<p>What are the top soft factors (Factors other than GPA and LSAT)</p>
<p>Work Experience? ECS? Socioeconomic Status? URM? </p>
<p>Those are the things I can think of off the top of my head, which ones are generally the most important? What did I leave off?</p>
<p>Hi Rolen,</p>
<p>Anna Ivey- Former Dean of admissions fromthe University of Chicago Law school, Now paid consultant who has a cloumn, Ask Anna on vault.com (not advocating anything, just passing on information)</p>
<p>In her column: What are the Odds? she writes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The most reliable resource for gauging your odds at different schools is the LSAT/GPA calculator provided by the Law School Admission Council (LSAC). It's a bit hard to find -- LSAC buried it under several layers on its site and gave the link a very non-descript name ("LSAC Data Search"), but every law school applicant should bookmark it: </p>
<p>I'm a power user of that calculator, and it usually takes me several attempts to load the page at any given time, but keep trying -- it's worth it. Once you're on the calculator page, you'll see two boxes near the top: one for you to fill in your undergraduate GPA, and the other to fill in your LSAT score. For any combination of numbers, the calculator spits out your odds for nearly all of the ABA-approved law schools. You can sort the results alphabetically or by odds. This calculator is especially handy if you're trying to decide how a change in your GPA or your LSAT would affect your odds at different schools. LSAC changed the layout of the results recently to present the odds graphically (using different colored bands and lines), a method I find irritating compared to the old layout, but no matter, it still gets the job done. </p>
<p>These odds aren't perfect predictors, of course. First of all, the odds are based only on raw numbers, and while your raw numbers are highly predictive, they don't get you all the way there. The caliber of your undergraduate institution, your masters degree, your doctorate from Oxford, and your publications would certainly catch an admissions officer's eye, and this database won't reflect those or other variables. See my previous article, "Is Admissions a Numbers Game?" for more on that. </p>
<p>Despite its limitations, the LSAC calculator is still the best way to shape and manage your expectations during the application process, and it certainly beats the self-reported and sometimes fraudulent data on other websites. Stick with the official LSAC data. </p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In her column: Is admissions a numbers game, she writes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
So is law school admissions entirely about numbers? No. If it were all about numbers, schools wouldn't pay professional salaries and benefits for a job that a computer could do: plug in the numbers, spit out the letters. Unless you are a member of a minority group they are trying to recruit, a school's median numbers will be reasonably predictive for any given applicant's chances. But we're talking about bell curves here, and exceptions do get made every year on either end, meaning that people with great numbers are rejected every year, and people with less than great numbers are admitted every year. What applicants with less than stellar numbers have in common is that they do an exceptional job presenting what they have to offer on the non-numbers side. Sure, the odds are against those applicants with LSATs below the medians; I'm not suggesting great odds, and the greater the disparity, the worse are the odds. But it happens enough times every year that applicants would be silly to squander that opportunity and make the most of the soft parts of the application.</p>
<p>Admissions officers pride themselves on picking the right people for a class, even in a world of rankings constraints. People are selected for those admissions jobs because they have a certain skill set that allows them to evaluate people - to put together a class every year that will benefit from each student's insights inside and outside of the classroom, that the school's professors will enjoy teaching and recommending for clerkships, that legal employers will want to hire, that will serve as excellent ambassadors for the school for the rest of their lives, that will benefit society in one way or another - all based on limited information about any given applicant.</p>
<p>Add to that other objectives and mandates admissions officers have besides the rankings and medians - they have to make sure there are enough minorities in each class, meet legislative quotas for in-state students (if they're public schools), figure out whether they can afford to tick off an applicant's big-donor relative, ensure that they don't end up with an entire class of Poli Sci and Econ majors or Ivy League graduates or people from a particular five-state area (just to give a few examples). Admissions officers make trade-offs against the LSAT numbers all the time for a variety of reasons, but they will be very picky before they make an offer to someone who will drag down the median.</p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The link for the LSAC calculator. </p>
<p>Its a little off, 2006 admissions numbers were slightly inflated (meaning more difficult to get in for almost all schools but Yale). I hope recent trends in increased applications decline; its making the process too cut-throat IMO.</p>
<p>First of all, law schools all have their own way of doing things. The big "soft" factors at one school might be a non-issue at another (much in the same way that some schools give a lot of weight to the LSAT and others don't). Schools may even change their admissions policies from year-to-year. Generally, the "soft" factors are:
