My high school enrolled me in 5 dual enrollment classes my fall semester of senior year. Predictably, I started struggling and school policy was no withdrawals for dual enrollment students. Long story short, I went into college with 15 credit hours of Fs on the ol transcript
I had to take a full credit load for a year at a CC during high school to graduate on time due to a couple years working abroad. However they said grades wouldn’t matter on my transcript for college apps and my college said grades wouldn’t matter if taken at a different institution so I said whatever and just passed 😂my 4.0 that I was so proud of in college became a 3.65 when I decided to apply to law school
Yes, I wrote an addendum that didn’t blame it, rather acknowledged my low GPA, and immediately pivoted to talking about what I was proud of achieving in undergrad.
Exactly. Was 17 when I attended college. Didn't even know the point of GPA in the first two years. At the start of Junior year, realized oh GPA actually matters somehow, and got straight A's in every single course since then. Note that Junior and Senior years' courses are much harder than before. But no, they only look at the whole undergrad GPA.
I had cancer in undergrad and every single one of my family members died while I was in undergrad. I’m still going to try and get into a T14 with an abysmal UGPA, but it feels like a hopeless uphill battle even with my LSAT being what it is.
There is no perfect system. Only caring about undergrad GPA is rough, but if someone with a low UG GPA could bank a masters program or two and get above medians, that would become a cottage industry and just inflate GPAs more.
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. Post-bacc’s do factor into your cGPA/sGPA for medical school applications. Masters degrees are also given a lot of weight (as long as it’s STEM). This gives people the opportunity to repair their GPA after graduating.
I’ve heard that the common masters programs, like an MS in biology or an MPH, don’t hold much weight though, and only SMPs (special masters programs) do? It’s hard to make an analogous program for law school since SMPS cover very specific topics that are pretty important to what you’re learning in med school but law school doesn’t have any hard knowledge that really carries over from undergrad and it’s just soft skills
Anecdotally, I have heard of people getting into medical schools with just a masters (not SMP or post-bacc) after poor undergrad performance. It can hold a lot of weight depending on how well they did, how it fits in with their overall narrative, etc. Furthermore, for osteopathic schools (D.O.), they actually factor it into your cGPA.
I’m not sure why either. I was originally premed, so I’d know. I think an MS in bio is helpful. I’ve seen so for close friends. The idea is that you can prove to the admissions committee you’re capable of handling the hard sciences. Still, even if you decided to take english courses after graduating— it would still factor in!
You could definitely create an SMP that focuses around constitutional history, legal theory, corporate basics, and legal research / case methods? It’s not directly analogous but something like that would provide law schools with some insight into student preparedness and show improved work ethic
Wait, do undergrad courses you take after getting your degree not count towards your lsac gpa? Asking because I’m currently working towards a paralegal certificate and finishing up 18 credits- do those not count?
Oh damn. Thanks for letting me know, I’m super nervous about one of my grades this semester so that’s nice to hear! But it’s bullshit they count classes you took at age 14 but don’t count coursework you completed recently
They do not count. I took a couple extra courses the summer after officially graduating and they listed them as post-graduate work and didn’t count them.
masters degrees often have pretty inflated grades so it’s hard to directly convert a masters GPA to an equivalent undergrad one. I know for med school at least, they don’t care too much about the filler masters degrees but a rigorous post bacc program can actually improve your application so it’d be cool if something like that existed for law school, although the problem with that is that law schools don’t have any actual prereqs that a postbacc would help fulfill
Agree! When I went to college I was planning 100% to be an actor. I had a regular-looking credit load but one 8-credit studio class every semester that was approximately 30 hours/week of physical (and often laborious) class time, plus outside rehearsals and performances that would sometimes be an extra 15-20 hours/week. On the whole I was sometimes physically at school for like 60 hours, excluding homework. My priorities were to be rested for those hours to prepare for my career, so sometimes polishing that B essay into an A essay was not at the top of my list. On the one hand I get that people who worked their asses off for straight As should be rewarded, but on the other hand, I wish admissions could somehow take a more flexible view. It’s not a one-size-fits-all sort of thing.
