Top Law Schools

I wanted to know if anybody had insights as to how much weight is put on undergrad gpa and lsac score in transfer applicant admission decisions. I'm at the top of my class (#1) right now and am considering transferring if I maintain my grades, but my LSDAS GPA is mediocre at best and my lsac was only a 160. I did have a significant upward grade trend for the second half of undergrad, and my "major gpa" was around a 3.9. The school I'm at is in the 50-60 range (T2), and I think i'll be able to swing some good LoRs. Do I have any chance at T6 with relatively poor pre-law school credentials?

Anonymous User wrote:I wanted to know if anybody had insights as to how much weight is put on undergrad gpa and lsac score in transfer applicant admission decisions. I'm at the top of my class (#1) right now and am considering transferring if I maintain my grades, but my LSDAS GPA is mediocre at best and my lsac was only a 160. I did have a significant upward grade trend for the second half of undergrad, and my "major gpa" was around a 3.9. The school I'm at is in the 50-60 range, and I think i'll be able to swing some good LoRs. Do I have any chance at T6 with relatively poor pre-law school credentials?

There is no weight given to those numbers. To answer your question about your chances we need to know what school tier you're in. T4 to top 6 is not likely even at #1. Given your lsat score I assume you're not at a t4 though.

toothbrush wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I wanted to know if anybody had insights as to how much weight is put on undergrad gpa and lsac score in transfer applicant admission decisions. I'm at the top of my class (#1) right now and am considering transferring if I maintain my grades, but my LSDAS GPA is mediocre at best and my lsac was only a 160. I did have a significant upward grade trend for the second half of undergrad, and my "major gpa" was around a 3.9. The school I'm at is in the 50-60 range, and I think i'll be able to swing some good LoRs. Do I have any chance at T6 with relatively poor pre-law school credentials?

There is no weight given to those numbers. To answer your question about your chances we need to know what school tier you're in. T4 to top 6 is not likely even at #1. Given your lsat score I assume you're not at a t4 though.

T2, 50-60

toothbrush wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I wanted to know if anybody had insights as to how much weight is put on undergrad gpa and lsac score in transfer applicant admission decisions. I'm at the top of my class (#1) right now and am considering transferring if I maintain my grades, but my LSDAS GPA is mediocre at best and my lsac was only a 160. I did have a significant upward grade trend for the second half of undergrad, and my "major gpa" was around a 3.9. The school I'm at is in the 50-60 range, and I think i'll be able to swing some good LoRs. Do I have any chance at T6 with relatively poor pre-law school credentials?

There is no weight given to those numbers. To answer your question about your chances we need to know what school tier you're in. T4 to top 6 is not likely even at #1. Given your lsat score I assume you're not at a t4 though.

You may be right, but this sounds a little off. NYU admitted 4 transfer from Brooklyn Law and few others from T2 schools. Seems like being #1 in a T2 doesn't put you completely out of the game.

OP - just scroll to the last page of the 509 disclosures for the schools you're interested in (http://www.abarequireddisclosures.org/). Of course, there's no way to know how likely your chances at admission are, but you might at least figure out of its worth shooting an application that way.

rondemarino wrote:

toothbrush wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I wanted to know if anybody had insights as to how much weight is put on undergrad gpa and lsac score in transfer applicant admission decisions. I'm at the top of my class (#1) right now and am considering transferring if I maintain my grades, but my LSDAS GPA is mediocre at best and my lsac was only a 160. I did have a significant upward grade trend for the second half of undergrad, and my "major gpa" was around a 3.9. The school I'm at is in the 50-60 range, and I think i'll be able to swing some good LoRs. Do I have any chance at T6 with relatively poor pre-law school credentials?

There is no weight given to those numbers. To answer your question about your chances we need to know what school tier you're in. T4 to top 6 is not likely even at #1. Given your lsat score I assume you're not at a t4 though.

You may be right, but this sounds a little off. NYU admitted 4 transfer from Brooklyn Law and few others from T2 schools. Seems like being #1 in a T2 doesn't put you completely out of the game.

