Downward Grade Trend Forum

[Patriot1208]

I'm wondering how much a downward grade trend will matter in admissions to t14 schools. I spent three semesters at a state school and had a 3.88 there. Then this past year I transferred to a t15 university and I have a 3.68 in a year here and although I expect to have with a little better than that when I apply to law school but not much over a 3.7. Does this downward trend, especially since its associated with a transfer to a tougher university, hurt me in my applications to law school.

As a note I haven't taken the lsat yet but I am starting a class this summer and I have taken one practice test completely cold and got a 162. And I heard you can expect, with a good study program, to approve on your cold score between 5-10 points so obviously I think I can do the 168+ i'd probably need for the t14.

[Grizz]

Not gonna matter. Good luck.

[ScaredWorkedBored]

(1) Your "new" university isn't tougher.
(2) A 3.68 instead of a 3.88 is not a trend.
(3) No one has to explain a 3.7 GPA anyway.
(4) No one cares about trend unless it's a dramatic LSAT split (75th percentile + LSAT, shitty GPA)

[armette]

UNC is my ultimate goal and they seem to stress grade trends. My first semester I had a 3.86 and now at the end of my junior year I have a 3.35, slowing progressing from the first to the latter. I expect to be around 3.4 by the time I apply (summer school), but does a grade trend like that make a difference?

[dbt]

ehh I started at a CC with a 3.88 and then went to a top 15 LAC and got a 3.45ish. it doesn't really matter - LSAC GPA + LSAT is where it's at.

[Patriot1208]

(1) Your "new" university isn't tougher.
(2) A 3.68 instead of a 3.88 is not a trend.
(3) No one has to explain a 3.7 GPA anyway.
(4) No one cares about trend unless it's a dramatic LSAT split (75th percentile + LSAT, shitty GPA)

Well my new university is about 100% harder than my old one to be honest. I'm putting in about double the time, granted I didn't put in all that much at the old school but still more than high school, and i'm obviously getting much different grades. And 4 semesters with around a 3.7 as opposed to the beginning 3 semesters around a 3.85+ is a drop at least, if not a trend. And i'm not sure if your saying it should hurt me or not, but I'm not really going to be a large splitter with my LSAC gpa no matter what I get on the LSAT (assuming I don't do terribly).

[gossipgirl]

(1) Your "new" university isn't tougher.

You're an idiot. I want to see you transfer from Penn State to Swarthmore and claim it "isn't tougher."

[ScaredWorkedBored]

You're an idiot. I want to see you transfer from Penn State to Swarthmore and claim it "isn't tougher."

Is this some sort of strawman in favor of "LOLundergrad rankings" or similar? The OP used an undergrad ranking - which indicates he doesn't have a clue as to what he's doing - but he did not specify school. So I'm not sure where you're getting Swarthmore from unless the OP is your sock puppet.

The general trend is that private schools have far more grade inflation than public schools. That's just a hard statistical fact.

http://www.gradeinflation.com/tcr2010grading.pdf

Swarthmore is allegedly tougher on grade inflation than most schools public or private, so it would both be a strawman and a particularly stupid transfer for someone who is set on going to law school.

The idea of any top-tier state research university being "easy" is too dumb to debate. It is true that it's probably easier to hide in garbage elective classes and run up the GPA, but that's apples to oranges. One wouldn't seem challenged because they're going to enormous lengths not to be. The optimal strategy for law school admission is, of course, exactly that. GPA is many, many times more valuable than major or school.

It still doesn't make the OP's attempt at ego-stroking any more relevant. See the other 300 threads where someone wonders if the quality of their undergrad matters at all.

Well my new university is about 100% harder than my old one to be honest. I'm putting in about double the time, granted I didn't put in all that much at the old school but still more than high school, and i'm obviously getting much different grades. And 4 semesters with around a 3.7 as opposed to the beginning 3 semesters around a 3.85+ is a drop at least, if not a trend. And i'm not sure if your saying it should hurt me or not, but I'm not really going to be a large splitter with my LSAC gpa no matter what I get on the LSAT (assuming I don't do terribly).

Grade trend is one of those silly soft factors that's considered when the application itself isn't a clear admit or deny. 99/100 or more, the adcoms just look at the raw numbers. Why the GPA is what it is becomes interesting if your LSAT hints you should have a significantly higher GPA than you do; it's not relevant at all when you are quibbling over the difference between a 3.7 & a 3.85. That doesn't mean the school is harder; it means you got a B+ instead of an A- or got some AB's (or similar 3.5 grade) in a couple classes. Save the worrying about that for law school.