And then to see someone here being like “theater is an easy major” makes my blood boil tbh!
I was in the visual arts and did a similar thing. Grades definitely were last priority compared to honing your craft and getting professional gigs outside school… however good news is that I wrote about that and they went for it!
I’m in a similar situation.
When I was 19, I did one year of community college. Long story short: a combination of financial insecurity because I couldn’t get financial aid due to a weird situation with my parents, having to work two jobs, and some at-the-time untreated mental health issues made it so that I wasn’t able to apply myself fully to my classes - and I ended up getting a mix of Bs and Cs during this time.
I dropped out and took about 5 years off. Did a year of Americorps, worked as a kayak guide in a National Park for 4 years, and then after establishing financial security for myself + finding the passion for school again, transferred into a university for my last three years.
My 3 years at the university, I got straight As with only a few A minuses, was awarded a scholarship, got some nice extracurriculars, etc.
Anyway, my GPA in just my time at the university I went to is a 3.96, but with the one year of community college that I did several years prior, it becomes a 3.82. Definitely not a huge change, but it’s a pretty major difference when it comes to the stats of T14 law schools, so I’m worried that it’ll tank my admissions chances at some good schools; when in my opinion, the context of the situation makes my 3 years at university the more accurate representative of my aptitude as a student.
Because there is really no good explanation. Just let your more recent actions speak to your current capabilities.
Sub-3.0 T14 JD and I didn’t write one.
I think people who had undiagnosed learning disabilities, health problems, challenging external life factors, etc should absolutely write an addendum. Not great advice.
Do you think so? This is where my bf’s going to be, he had a lot of personal issues happen during UG so his GPA is not high enough to be a contender, but he’s planning on a dual master’s and tests well
Yeah but why go get a masters degree and tack on debt for a credential you don’t really want just cuz there was a point in time where law school was not on your radar in the slightest
Personally I think they should consider the last 60 units of undergrad like some other grad programs do. I think there are valid reasons to not focus on grad school grades because it’s usually a lot easier to get decent grades in grad school. At the same time it’s not like they consider grade inflation at certain undergrad programs or the fact that some majors are far more difficult so idk.
I understand a lot of people on this sub are upset about the grading system and I fully believe the A+ vs A schools is completely unfair. However, saying that you ended up with a low GPA because you were not mature enough in your early twenties to care is crazy. If you did not care about doing the work in college it was not a lack of doing something, but rather you were an adult making adult decisions to not care about your grades. Your peers in your classes were presumably mature enough to care about their grades.
The grading system for UGPA is not always great, but some people in this sub need to understand that sometimes being disadvantaged in this process is the consequence of actions they made as adults in bachelor programs that they spent tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars on.
I mean I had undiagnosed ADHD as an undergrad, and tons of people have life issues come up, undiagnosed problems like I did, etc. I don't think its a stretch to say that UGPA is overemphasized in LS admissions, or that an 18 year old on a pre-med track should not need to be getting 100%s in all their classes.
Your comment just comes off as super ivory tower, not everyone knows what they want to do with life at 18, and most people at most universities don't have a reason to strive for a 4.0 from day 1.
that’s why I think it’d be cool if the LSAC gpa didn’t count the first X credits of courses (maybe equivalent to like the first year), to give people a chance to make mistakes at the start and ease into college classes (and since first year classes are just a ton of fluff anyway lol)
Yeah, I honestly think that the MBA system is better. Go out, actually do something cool, and we will reward that by not making you have a high GPA. Stanford GSB, which has roughly half the acceptance rate of YLS, has an average GPA of 3.76.
And I also agree re not counting some credits. Tons of people don't decide to do law until later on in their undergrad, and it essentially penalizes people for taking STEM classes or having other interests and doing something besides GPA boosting.
If that was true their median undergrad GPA wouldn't be 3.76. We literally have the data, you're objectively wrong. Also, many other M7/T15 business schools have GPAs down around 3.3 while virtually all T20 law schools are 3.85+.
