it didn't affect LSAC GPA, because they only care about what changes their ranking.

Exactly, just like how law schools suddenly decided that the highest LSAT score most accurately predicts your potential, just as soon as LSAC changed its multiple LSAT policy.

.

JohnstonMMM wrote:I never said "ignore" and never said "completely disregard"... The failing grades are there on the transcript for everyone to see, and they do not go away. No doubt this would count against an applicant when the admissions council looks at the transcript... But to count all those grades into one of the two main criteria that determine your chances of acceptance is ludicrous... How can you have 2 or 3 grades factoring into your gpa from one class? You retake stuff for a reason...

Compare this with someone taking an LSAT cold, with no plans of going to law school, in their freshman year of college and getting a 120... Then 5 years later, they take it for real and score a 170. Is their reported LSAT score now 145???

Bad analogy - the whole point of a GPA is to evaluate your cumulative performance over your entire college career. The LSAT is a single skills test.

And lower LSAT scores are theoretically considered (when they're less than 5 years apart - after 5 years they disappear from your record) so your argument fails anyway.

JohnstonMMM wrote:You retake stuff for a reason...

You do realize that the ability to retake a class is not necessarily the norm, and many schools do not offer that as an option.

It sucks that you screwed up when you were 18. I did too. There isn't shit we can do about it. Now it is time to drive on. Write an asskicking addendum about how you are motivated, passionate and enthusiastic about law. Apply as if the GPA in your mind was the real one. Get into the school of your dreams.

kurla88 wrote:

JohnstonMMM wrote:I never said "ignore" and never said "completely disregard"... The failing grades are there on the transcript for everyone to see, and they do not go away. No doubt this would count against an applicant when the admissions council looks at the transcript... But to count all those grades into one of the two main criteria that determine your chances of acceptance is ludicrous... How can you have 2 or 3 grades factoring into your gpa from one class? You retake stuff for a reason...

Compare this with someone taking an LSAT cold, with no plans of going to law school, in their freshman year of college and getting a 120... Then 5 years later, they take it for real and score a 170. Is their reported LSAT score now 145???

Bad analogy - the whole point of a GPA is to evaluate your cumulative performance over your entire college career. The LSAT is a single skills test.

And lower LSAT scores are theoretically considered (when they're less than 5 years apart - after 5 years they disappear from your record) so your argument fails anyway.

1) I'm not discussing the point of GPA. I'm arguing the way LSAC calculates the GPA. From LSAC's standpoint, the GPA and LSAT are both used to evaluate one's aptitude for applying law school. I don't think one semester of all Fs from an at-that-time undergrad freshman who didn't even know that there is life after college -- and more importantly didn't care about Fs (since your school tells you you can just retake) changes one's current aptitude for law school.

2) As mentioned earlier, this was, in fact, more than 5 years ago, so your counter fails..

fuck lsac, fml