<p>LSN</a> :: hardboiled</p>
<p>I was looking on LSN to find people with similar stats. I looked at people with a 3.8-3.95 gpa which is what I will graduate with (graduating in 3 years total with an environmental science degree (I'm one year in with a 4.0 GPA). I'm starting to realize how hard it is to get above a 170 on the LSAT (I got a 34 on the ACT and consider myself to be good at standardized testing) and am hoping to get a ~170 or higher if I can. I'm wondering why this applicant, with strong scores, didn't get into some top schools like Harvard, columbia, or UVa (these are the caliber of schools I am shooting for). Is being from a large public a disadvantage at schools of this caliber? If I graduate with a 3.9 and 170+, will I have a shot at these schools? I have been researching extensively and know that the LSAT and GPA are far and away the most important parts of an application. When I look through the profiles of students accepted to the top schools, I see lots of students indicating "ivy" or "top 20" as their undergrad school (along with strong stats). Are these students being accepted because they have the stats and are from top schools? Or are they just the type of students who would rock the LSAT regardless of their undergrad college?</p>
<p>I don’t see anything unusual about those results, aside from the WL at UVa. This guy got into Chicago, Penn and NYU, and got money from the latter two. I can’t see how this is evidence that he was at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>[LSN</a> :: NYC2109](<a href=“Recently Updated J.D. Profiles | Law School Numbers”>NYC2109 | Law School Numbers)</p>
<p>what sets this person apart? Other than having a 1 point advantage on the LSAT? Is it ivy league status that gained him/her admission all over?</p>
<p>He got accepted to a lot of great schools. Only odd thing was the WL at UVA. At the same time I don’t consider those HYS numbers because the LSAT is too low, but he actually got WL at Harvard which is more surprising than rejection at UVA. Even if this profile was odd, which it really isn’t (it’s actually extremely expected for numbers like that), it would be only one odd example which could be explained for a ton of different reasons. Maybe just a bad personal statement for example.</p>
<p>Don’t think it’s a disadvantage at all. I go to a large public and students that I’ve talked to have gotten in about where they should have from their numbers.</p>
<p>For the second example, I mean pedigree will play a SMALL role. And again, 170 and 171 are major cutoff areas in the top schools. Furthermore, personal statement could be playing a hidden role here.</p>
<p>To be honest, I think more consideration should be given to undergrad considering all these people asking questions if they should attend some junk school over a better school in order to artificially inflate their gpa. I mean someone attending San Francisco State is going to have a waaaaaay easier time with the curve during undergrad than someone at Stanford.</p>
<p>A one-point LSAT difference is not trivial at that level. It’s the difference between being at the 25th percentile at Harvard and being below it. And there are plenty of other factors that could make a difference, like the fact that the second applicant was female. Maybe her work experience was more impressive, or she had a better PS, etc.</p>
<p>Just to be clear, I’m at a large public for financial reasons, not to inflate my gpa for law (I was premed going in). Basically what I’m hearing is that the LSAT is sooooo important in the admissions game, especially if you look at the results on LSN. I’m going to assume that ivy undergrads litter top law schools not becuase of the ivy itself but because of their talent, which they would have regardless of the school they had chosen</p>