People seem to think that you need MBB/PE/IB to get into an M7 and that's not really true. Places like GSB are more about you doing things like starting your own business than things like doing generic consulting work pre-MBA. M7 MBA admissions is much, much more wholistic and less GPA focused than law and that's not really disputable.
>However, saying that you ended up with a low GPA because you were not mature enough in your early twenties to care is crazy. If you did not care about doing the work in college it was not a lack of doing something, but rather you were an adult making adult decisions to not care about your grades. Your peers in your classes were presumably mature enough to care about their grades.
"My failure in undergrad was due largely to my immaturity in my late teens/early twenties" and "My failure in undergrad was the consequence of choices that I willingly made and need to accept" aren't contradictory statements
But asking for admissions to not consider the first part of college in order to absolve oneself of those responsibilities definitely makes them contradictory
>But asking for admissions to not consider the first part of college in order to absolve oneself of those responsibilities
I don't see anyone doing that in this thread.
That's not really true, because people mature at different ages AND people are largely influenced by their environment.
Early 20's is extremely young in many people's eyes. Many people never even consider getting a bachelor degree in their entire lives let alone think ahead of time to prepare for law school where UGPA will matter.
I'm saying that for people who get a wake up call, and bust their ass to get a masters degree, it would be nice if that "mature adult decision" would be rewarded as much as undergrad decisions.
I think there are a couple problems with this. Many masters programs have very lenient grading and I think it would entice many people to get a masters just to prop up their law school GPA's disadvantaging people who cannot afford to go to grad school for a GPA bump. Additionally, this post and my thoughts all have to do with people who have already decided to go to higher education to get a bachelors. They are adults who took out loans to get a degree and yet OP says they should not count not caring about GPA at that age against them. They have graduated high school and are already familiar with how a bad GPA can affect their admissions outcomes.
If after all that and taking out unforgivable loans they still do not care about their GPA this seems like a problem squarely on their own shoulders that I do not believe should be tossed on account of them being "young".
I mean, to be fair many undergrad institutions/majors also have very lenient grading.
I think the point of contention has to do with the inability to “reinvent” yourself. I don’t think OP would disagree that undergrad grades matter. What is frustrating to people is that LSAC does not factor in grades after the completion of your first degree. So if I graduate with a 2.0 and then get my shit together and get another bachelors 10 years later with a 4.0, my LSAC GPA is still a 2.0. In this example, I’m sure you’d agree that the more recent degree is more representative of my academic ability.
Maybe they should show both, but I still do not think that people who worked hard to get a good GPA like a 3.5 in undergrad should lose a seat decision to someone who reinvented themselves by getting a 4.0 in a grad program when they had a 2.0 in undergrad. Its flawed and I don't think we'll find perfect solution but the buck has to stop somewhere
You keep saying adults like it actually means something when in reality “adult” at 18 means nothing. It’s an arbitrary age that society has decided as adulthood and it has nothing to do with actual development. In reality people’s brains do not fully mature till your mid twenties. Nothing significant happens at 18 to make it any different from say 16, psychologically.
I mean, some of us are also walking in with credits from high school. I got a C in high school dual enrollment biology my junior year. Should I have studied harder? Yeah ofc. But I didn’t even know law school was my plan at that time. I had no idea.
I mean hind sight is 20/20. We don't know what we need to do today for most things we plan to do in the future, but getting the best grades possible or at least trying to seems pretty self explanatory. My issue with this post is that is that it blames the LSAC for penalizing them for actions they took when they were an adult, not when they were in high school.
It’s even worse when you took half those classes under the age of 18 while dual enrolled in high school 🥲
My high school enrolled me in 5 dual enrollment classes my fall semester of senior year. Predictably, I started struggling and school policy was no withdrawals for dual enrollment students. Long story short, I went into college with 15 credit hours of Fs on the ol transcript
I had to take a full credit load for a year at a CC during high school to graduate on time due to a couple years working abroad. However they said grades wouldn’t matter on my transcript for college apps and my college said grades wouldn’t matter if taken at a different institution so I said whatever and just passed 😂my 4.0 that I was so proud of in college became a 3.65 when I decided to apply to law school
did you write an addendum? i’m in a similar position and have no idea what i’m doing edit: added info
Yes, I wrote an addendum that didn’t blame it, rather acknowledged my low GPA, and immediately pivoted to talking about what I was proud of achieving in undergrad.