[Patriot1208]

This notion that its not harder to achieve better grades at top private universities due to the fact that the average graduating GPA has gone up is one big logic fallacy. The fact that kids from harvard have an average graduating GPA of 3.3 and the kids from Maryland have an average graduating gpa of 3.1 does not differentiate how hard the classes are. People seem to completely discount that the student body is just that more talented and hard working. People like you use these "everything is relative" arguments that are just plain erroneus. In a strict sense it is much tougher to achieve A's at these universities due to the fact that everyone is expected to do more to get an A. As in the grading is MUCH MUCH tougher because the students are expected to achieve a higher quality of work. Just because more kids are willing to put in the work to get an A at Harvard does not change the facts that you still have to do better work to achieve that A. So yes in any definition of the word, my new university and its peers are tougher than almost any state university.

[ToTransferOrNot]

This notion that its not harder to achieve better grades at top private universities due to the fact that the average graduating GPA has gone up is one big logic fallacy. The fact that kids from harvard have an average graduating GPA of 3.3 and the kids from Maryland have an average graduating gpa of 3.1 does not differentiate how hard the classes are. People seem to completely discount that the student body is just that more talented and hard working. People like you use these "everything is relative" arguments that are just plain erroneus. In a strict sense it is much tougher to achieve A's at these universities due to the fact that everyone is expected to do more to get an A. As in the grading is MUCH MUCH tougher because the students are expected to achieve a higher quality of work. Just because more kids are willing to put in the work to get an A at Harvard does not change the facts that you still have to do better work to achieve that A. So yes in any definition of the word, my new university and its peers are tougher than almost any state university.

TLDR. Fact of life is that no one cares where you went to undergrad. HTH.

[Baylan]

This notion that its not harder to achieve better grades at top private universities due to the fact that the average graduating GPA has gone up is one big logic fallacy. The fact that kids from harvard have an average graduating GPA of 3.3 and the kids from Maryland have an average graduating gpa of 3.1 does not differentiate how hard the classes are. People seem to completely discount that the student body is just that more talented and hard working. People like you use these "everything is relative" arguments that are just plain erroneus. In a strict sense it is much tougher to achieve A's at these universities due to the fact that everyone is expected to do more to get an A. As in the grading is MUCH MUCH tougher because the students are expected to achieve a higher quality of work. Just because more kids are willing to put in the work to get an A at Harvard does not change the facts that you still have to do better work to achieve that A. So yes in any definition of the word, my new university and its peers are tougher than almost any state university.

Quality of undergraduate institution is an almost immaterial part of the admissions process. This is particularly true because certain parts of the same institution can have varying degrees of difficulty (Engineering, with forced curves, versus English, without, for example).

So the fact of the matter is - your undergraduate institution is seen, by adcomms, as no more difficult than any other in 99% of cases.

[Patriot1208]

This notion that its not harder to achieve better grades at top private universities due to the fact that the average graduating GPA has gone up is one big logic fallacy. The fact that kids from harvard have an average graduating GPA of 3.3 and the kids from Maryland have an average graduating gpa of 3.1 does not differentiate how hard the classes are. People seem to completely discount that the student body is just that more talented and hard working. People like you use these "everything is relative" arguments that are just plain erroneus. In a strict sense it is much tougher to achieve A's at these universities due to the fact that everyone is expected to do more to get an A. As in the grading is MUCH MUCH tougher because the students are expected to achieve a higher quality of work. Just because more kids are willing to put in the work to get an A at Harvard does not change the facts that you still have to do better work to achieve that A. So yes in any definition of the word, my new university and its peers are tougher than almost any state university.

Quality of undergraduate institution is an almost immaterial part of the admissions process. This is particularly true because certain parts of the same institution can have varying degrees of difficulty (Engineering, with forced curves, versus English, without, for example).

So the fact of the matter is - your undergraduate institution is seen, by adcomms, as no more difficult than any other in 99% of cases.

Yes, I understand this, the point of this thread was not to debate if undergraduate prestige matters but simply if the drop in grades would hurt me severly in t14 admittance. And the guy that said no one cares where you went to undergrad, thats completely false, depending on what you do with your life. Your right after law school people will only care where I went to law school. But if I were to decide to go the Finance route (i'm a double major) my job prospects now are greater than before.