LSAC GPA Forum

[tberk89]

Hey everyone,

This is my first post. I am graduating from UC Berkeley at the end of this coming year. I transfered from a community college system and am now starting to look at which schools I want to apply to in the coming months. I plan to take my LSAT in October of this year. I may wait one year to apply for law school and do a ten month stint with the City Year program. Anyways, here is my question:

I started out at Junior College when I was only 16 years old. I did not do so well when I first started because I wasn't really mature enough to handle college yet, and other reasons that aren't super important. Anyways, I had 19 units of F's in my first semester because I just stopped going to school and didn't realize I had to drop those classes. I was ignorant and young.

Since then I have gone back to school, I am now 21 starting my last year at Berkeley. My current GPA is a 3.71. With my current trend, I should be able to get my overall GPA of Berkeley and JC to be around 3.8. However, my LSAC GPA will be considerably lower because of those substandard grades. It will be closer to a 3.1 or a 3.2. Now with the practice LSATs I have done so far, I should score around a 168-172, but my GPA will not really be reflective of my abilities. My question to everyone is, how much will they look at my upward trend? Will this be a challenge I wont be able to significantly overcome? I want to get into the highest rank law school I possibly can, with my ultimate dream of going to UCLA. Can anyone shed some light on this situation and let me know what I might be able to do and what my chances of success are. Thanks so much for your help in advanced!!!

[kalvano]

Your GPA will be whatever it is on the LSAC report. An upward trend won't matter, unless it's between you and a person with a downward trend.

Also, 3.1, 3.2? Are you sure? With 19 F's?

[CaptainCrunch]

Ditto. Nineteen F's. That really blows... In the 1/1000th chance you didn't consider it, write an addendum. I've got to believe you'll get some leniency given your current UG GPA.

[eaglemuncher]

I think he meant like 5 or 6 F's, 19 credits worth.

[haus]

Your GPA will be whatever it is on the LSAC report. An upward trend won't matter, unless it's between you and a person with a downward trend.

Also, 3.1, 3.2? Are you sure? With 19 F's?

Assuming that the OP meant 19 credits of F's, it is possible. If you exclude these, and figure 3.71 multiplied by 128 credit hours, then throw in an additional 19 credit hours of 0.0, the end GPA would be GPA of 3.23. That is quite a comeback.

[tberk89]

Yes I meant 19 UNITs of F's, not F's in 19 different classes. The calculations above are approximately what happened. So yes, I currently have a 3.71 with academic renewal and things, but with the LSAC GPA it brings me down low. I realize that I can't change my LSAC GPA. I was just wondering, since those F's are such a long time ago and when I was so young, how much of an impact will it have. And will my LSATs be able to outweigh my prior GPA.
I will definitely write about this in my applications. I just didn't know if anyone had any experience or had read anything on the matter.
If you are simply guessing, I appreciate your interest, but I am looking for more informed answers.

Thanks so much!!

[kalvano]

I had a 3.6-ish brought down by older stuff.

It won't make a damn bit of difference that you did better later.

[tberk89]

Source?

[kalvano]

What do you mean "source"? You will perform on par with what your LSAC GPA is. My source is my own cycle, and the cycle of the previous 15,762 posters who have asked this exact question.

[tberk89]

Well since I know that some schools do only look at the last 2 years grades primarily, what you are saying isn't universally accurate. Therefore you are guessing, at least partially. So I was just wondering if you had any legitimate reason for your assumption, or seeing if you were just making an unwarranted generalization. Now if you know something specific about how the schools look at your grades, I would love to read it or see evidence for it.

Thanks!

[Patriot1208]

Well since I know that some schools do only look at the last 2 years grades primarily, what you are saying isn't universally accurate. Therefore you are guessing, at least partially. So I was just wondering if you had any legitimate reason for your assumption, or seeing if you were just making an unwarranted generalization. Now if you know something specific about how the schools look at your grades, I would love to read it or see evidence for it.

Thanks!

It's pretty well documented, albeit anecdotally, that overall LSAC gpa is all that matters and trends do not help. Also i've never heard of a law school only looking at two years worth of grades.

[FantasticMrFox]

Well since I know that some schools do only look at the last 2 years grades primarily

Source? We aren't talking about lower tiers, right?

[tberk89]

Well that's what I am trying to find out. Is it the case that all top tiers look at everything equally or are there some schools that will more likely understand the prior Lower gpa, and be more likely to over look it. I'm not looking for guesses as much as actual data.

[09042014]

I believe some Canadian schools do the "last 60 hours" thing.

OP if you get a decent (170+) LSAT. You can apply ED to UCLA. But California is TTT ITE.