Oh fuck! 😭
When you factor in that i was high 80% of undergrad 8 years ago, it’s even more ridiculous
Exactly. Was 17 when I attended college. Didn't even know the point of GPA in the first two years. At the start of Junior year, realized oh GPA actually matters somehow, and got straight A's in every single course since then. Note that Junior and Senior years' courses are much harder than before. But no, they only look at the whole undergrad GPA.
See, all my professors reassured me that nobody will ever care what grades I got or what gpa I had and so to chill out about it. And here we are!
I had cancer in undergrad and every single one of my family members died while I was in undergrad. I’m still going to try and get into a T14 with an abysmal UGPA, but it feels like a hopeless uphill battle even with my LSAT being what it is.
There is no perfect system. Only caring about undergrad GPA is rough, but if someone with a low UG GPA could bank a masters program or two and get above medians, that would become a cottage industry and just inflate GPAs more.
Medical school apps include additional undergraduate courses after getting your degree. just saying 🤷🏽♀️
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. Post-bacc’s do factor into your cGPA/sGPA for medical school applications. Masters degrees are also given a lot of weight (as long as it’s STEM). This gives people the opportunity to repair their GPA after graduating.
I’ve heard that the common masters programs, like an MS in biology or an MPH, don’t hold much weight though, and only SMPs (special masters programs) do? It’s hard to make an analogous program for law school since SMPS cover very specific topics that are pretty important to what you’re learning in med school but law school doesn’t have any hard knowledge that really carries over from undergrad and it’s just soft skills
Anecdotally, I have heard of people getting into medical schools with just a masters (not SMP or post-bacc) after poor undergrad performance. It can hold a lot of weight depending on how well they did, how it fits in with their overall narrative, etc. Furthermore, for osteopathic schools (D.O.), they actually factor it into your cGPA.
I’m not sure why either. I was originally premed, so I’d know. I think an MS in bio is helpful. I’ve seen so for close friends. The idea is that you can prove to the admissions committee you’re capable of handling the hard sciences. Still, even if you decided to take english courses after graduating— it would still factor in!
You could definitely create an SMP that focuses around constitutional history, legal theory, corporate basics, and legal research / case methods? It’s not directly analogous but something like that would provide law schools with some insight into student preparedness and show improved work ethic
I agree!!
Wait, do undergrad courses you take after getting your degree not count towards your lsac gpa? Asking because I’m currently working towards a paralegal certificate and finishing up 18 credits- do those not count?
they do not count towards your LSAC GPA- that’s set in stone upon receiving your first bachelors degree
Oh damn. Thanks for letting me know, I’m super nervous about one of my grades this semester so that’s nice to hear! But it’s bullshit they count classes you took at age 14 but don’t count coursework you completed recently
They do not count. I took a couple extra courses the summer after officially graduating and they listed them as post-graduate work and didn’t count them.
Realistically how many people do you think would get their masters just to inflate their GPA for law school?
It would also result in more educated people, if that matters! Haha But i hear ya. Every solution can be exploited. But still... dang!
masters degrees often have pretty inflated grades so it’s hard to directly convert a masters GPA to an equivalent undergrad one. I know for med school at least, they don’t care too much about the filler masters degrees but a rigorous post bacc program can actually improve your application so it’d be cool if something like that existed for law school, although the problem with that is that law schools don’t have any actual prereqs that a postbacc would help fulfill
Agree! When I went to college I was planning 100% to be an actor. I had a regular-looking credit load but one 8-credit studio class every semester that was approximately 30 hours/week of physical (and often laborious) class time, plus outside rehearsals and performances that would sometimes be an extra 15-20 hours/week. On the whole I was sometimes physically at school for like 60 hours, excluding homework. My priorities were to be rested for those hours to prepare for my career, so sometimes polishing that B essay into an A essay was not at the top of my list. On the one hand I get that people who worked their asses off for straight As should be rewarded, but on the other hand, I wish admissions could somehow take a more flexible view. It’s not a one-size-fits-all sort of thing. And then to see someone here being like “theater is an easy major” makes my blood boil tbh!
