Top Law Schools

According to my UG institution, I have a 4.0 GPA. A-'s are not counted, and a B I got in previous coursework during a post-HS program is not counted either.

When the B and A-'s are factored in, my UG GPA goes down to a 3.85.

Question: Is there a significant difference between a 3.85 and 4.0? If so, would the 4.0 according to my "official transcript" help me at all?

There is a difference, and it is kind of significant depending on what you score on your LSAT.

If you score in the low 170s it will be significant, if you score in the low 150s, it wont be.

Your UG transcript means nothing.

bport hopeful wrote:There is a difference, and it is kind of significant depending on what you score on your LSAT.

If you score in the low 170s it will be significant, if you score in the low 150s, it wont be.

Your UG transcript means nothing.

That's what I figured. I scored in the mid-upper 160's but will be retaking. Thanks!

weathercoins wrote:

bport hopeful wrote:There is a difference, and it is kind of significant depending on what you score on your LSAT.

If you score in the low 170s it will be significant, if you score in the low 150s, it wont be.

Your UG transcript means nothing.

That's what I figured. I scored in the mid-upper 160's but will be retaking. Thanks!

Then it will make a difference, but its still a damn find GPA. Its not the difference between a 4.0 and a 3.2. Nice job on the LSAT, and good luck on the retake.

bport hopeful wrote: Your UG transcript means nothing.

I feel as though this may not be true. The transcript 4.0 (explained via addendum) may be a similar boost to a upward grade trend. VERY MINOR but not nothing.

I have no proof of this but I feel like you might have something small to eek out of the transcript.

admisionquestion wrote:

bport hopeful wrote: Your UG transcript means nothing.

I feel as though this may not be true. The transcript 4.0 (explained via addendum) may be a similar boost to a upward grade trend. VERY MINOR but not nothing.

I have no proof of this but I feel like you might have something small to eek out of the transcript.

An upward trend doesnt mean anything either.

Unless CLS, NYU, UC, GULC all were lying to me when they said upward trends are a positive indicator.

I suppose they could be lying but more likely the case is that it is a minor minor boost like I said it was.

admisionquestion wrote: CLS, NYU, UC, GULC all were lying to me when they said upward trends are a positive indicator.

FTFY

I find that very hard to believe.

I am not going to bother asking for evidence since I am certain none exists in either direction.

But I am wondering what leads you to the conclusion your making?

admisionquestion wrote:I find that very hard to believe.

I am not going to bother asking for evidence since I am certain none exists in either direction.

But I am wondering what leads you to the conclusion your making?

Honestly, I dont have a really good answer for you, and there may be no good evidence, but heres why I think that.

I have come to honestly believe that all Law Schools care about is the numbers that they get to report, in which case only your LSAC GPA matters because it is the only GPA the schools report.

Also, I have a strong upward trend and sort of feel like my cycle was shitty despite that fact.

I'm going to try to avoid beating this dead horse too long...but...

Based on what "you have come to believe" you are calling out adcomms from four different schools. Your evidence being that your cycle did not go especially well despite having an upward trend.

Dear everyone on TLS heres how shit works:

1. Adcomm considers your LSAT
2. Adcomm considers your GPA
3. Adcomm considers if you are URM or WE
School thinks about how much it will help or hurt their reported numbers to admit you.
4. Adcomm considers everything else to decide if they think you will fit well in the school or will be a good member of the student body etc.
---
4.1. They look at PS
4.2. They look at LOR's
4.3. They look at your Resume
4.4. They look at your criminal history
4.5. They consider the specifics of your transcript.
4.5.1. They consider the number of upper division classes you took.
4.5.2. They consider if your major is interesting
4.5.3. They look for grade trends or other reasons to interpret your GPA differently.
4.6. They consider addendum (this is not in any order)
4.7. They consider LOCI (this is not in any order)
4.8. They consider YP (this is not in any order)

The order might be different from one school to another but this basically sums up (roughly in order of importance) how each part of an application is considered.

----

If you disagree and say it is "all numbers" unless identical numbers consider this. How do they choose between these applicants. Tom is .08 below median GPA and one point above median LSAT. Mike is at both medians. Tim is .08 above median GPA and one point below median LSAT.

admisionquestion wrote:I'm going to try to avoid beating this dead horse too long...but...

Based on what "you have come to believe" you are calling out adcomms from four different schools. Your evidence being that your cycle did not go especially well despite having an upward trend.

Dear everyone on TLS heres how shit works:

1. Adcomm considers your LSAT
2. Adcomm considers your GPA
3. Adcomm considers if you are URM or WE
School thinks about how much it will help or hurt their reported numbers to admit you.
4. Adcomm considers everything else to decide if they think you will fit well in the school or will be a good member of the student body etc.
---
4.1. They look at PS
4.2. They look at LOR's
4.3. They look at your Resume
4.4. They look at your criminal history
4.5. They consider the specifics of your transcript.
4.5.1. They consider the number of upper division classes you took.
4.5.2. They consider if your major is interesting
4.5.3. They look for grade trends or other reasons to interpret your GPA differently.
4.6. They consider addendum (this is not in any order)
4.7. They consider LOCI (this is not in any order)
4.8. They consider YP (this is not in any order)

The order might be different from one school to another but this basically sums up (roughly in order of importance) how each part of an application is considered.

