Is LSAT and GPA that important for LS admission?

<p>I know that everyone says that these two are the top factors in the admission decisions but are they really the determining factors? I mean if someone gets a 175 and has a 3.9 GPA are they going to get into most T14 schools even if their EC's are less than stellar or their UG institution isn't ranked highly?</p>

<p>Yep.</p>

<p>GPA and LSAT are, from what I gather, 90-97% of admissions decisions.</p>

<p>It also depends on the school, to some (admittedly minor) extent. Certain schools are known for weighing soft factors more highly than others. My own experience has not solidly disproven anything, but it has made me slightly more critical of the "NUMBERS ARE EVERYTHING" madness that you find everywhere (which is not to say that they aren't still unbelievably significant in the application process, but it is perhaps to argue that 2-3% seems skimpy). </p>

<p>It seems to me like numbers alone are more likely to keep you out than to get you in.</p>

<p>If GPA and LSAT were the sole criteria, then the applicants with the highest combination of these factors would almost always be the ones accepted. Looking at the real numbers, this does not necessarily appear to be the except among applicants with scores at the very top of the applicant pool.</p>

<p>What I see at most schools that have released data is that some combination of GPA and LSAT is almost a guarantee of admission and perhaps this tends to perpetuate the idea that GPA / LSAT are everything At some level it almost is. The more selective the school, the higher the combination required. From this generalization you can exclude Harvard, Yale, Stanford and maybe a couple of other schools where nothing will guarantee an admission (perhaps other than serious connections). </p>

<p>However, just below this level of nearly guaranteed admission for the academic ?superstars? (and where this level is depends on the school), the odds of admission tend to fall off rather sharply, but people with a variety of GPA /LSAT combinations are accepted. It appears at this level that some factors other than GPA/LSAT must be driving decisions, as there has to be a way of differentiating among applicants with nearly equal GPA/LSAT combinations. It is here where I suspect that the schools pay a lot more attention to some of the factors such as background, work experience, EC?s, etc. come into play.</p>

<p>For instance, look at Duke. An applicant with a GPA of at least 3.75 with an LSAT score of at least 170 has roughly a 90% chance of admission. 10% are rejected even with this combination. Other the other hand, those with at least a 3.75 GPA and an LSAT score of 165-169 only 41% of applicants are offered admission. It appears to me that the admissions committee must be making some choices at this level based on factors other than strictly GPA / LSAT, particularly since students are, in fact, accepted with score combinations lower than all of the above.</p>

<p>interesting post, I did some research using lawschoolnumbers.com link someone sent me and found that a combination of 3.9gpa and 175 almost guaranteed admission to Yale, and in the few cases where someone was deferred or outright rejected they got in at Harvard, or Stanford.</p>

<p>so I guess it is true that Yale is a crap shoot for anyone without a perfect academic record or connections but getting in the T14 and most of the top 5 is almost guaranteed with great stats.</p>

<p>Yep. From what I gather, Stanford and Yale admissions are crapshoots, Harvard is a little bit more predictable.</p>

<p>stoneimmaculate,</p>

<p>I plugged in the same numbers at the Law School Admission Council site (LASC.org) and the results there do not reflect anywhere near an "almost guaranteed" admission to Yale with a 3.9 / 175 (actually looks closer to 25-30% chance). Certainly those numbers will get you in a top school, but Yale is still a crapshoot even with those numbers. Even a 4.0 / 180 gives you about a 75% chance. While lawschoolnumbers.com is a useful tool, it is by no means statistically accurate, given that participation is voluntary and I doubt that the stats for all the participants represent true numbers.</p>