[bisonpower27]

OP I went to UCLA after transferring from a CC. My GPA was nearly 4.0 at UCLA but my LSAC GPA was much lower due to circumstances similar to yours. Unfortunately the other posters are correct in saying that your LSAC GPA is pretty much all that matters here. Write an addendum and do well on the LSAT since that is the only thing you can do now to help your situation. Good luck.

[Patriot1208]

Well that's what I am trying to find out. Is it the case that all top tiers look at everything equally or are there some schools that will more likely understand the prior Lower gpa, and be more likely to over look it. I'm not looking for guesses as much as actual data.

There isn't hard data, but these aren't guesses. Many of us have seen thousands of people go through their cycle and only a couple times have I seen someone significantly outperform their lsat + lsac gpa. And all those instances were much more rare than yours is.

[paratactical]

Contact the school you got the Fs at and see if they will retroactively withdraw you. There was a poster on the board that managed to get a semester taken off because they didn't attend the classes.

[Bildungsroman]

Well that's what I am trying to find out. Is it the case that all top tiers look at everything equally or are there some schools that will more likely understand the prior Lower gpa, and be more likely to over look it. I'm not looking for guesses as much as actual data.

Well, you're not getting guesses here, you're getting the sum total of hundred of TLS users' experiences with old grades bringing down their LSAC GPA. Maybe Canadian schools are nicer and will only consider your past two years, but I've never heard of an American school making that exception. It may not be what you want to hear, but don't try and play off all of this as just being guesswork, especially since you have nothing that says decent schools will just ignore the fact that your GPA will drop their stats.

If you actually do score around a 172, you can possibly do better than UCLA, even with your 3.1 GPA. ED to UVA is in the mix, so there's no need to be mad.

[tberk89]

I'm not getting mad, just with my experience with message boards I realize that a lot of the information is completely misinformed. That is why I was looking for sources. If you say there are none, I trust your judgment. I just always will take numbers over some random persons word. Anyone can join these boards and post responses and I have no idea about the credibility of anyone. When someone just responds with no info on where they are getting their information, I am prone to ignore them.

I appreciate everyone's help though!

[tberk89]

And typically when people speak in absolutes, they are wrong.

[09042014]

And typically when people speak in absolutes, they are wrong.

Then don't ask for help.

[bk1]

If you want data look at http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com and see how closely things conform to the numbers. Realize that the number of non-URM outliers is exceedingly marginal and that you are not actually a special snowflake and you won't buck the trend.

[tberk89]

If you want data look at http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com and see how closely things conform to the numbers. Realize that the number of non-URM outliers is exceedingly marginal and that you are not actually a special snowflake and you won't buck the trend.

Thanks. This was helpful!

[tberk89]

And typically when people speak in absolutes, they are wrong.

Then don't ask for help.

People speaking in absolutes isn't equivalent to people speaking... So me expecting a little bit better of an answer than "trends don't matter" without anything substantiating it isn't too much too ask in my humble opinion. I wasn't trying to be a douche, I just wanted a little more information, that is all.
If you say that you are applying to medical schools, but you got a C in biology and one of the primary things medical schools look at is grades in your biology classes, and I simply respond, "they only care about the grades, nothing else matters", that wouldn't really be sufficient to you, I would hope. Now that may be the case, but it is the case for particular reasons. All I wanted was the reasons why the conclusion is true, not reasons for it not being true.

[bk1]

People speaking in absolutes isn't equivalent to people speaking... So me expecting a little bit better of an answer than "trends don't matter" without anything substantiating it isn't too much too ask in my humble opinion. I wasn't trying to be a douche, I just wanted a little more information, that is all.
If you say that you are applying to medical schools, but you got a C in biology and one of the primary things medical schools look at is grades in your biology classes, and I simply respond, "they only care about the grades, nothing else matters", that wouldn't really be sufficient to you, I would hope. Now that may be the case, but it is the case for particular reasons. All I wanted was the reasons why the conclusion is true, not reasons for it not being true.

The reason people get annoyed is because they've seen it time and time again. You're not the first to question it nor will you be the last, but it does tend to grate on people who feel like they are trying to be helpful to which others respond with "I'm not sure I believe you."

TLS contains hundreds if not thousands of law school students and applicants who have all been through the process and invariably include the vast array of possible applications. If somebody says something that is completely out of line with what is the norm then people will point that out. But when a bunch of people who have been through the process are all saying one thing and you are questioning them, it does get annoying.

Why don't law schools care about anything other than LSAC GPA? Because LSAC GPA is the one they have to report and the one that factors into their USNWR ranking which they care about a lot.