Merit-Based Aid Question: LSAT/GPA vs. Softs Forum

[abitaman6363]

I'm currently applying to several T-14 schools and have a question regarding financial aid at law schools in general and T-14 schools in particular. When determining merit-based aid, how much weight (if any) do committees put on soft factors. Is aid primarily based on LSAT/GPA, or do strong softs play as much of a role as in the original application process?

Note: I'm aware this question doesn't apply to HYS given their no merit-based aid policies.

[abitaman6363]

*bump*

[Nom Sawyer]

Aid is primarily based on LSAT/GPA (mainly looking for above one or both of the 75ths) but softs do still play a role.

[tea_drinker]

Take it for what it is, Merit-based scholarships are determined based on the merit of applicant. This means GPA and LSAT. Unless your strong soft is Rhode Scholarship, Truman Scholarship, Fulbright, Nobel Laureate, etc., your numbers may be sole indicators.

[whymeohgodno]

Numbers mostly. Softs if they are extraordinary.

[Arbiter213]

Take it for what it is, Merit-based scholarships are determined based on the merit of applicant. This means GPA and LSAT. Unless your strong soft is Rhode Scholarship, Truman Scholarship, Fulbright, Nobel Laureate, etc., your numbers may be sole indicators.

This is not strictly true. A friend of mine got nearly a full ride (or at least VERY substantial merit aid, he won't tell me) at Wash U with a 168 and like a 3.65, and the dean told him it was in part because of his extensive softs- and what he had would be called "ho-hum" here. Just superior involvement in my fraternity (three executive board positions).

[whymeohgodno]

Take it for what it is, Merit-based scholarships are determined based on the merit of applicant. This means GPA and LSAT. Unless your strong soft is Rhode Scholarship, Truman Scholarship, Fulbright, Nobel Laureate, etc., your numbers may be sole indicators.

This is not strictly true. A friend of mine got nearly a full ride (or at least VERY substantial merit aid, he won't tell me) at Wash U with a 168 and like a 3.65, and the dean told him it was in part because of his extensive softs- and what he had would be called "ho-hum" here. Just superior involvement in my fraternity (three executive board positions).

Well that and him being well over their 75th LSAT percentile? lolol

[Arbiter213]

Take it for what it is, Merit-based scholarships are determined based on the merit of applicant. This means GPA and LSAT. Unless your strong soft is Rhode Scholarship, Truman Scholarship, Fulbright, Nobel Laureate, etc., your numbers may be sole indicators.

This is not strictly true. A friend of mine got nearly a full ride (or at least VERY substantial merit aid, he won't tell me) at Wash U with a 168 and like a 3.65, and the dean told him it was in part because of his extensive softs- and what he had would be called "ho-hum" here. Just superior involvement in my fraternity (three executive board positions).

Well that and him being well over their 75th LSAT percentile? lolol

When did 1 point become "well over"?

[Lwoods]

Take it for what it is, Merit-based scholarships are determined based on the merit of applicant. This means GPA and LSAT. Unless your strong soft is Rhode Scholarship, Truman Scholarship, Fulbright, Nobel Laureate, etc., your numbers may be sole indicators.

This is not strictly true. A friend of mine got nearly a full ride (or at least VERY substantial merit aid, he won't tell me) at Wash U with a 168 and like a 3.65, and the dean told him it was in part because of his extensive softs- and what he had would be called "ho-hum" here. Just superior involvement in my fraternity (three executive board positions).

Well that and him being well over their 75th LSAT percentile? lolol

? WashU's LSAT 75th percentile is equal to 168, and the median is 167, so Arbiter's friend wasn't "well over" any LSAT metric. A comfortable LSAT for WUSTL, yes, but not insane.
Congrats to your friend! Gives me hope re my undergrad softs.

[tea_drinker]

Take it for what it is, Merit-based scholarships are determined based on the merit of applicant. This means GPA and LSAT. Unless your strong soft is Rhode Scholarship, Truman Scholarship, Fulbright, Nobel Laureate, etc., your numbers may be sole indicators.

This is not strictly true. A friend of mine got nearly a full ride (or at least VERY substantial merit aid, he won't tell me) at Wash U with a 168 and like a 3.65, and the dean told him it was in part because of his extensive softs- and what he had would be called "ho-hum" here. Just superior involvement in my fraternity (three executive board positions).

Well that and him being well over their 75th LSAT percentile? lolol

I am not saying numbers are definitive factors. Although, I am sure that you will never find an applicant with numbers below both medians that receives merit-based scholarship unless that applicant is URM with competitive numbers. Schools have different formulas on how to award $$$, so they can ensure their medians stay the same. We are not going to find out unless one of us works as an admission officer. Also, maybe you underestimate your friend. Maybe he has something special that distinguish himself from the herd.

[Arbiter213]

Take it for what it is, Merit-based scholarships are determined based on the merit of applicant. This means GPA and LSAT. Unless your strong soft is Rhode Scholarship, Truman Scholarship, Fulbright, Nobel Laureate, etc., your numbers may be sole indicators.

This is not strictly true. A friend of mine got nearly a full ride (or at least VERY substantial merit aid, he won't tell me) at Wash U with a 168 and like a 3.65, and the dean told him it was in part because of his extensive softs- and what he had would be called "ho-hum" here. Just superior involvement in my fraternity (three executive board positions).

Well that and him being well over their 75th LSAT percentile? lolol

I am not saying numbers are definitive factors. Although, I am sure that you will never find an applicant with numbers below both medians that receives merit-based scholarship unless that applicant is URM with competitive numbers. Schools have different formulas on how to award $$$, so they can ensure their medians stay the same. We are not going to find out unless one of us works as an admission officer. Also, maybe you underestimate your friend. Maybe he has something special that distinguish himself from the herd.

Oh he had some pretty cool stuff. But he wasn't a Rhodes Scholar. My friend who won the Rhodes was WAY more impressive. I also think she didn't get into HLS (but did HBS).

And I'm not trolling.

[tea_drinker]

Oh he had some pretty cool stuff. But he wasn't a Rhodes Scholar. My friend who won the Rhodes was WAY more impressive. I also think she didn't get into HLS (but did HBS).

And I'm not trolling.

LOL, I don't think you are. Just that mass communication forces me to make generalizations. When it comes down to individual applicants, numbers will become less predictive (but still reliable indicators though)

[Arbiter213]

Oh he had some pretty cool stuff. But he wasn't a Rhodes Scholar. My friend who won the Rhodes was WAY more impressive. I also think she didn't get into HLS (but did HBS).

And I'm not trolling.

LOL, I don't think you are. Just that mass communication forces me to make generalizations. When it comes down to individual applicants, numbers will become less predictive (but still reliable indicators though)

+1