Why do law schools prefer low rigor 4.0 over high rigor 3.5 GPA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t understand what law school is about.

- biglaw partner

+1 It's all about the creds. Give me the summa cum laude poli sci major rather than the cum laude physics major, because who wants to have a super pricey lawyer who wasn't at the top of their class.

I get it's all about creds but why wouldn't a law school want a chemistry major from MIT who got a 3.5 vs. a Dickinson (nothing against Dickinson! I happen to think it's a good school. Just not as prestigious as MIT) grad who majored in majored in Amercian Studies and got a 4.0?

The law school would chose the MIT applicant if the LSAT is sufficiently high. Ignore the person who says undergrad pedigree doesn’t matter, it’s a factor.

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Isn’t LSAT more important? Thank goodness no TO for med and law school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don’t understand what law school is about.

- biglaw partner

??? Please explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t understand what law school is about.

- biglaw partner

+1 It's all about the creds. Give me the summa cum laude poli sci major rather than the cum laude physics major, because who wants to have a super pricey lawyer who wasn't at the top of their class.

I get it's all about creds but why wouldn't a law school want a chemistry major from MIT who got a 3.5 vs. a Dickinson (nothing against Dickinson! I happen to think it's a good school. Just not as prestigious as MIT) grad who majored in majored in Amercian Studies and got a 4.0?

Yes many would want the 3.5 chem major from MIT particularly for patent law but even better if you can find an MIT undergrad degree holder who also graduated with high honors.

If you look at bios on law firm pages, a lot of lawyers don’t list their majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t LSAT more important? Thank goodness no TO for med and law school

It’s not that it’s “more” important. It’s that fewer applicants have top LSAT scores than top GPAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t understand what law school is about.

- biglaw partner

+1 It's all about the creds. Give me the summa cum laude poli sci major rather than the cum laude physics major, because who wants to have a super pricey lawyer who wasn't at the top of their class.

I get it's all about creds but why wouldn't a law school want a chemistry major from MIT who got a 3.5 vs. a Dickinson (nothing against Dickinson! I happen to think it's a good school. Just not as prestigious as MIT) grad who majored in majored in Amercian Studies and got a 4.0?

The law school would chose the MIT applicant if the LSAT is sufficiently high. Ignore the person who says undergrad pedigree doesn’t matter, it’s a factor.

Nope.

Thanks for identifying yourself. Ignore this guy.

[Anonymous]

It's not just major or school. Even sitting a major at a school there are basic tracks and advanced tracks. But colleges don't have weights GPAs.

There are students at a school who start in classes first year that other student finish in senior year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t LSAT more important? Thank goodness no TO for med and law school

It’s not that it’s “more” important. It’s that fewer applicants have top LSAT scores than top GPAs.

179/180 LSAT plus 3.5 GPA isn't winning though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t understand what law school is about.

- biglaw partner

+1 It's all about the creds. Give me the summa cum laude poli sci major rather than the cum laude physics major, because who wants to have a super pricey lawyer who wasn't at the top of their class.

I get it's all about creds but why wouldn't a law school want a chemistry major from MIT who got a 3.5 vs. a Dickinson (nothing against Dickinson! I happen to think it's a good school. Just not as prestigious as MIT) grad who majored in majored in Amercian Studies and got a 4.0?

The law school would chose the MIT applicant if the LSAT is sufficiently high. Ignore the person who says undergrad pedigree doesn’t matter, it’s a factor.

Why does the MIT student need a higher LSAT than the Dickinson student?

To balance lower GPA

[Anonymous]

Law school if you have lower gpa. For undergrad go to grad school and get a good gpa chances are very easy then. Knew a lot of people who did that and got into top 5 laws schools. Ofcourse the lsat scores were very good.

[Anonymous]

for the same reason med schools choose low rigor 4.0 over high rigor 3.0

[Anonymous]

This is a great introduction to law, where religiously adhering to often silly benchmarks is rewarded and deviation is harshly punished.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t understand what law school is about.

- biglaw partner

+1 It's all about the creds. Give me the summa cum laude poli sci major rather than the cum laude physics major, because who wants to have a super pricey lawyer who wasn't at the top of their class.

I get it's all about creds but why wouldn't a law school want a chemistry major from MIT who got a 3.5 vs. a Dickinson (nothing against Dickinson! I happen to think it's a good school. Just not as prestigious as MIT) grad who majored in majored in Amercian Studies and got a 4.0?

The law school would chose the MIT applicant if the LSAT is sufficiently high. Ignore the person who says undergrad pedigree doesn’t matter, it’s a factor.

Why does the MIT student need a higher LSAT than the Dickinson student?

To balance lower GPA

But a 3.5 from MIT is more difficult to attain than a 3.9 from Dickinson, and probably also a 4.0 from Dickinson. Especially if you include the difficulty of getting in in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a sad state of affairs that it's recommended to major in something "easy" just to go to law school. The prize is not the prize that some think it is.

Most law school students majored in something easy. I’d bet political science, business, English, psychology and communications are the top 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Law schools actually do take into account rigor of a particular college, as well as major, when considering an applicants GPA. My uncle worked in admissions at a top law school, and he said that engineering majors and students from colleges like Cal Tech would be accepted with lower GPAs. (Although they tended to do well on the LSATs, so there's that.) Also, students applying from Swarthmore received an automatic bump in GPA because, apparently, "anywhere else it would have been an A" has a kernel of truth to it.

This. T14 admit from below average from our ivy. 3.6-3.7 is plenty because they know how competitive ivies are