OP - just scroll to the last page of the 509 disclosures for the schools you're interested in (http://www.abarequireddisclosures.org/). Of course, there's no way to know how likely your chances at admission are, but you might at least figure out of its worth shooting an application that way.

Awesome resource thanks much. It seems even Harvard excepts a surprising number of students from T2.

Absolutely t2 can crack the t6. But try to find someone from a t4 to a top 6...

Anyway, the Aba disclosures are a good resource.

toothbrush wrote:Absolutely t2 can crack the t6. But try to find someone from a t4 to a top 6...

Anyway, the Aba disclosures are a good resource.

OP's school tier was in the OP.

rondemarino wrote:
NYU admitted 4 transfer from Brooklyn Law and few others from T2 schools. Seems like being #1 in a T2 doesn't put you completely out of the game.

I think NYU is more flexible with transfers from NY schools. The transfers from the other TT schools that I know (4-5) were #1 or #2.

BVest wrote:

toothbrush wrote:Absolutely t2 can crack the t6. But try to find someone from a t4 to a top 6...

Anyway, the Aba disclosures are a good resource.

OP's school tier was in the OP.

Reading from phone fail.

LSAT and UGPA are used in admissions to try and predict how you will perform in law school. They become more or less irrelevant once you actually have LS grades and so they're not given weight. They won't matter for transfer purposes until they get factored into USNWR rankings, if that ever happens

MarkfromWI wrote:LSAT and UGPA are used in admissions to try and predict how you will perform in law school. They become more or less irrelevant once you actually have LS grades and so they're not given weight. They won't matter for transfer purposes until they get factored into USNWR rankings, if that ever happens

That's really what I'm hoping is the case. I know Harvard is a long-shot for any T2 but I've read a couple of posts that have said something along the lines of "Harvard has never accepted a transfer with less than a 163." But even if that were true, I know there are exceptions to every rule. I'm just going to do my best to build up my softs, which I think I've done reasonably well at so far, and work on getting some killer LoRs.

The general consensus among my peers (as well as on here) seems to be that, even if i miss HYS, a jump to CCN (and maybe even the T10) would be worth giving up my high class-ranking.

I come here to re-fuel my fire, because second semester (Con Law alone, really) is a grind. I thank anyone who posts genuine advice on these forums. They've been a great resource.

The only possible exceptions I can think of to the rule that UGPA doesn't matter (and these are just theoretical; I have no evidence these actually exist except at UT for #1) are as follows:

1) A school with a stated minimum UGPA for admissions that says something like you must "have attained undergraduate performance and Law School Admission Test scores that generally meet the standard currently applicable for admission to the Law School as a first-year student." This is the case at UT, but they get more explicit, actually saying that transfers must have a minimum LSAC UGPA of 2.2 (so, it's obviously not theoretical at UT, but everywhere else it is).

2) For a K-JD, they might pay more attention to UGPA, especially if they notice that the low UGPA is a result of starting out strong and then coasting.


ETA: For a school's perspective, going back to the UT example, they state "UT Law evaluates transfer applications primarily upon the student’s performance in their first year at a full-time law program, but also considers factors such as LSAT, undergraduate record, and an essay explaining the reasons for transfer."

BVest wrote:The only possible exceptions I can think of to the rule that UGPA doesn't matter (and these are just theoretical; I have no evidence these actually exist except at UT for #1) are as follows:

1) A school with a stated minimum UGPA for admissions that says something like you must "have attained undergraduate performance and Law School Admission Test scores that generally meet the standard currently applicable for admission to the Law School as a first-year student." This is the case at UT, but they get more explicit, actually saying that transfers must have a minimum LSAC UGPA of 2.2 (so, it's obviously not theoretical at UT, but everywhere else it is).

2) For a K-JD, they might pay more attention to UGPA, especially if they notice that the low UGPA is a result of starting out strong and then coasting.


ETA: For a school's perspective, going back to the UT example, they state "UT Law evaluates transfer applications primarily upon the student’s performance in their first year at a full-time law program, but also considers factors such as LSAT, undergraduate record, and an essay explaining the reasons for transfer."