----

If you disagree and say it is "all numbers" unless identical numbers consider this. How do they choose between these applicants. Tom is .08 below median GPA and one point above median LSAT. Mike is at both medians. Tim is .08 above median GPA and one point below median LSAT.

Work experience is equal to URM status?

Wade LeBosh wrote:

admisionquestion wrote:I'm going to try to avoid beating this dead horse too long...but...

Based on what "you have come to believe" you are calling out adcomms from four different schools. Your evidence being that your cycle did not go especially well despite having an upward trend.

Dear everyone on TLS heres how shit works:

1. Adcomm considers your LSAT
2. Adcomm considers your GPA
3. Adcomm considers if you are URM or WE
School thinks about how much it will help or hurt their reported numbers to admit you.
4. Adcomm considers everything else to decide if they think you will fit well in the school or will be a good member of the student body etc.
---
4.1. They look at PS
4.2. They look at LOR's
4.3. They look at your Resume
4.4. They look at your criminal history
4.5. They consider the specifics of your transcript.
4.5.1. They consider the number of upper division classes you took.
4.5.2. They consider if your major is interesting
4.5.3. They look for grade trends or other reasons to interpret your GPA differently.
4.6. They consider addendum (this is not in any order)
4.7. They consider LOCI (this is not in any order)
4.8. They consider YP (this is not in any order)

The order might be different from one school to another but this basically sums up (roughly in order of importance) how each part of an application is considered.

----

If you disagree and say it is "all numbers" unless identical numbers consider this. How do they choose between these applicants. Tom is .08 below median GPA and one point above median LSAT. Mike is at both medians. Tim is .08 above median GPA and one point below median LSAT.

Work experience is equal to URM status?

In context, Wade Lebosh, you could safely interpret WE as "whatever."

.

admisionquestion wrote:Dear everyone on TLS heres how shit works:

Are you an adcomm?

admisionquestion wrote: If you disagree and say it is "all numbers" unless identical numbers consider this. How do they choose between these applicants. Tom is .08 below median GPA and one point above median LSAT. Mike is at both medians. Tim is .08 above median GPA and one point below median LSAT.

Tom gets in because his LSAT is better.

No I am not. I am a person who has read a bunch and can think things through.

Then imagine that the gap was bigger...

admisionquestion wrote:No I am not. I am a person who has read a bunch and can think things through.

Then imagine that the gap was bigger...

Haha. This is TLS, everyone has read everything. Thats why the TLS general beliefs are accepted, because they have solid foundations.

Work experience is equal to URM status?

WE and URM status should be listed exclusively. FYI: URM status means more to adcoms. and will always trump WE.

bport hopeful wrote:

admisionquestion wrote:No I am not. I am a person who has read a bunch and can think things through.

Then imagine that the gap was bigger...

Haha. This is TLS, everyone has read everything. Thats why the TLS general beliefs are accepted, because they have solid foundations.

I agree in full that everyone has read everything and was not trying to claim any special source of knowledge. Maybe, I even have less knowledge--is it really TLS dogma that grade trend has absolutely zero effect? I'll stop fussing about this if a few of the big posters stop by and confirm this...

I find it hard to believe that trend does not count about as strongly as a legit GPA addendum. Which I fully admit is very little, but is not absolutely zero.

I also find it hard to believe that four different schools would have outright lied for something that does not really benefit them in any way including image.

bmyhope wrote:

Work experience is equal to URM status?

WE and URM status should be listed exclusively. FYI: URM status means more to adcoms. and will always trump WE.

Agreed, that was sloppy on my part. WE and URM are both considered as part of the "how much will this help or hurt our numbers" line but URM is definitely a bigger boost (at least for the big URM boosts maybe for all of them).

admisionquestion wrote:

bport hopeful wrote:

admisionquestion wrote:No I am not. I am a person who has read a bunch and can think things through.

Then imagine that the gap was bigger...

Haha. This is TLS, everyone has read everything. Thats why the TLS general beliefs are accepted, because they have solid foundations.

I agree in full that everyone has read everything and was not trying to claim any special source of knowledge. Maybe, I even have less knowledge--is it really TLS dogma that grade trend has absolutely zero effect? I'll stop fussing about this if a few of the big posters stop by and confirm this...

I find it hard to believe that trend does not count about as strongly as a legit GPA addendum. Which I fully admit is very little, but is not absolutely zero.

I also find it hard to believe that four different schools would have outright lied for something that does not really benefit them in any way including image.

Let me make one distinction, its not worth 0. I think that if there are two people and a single seat left, all other numbers and softs being equal, the person with the upward trend might win out. But thats it.

Adcomms want to make it seem as if they have a more holistic review process.

alright cool. Lets stop the fighting then...

Agreed its not worth much.

admisionquestion wrote:alright cool. Lets stop the fighting then...

Agreed its not worth much.

Much Love Homie

Quick question here related to the OP's.

My UG doesn't give out A+s, but numerically I would have received two of them had I gone to a different University (received final grades of 97,98 respectively). Should I expect my LSAC GPA to account for these A+s and be higher than my UG GPA, assuming all else held constant? Thanks.

Asebinop wrote:Quick question here related to the OP's.

My UG doesn't give out A+s, but numerically I would have received two of them had I gone to a different University (received final grades of 97,98 respectively). Should I expect my LSAC GPA to account for these A+s and be higher than my UG GPA, assuming all else held constant? Thanks.

No, they'll count as A's if that's the letter grade you received.