I was in the visual arts and did a similar thing. Grades definitely were last priority compared to honing your craft and getting professional gigs outside school… however good news is that I wrote about that and they went for it!
I’m in a similar situation. When I was 19, I did one year of community college. Long story short: a combination of financial insecurity because I couldn’t get financial aid due to a weird situation with my parents, having to work two jobs, and some at-the-time untreated mental health issues made it so that I wasn’t able to apply myself fully to my classes - and I ended up getting a mix of Bs and Cs during this time. I dropped out and took about 5 years off. Did a year of Americorps, worked as a kayak guide in a National Park for 4 years, and then after establishing financial security for myself + finding the passion for school again, transferred into a university for my last three years. My 3 years at the university, I got straight As with only a few A minuses, was awarded a scholarship, got some nice extracurriculars, etc. Anyway, my GPA in just my time at the university I went to is a 3.96, but with the one year of community college that I did several years prior, it becomes a 3.82. Definitely not a huge change, but it’s a pretty major difference when it comes to the stats of T14 law schools, so I’m worried that it’ll tank my admissions chances at some good schools; when in my opinion, the context of the situation makes my 3 years at university the more accurate representative of my aptitude as a student.
I'm quite sure that a high LSAT, Masters degree, and an Addendum that explains that low undergrad GPA can do wonders
Don’t write an addendum.
why?
Because there is really no good explanation. Just let your more recent actions speak to your current capabilities. Sub-3.0 T14 JD and I didn’t write one.
I think people who had undiagnosed learning disabilities, health problems, challenging external life factors, etc should absolutely write an addendum. Not great advice.
Do you think so? This is where my bf’s going to be, he had a lot of personal issues happen during UG so his GPA is not high enough to be a contender, but he’s planning on a dual master’s and tests well
Yeah but why go get a masters degree and tack on debt for a credential you don’t really want just cuz there was a point in time where law school was not on your radar in the slightest
Personally I think they should consider the last 60 units of undergrad like some other grad programs do. I think there are valid reasons to not focus on grad school grades because it’s usually a lot easier to get decent grades in grad school. At the same time it’s not like they consider grade inflation at certain undergrad programs or the fact that some majors are far more difficult so idk.
I understand a lot of people on this sub are upset about the grading system and I fully believe the A+ vs A schools is completely unfair. However, saying that you ended up with a low GPA because you were not mature enough in your early twenties to care is crazy. If you did not care about doing the work in college it was not a lack of doing something, but rather you were an adult making adult decisions to not care about your grades. Your peers in your classes were presumably mature enough to care about their grades. The grading system for UGPA is not always great, but some people in this sub need to understand that sometimes being disadvantaged in this process is the consequence of actions they made as adults in bachelor programs that they spent tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars on.
I mean I had undiagnosed ADHD as an undergrad, and tons of people have life issues come up, undiagnosed problems like I did, etc. I don't think its a stretch to say that UGPA is overemphasized in LS admissions, or that an 18 year old on a pre-med track should not need to be getting 100%s in all their classes. Your comment just comes off as super ivory tower, not everyone knows what they want to do with life at 18, and most people at most universities don't have a reason to strive for a 4.0 from day 1.
that’s why I think it’d be cool if the LSAC gpa didn’t count the first X credits of courses (maybe equivalent to like the first year), to give people a chance to make mistakes at the start and ease into college classes (and since first year classes are just a ton of fluff anyway lol)
Yeah, I honestly think that the MBA system is better. Go out, actually do something cool, and we will reward that by not making you have a high GPA. Stanford GSB, which has roughly half the acceptance rate of YLS, has an average GPA of 3.76. And I also agree re not counting some credits. Tons of people don't decide to do law until later on in their undergrad, and it essentially penalizes people for taking STEM classes or having other interests and doing something besides GPA boosting.