As a UT transfer, I'm here to tell you that statement is total BS. All that matters is your class rank and the ranking of the school you are transferring from. My UGPA and LSAT were a far cry from what UT would ever consider accepting any my PS basically read "i wunt tha preftige of UT for the biglalz." I was admitted, IMO, almost completely because of my law school GPA (and 1% bc of LORs etc).

mandimeoutof10 wrote:

BVest wrote:The only possible exceptions I can think of to the rule that UGPA doesn't matter (and these are just theoretical; I have no evidence these actually exist except at UT for #1) are as follows:

1) A school with a stated minimum UGPA for admissions that says something like you must "have attained undergraduate performance and Law School Admission Test scores that generally meet the standard currently applicable for admission to the Law School as a first-year student." This is the case at UT, but they get more explicit, actually saying that transfers must have a minimum LSAC UGPA of 2.2 (so, it's obviously not theoretical at UT, but everywhere else it is).

2) For a K-JD, they might pay more attention to UGPA, especially if they notice that the low UGPA is a result of starting out strong and then coasting.


ETA: For a school's perspective, going back to the UT example, they state "UT Law evaluates transfer applications primarily upon the student’s performance in their first year at a full-time law program, but also considers factors such as LSAT, undergraduate record, and an essay explaining the reasons for transfer."

As a UT transfer, I'm here to tell you that statement is total BS. All that matters is your class rank and the ranking of the school you are transferring from. My UGPA and LSAT were a far cry from what UT would ever consider accepting any my PS basically read "i wunt tha preftige of UT for the biglalz." I was admitted, IMO, almost completely because of my law school GPA (and 1% bc of LORs etc).

Yeah, IMO, the statement about "have attained undergraduate performance and Law School Admission Test scores that generally meet the standard currently applicable" means that we wouldn't have turned down someone with that gpa OR someone with that LSAT who had cured cancer. But if you had that LSAT and that GPA and cured cancer, we would have turned you down for 1L anyway.

And I read the "also considers factors such as LSAT, undergraduate record, and [PS]" as meaning: "If we have one more spot left and we've got two people with the same GPAs from the same TTT, we're going to take the one with a better UGPA/LSAT/PS. Telling is the fact that UT doesn't even want you to use LSAC for your application at all. They want a copy of the cover page of your LSAC report from your first school, but you retrieve that and include it with your app.

Anonymous User wrote:

rondemarino wrote:

toothbrush wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I wanted to know if anybody had insights as to how much weight is put on undergrad gpa and lsac score in transfer applicant admission decisions. I'm at the top of my class (#1) right now and am considering transferring if I maintain my grades, but my LSDAS GPA is mediocre at best and my lsac was only a 160. I did have a significant upward grade trend for the second half of undergrad, and my "major gpa" was around a 3.9. The school I'm at is in the 50-60 range, and I think i'll be able to swing some good LoRs. Do I have any chance at T6 with relatively poor pre-law school credentials?

There is no weight given to those numbers. To answer your question about your chances we need to know what school tier you're in. T4 to top 6 is not likely even at #1. Given your lsat score I assume you're not at a t4 though.

You may be right, but this sounds a little off. NYU admitted 4 transfer from Brooklyn Law and few others from T2 schools. Seems like being #1 in a T2 doesn't put you completely out of the game.

OP - just scroll to the last page of the 509 disclosures for the schools you're interested in (http://www.abarequireddisclosures.org/). Of course, there's no way to know how likely your chances at admission are, but you might at least figure out of its worth shooting an application that way.

Awesome resource thanks much. It seems even Harvard excepts a surprising number of students from T2.

The 509 disclosures only have one-year of transfers (c/o 2014). I know HLS does, in fact, dig even lower than that because a kid from my 1L t3 transferred to HLS (this was in 2009). That same year, a t3 student transferred to SLS (I don't know the specifics of that student, though). Anything is possible. I wouldn't rule out what is or isn't possible based on a single year's transfer class. You need a lot more data for it to actually be meaningful.