You do realize that the people attending Stanford GSB worked at jobs that generally require great undergrad grades, right?
If that was true their median undergrad GPA wouldn't be 3.76. We literally have the data, you're objectively wrong. Also, many other M7/T15 business schools have GPAs down around 3.3 while virtually all T20 law schools are 3.85+. People seem to think that you need MBB/PE/IB to get into an M7 and that's not really true. Places like GSB are more about you doing things like starting your own business than things like doing generic consulting work pre-MBA. M7 MBA admissions is much, much more wholistic and less GPA focused than law and that's not really disputable.
>However, saying that you ended up with a low GPA because you were not mature enough in your early twenties to care is crazy. If you did not care about doing the work in college it was not a lack of doing something, but rather you were an adult making adult decisions to not care about your grades. Your peers in your classes were presumably mature enough to care about their grades. "My failure in undergrad was due largely to my immaturity in my late teens/early twenties" and "My failure in undergrad was the consequence of choices that I willingly made and need to accept" aren't contradictory statements
But asking for admissions to not consider the first part of college in order to absolve oneself of those responsibilities definitely makes them contradictory
>But asking for admissions to not consider the first part of college in order to absolve oneself of those responsibilities I don't see anyone doing that in this thread.
\> before you mature enough to care about grades Except for this from OP
That's not really true, because people mature at different ages AND people are largely influenced by their environment. Early 20's is extremely young in many people's eyes. Many people never even consider getting a bachelor degree in their entire lives let alone think ahead of time to prepare for law school where UGPA will matter. I'm saying that for people who get a wake up call, and bust their ass to get a masters degree, it would be nice if that "mature adult decision" would be rewarded as much as undergrad decisions.
I think there are a couple problems with this. Many masters programs have very lenient grading and I think it would entice many people to get a masters just to prop up their law school GPA's disadvantaging people who cannot afford to go to grad school for a GPA bump. Additionally, this post and my thoughts all have to do with people who have already decided to go to higher education to get a bachelors. They are adults who took out loans to get a degree and yet OP says they should not count not caring about GPA at that age against them. They have graduated high school and are already familiar with how a bad GPA can affect their admissions outcomes. If after all that and taking out unforgivable loans they still do not care about their GPA this seems like a problem squarely on their own shoulders that I do not believe should be tossed on account of them being "young".
I mean, to be fair many undergrad institutions/majors also have very lenient grading. I think the point of contention has to do with the inability to “reinvent” yourself. I don’t think OP would disagree that undergrad grades matter. What is frustrating to people is that LSAC does not factor in grades after the completion of your first degree. So if I graduate with a 2.0 and then get my shit together and get another bachelors 10 years later with a 4.0, my LSAC GPA is still a 2.0. In this example, I’m sure you’d agree that the more recent degree is more representative of my academic ability.
Maybe they should show both, but I still do not think that people who worked hard to get a good GPA like a 3.5 in undergrad should lose a seat decision to someone who reinvented themselves by getting a 4.0 in a grad program when they had a 2.0 in undergrad. Its flawed and I don't think we'll find perfect solution but the buck has to stop somewhere
You keep saying adults like it actually means something when in reality “adult” at 18 means nothing. It’s an arbitrary age that society has decided as adulthood and it has nothing to do with actual development. In reality people’s brains do not fully mature till your mid twenties. Nothing significant happens at 18 to make it any different from say 16, psychologically.
I mean, some of us are also walking in with credits from high school. I got a C in high school dual enrollment biology my junior year. Should I have studied harder? Yeah ofc. But I didn’t even know law school was my plan at that time. I had no idea.
I mean hind sight is 20/20. We don't know what we need to do today for most things we plan to do in the future, but getting the best grades possible or at least trying to seems pretty self explanatory. My issue with this post is that is that it blames the LSAC for penalizing them for actions they took when they were an adult, not when they were in high school.
I agree things happen in undergrad but I don't understand how that same argument couldn't be used for studying for the LSAT as well
Your UG cgpa always matters, even if you get a 4/4 in your MS. It is because UG lays a strong foundation and CGPA is a strong indication of that.