*undergrad school
*major
*work experience
*essays
*LORs
*geography
*etc.</p>
<p>Now, I'm going to set off a firestorm on this one, but being a minority is not a soft factor. When Michigan's law school data was analysed, it was found that being black in the law school application process gives you more of a numerical boost than it does on the undergrad side (in which minority status gave an automatic 20 points). Generally, minority status is an extra 15 LSAT points. </p>
<p>Most of this is a pipeline issue - I read recently that less than 5% of black students in the 9th grade will graduate from college. (Now, this could be for my area, not nationwide, but it's still a startling number.) If admitted only on numbers, top law schools would be more than 99% non-black. </p>
<p>I'm not going to even discuss what I think of affirmative action (as either a feather on the scale or the "anvil" that this has been said to be) - but they are there. Their value does not change their existence, IM(never humble) opinion.</p>
<p>How important is your Degree GPA (Aka Major GPA) relative to other things?</p>
<p>See above.</p>
<p>Depends on the school. Even within the same school, that might change year-to-year. </p>
<p>My guess is that it barely matters. Considering that your major GPA probably isn't any better indication of your ability to do legal work than your overall GPA, why would it matter very much?</p>
<p>"Generally, minority status is an extra 15 LSAT points. "</p>
<p>does that include Asians like Chinese and Korean natives who have finished their education in the states?</p>
<p>It most certainly does not apply for any Asians.</p>
<p>do any of the t14 schools look favorably at asian-american applicants?</p>
<p>i see some of them have under 10% asian student body, which i guess is "overrepresented" in terms of US population, but of course i'm from california and it's astonishing to imagine a student body of UNDER 10% asians! </p>
<p>it's mostly in reference to michigan, virginia, and duke, but please give comments on any t14 school</p>
<p>(i realize someone already mentioned the boost given to historically under-represented minorities at michigan doesnt apply for asian-americans, but i'm still wondering if there's ANY type of special consideration)</p>
<p>There is no special consideration for asians.</p>
<p>if im 1/2 spanish, do I qualify for URM status?</p>
<p>No, you do not.</p>
<p>Do you mean Spanish as in from Spain or Hispanic/Latino? In either case you are half non-anglo. </p>
<p>Didn't we cover this sometime ago? For Native Americans 1/8 is sufficient--I assuming the same for other groups, with one-half being certainly enough.</p>
<p>What about Mexican citizens who have lived in the US and will attend an undergraduate school in the US but who do not yet have residence? Are you considered an URM in that case?</p>
<p>No. Legally you are a non-immigrant. Thus, you will be considered as an international student (some schools have specific policies for Canadian and Mexican citizens). Nevertheless, the diversity factor will still be present; While you will not benefit from AA, you will most likely benefit from being different and, consequently, increasing the diversity of the school. Having said that, however, a JD is not the most useful degree if you are planning to end up practicing in Mexico--a mexican law degree would be best, perhaps followed by an LLM in the States.</p>
<p>What if you plan to stay in the United States? I'm not real sure how the law works in regards to people like me, because I've been living here for about 10 years legally. I am here on an A-2 Visa which I will still have in college until my mom moves to another country for the government job she has. Then I think I'll have to switch to an F-1. Is there any way for me to get residency status and if so what is the process I should follow in doing so? I just think it's kind of silly that I've lived here most of my life, will attend college in the US, and after college may have to just leave the country completely and live in Mexico, where I've never lived before.</p>
<p>Are you a diplomat's kid? (Just curious).</p>
<p>The bottom line, unfortunately, is that you are neither a Citizen nor a Permanent Resident (Green Card Holder). Furthermore, you have no real way to become either. Being that the case, you do not qualify as an URM. </p>
<p>To get residency, you'd have to get married to a US Citizen--that's pretty much your only opportunity. Other than that, you'll have to go back for good. I know it's pretty silly, as you probably feel this is your home--but that's the law and its beauty. </p>
<p>What are you planning to study in College? I'd definitely go for something that's transferrable from country to country, like Economics, Engineering, or the Hard Sciences--perhaps even Business. Law is not one of them.</p>
<p>An option you may have, is to get a US company to sponsor you for a H1B (work visa). But even that one comes with an expiration date and the company has to really, really, really like/need you in order to go through the hassle. It takes time and is expensive.</p>
<p>If Law is truly your calling, I'd pursue regardless. If you graduate from a top Law school, you may or may not find someone to sponsor you. As a matter of fact, a lot of foreign students come to the states for an LLM, hustle and find a willing employer and stay. But as I said, work visas are temporary as well--most people get married.</p>
<p>Good luck.</p>
<p>Edit: I'd talk with an immigration attorney if I was you. But I'll warn you: he or she will repeat what I just said.</p>
<p>I remember browsing through the LASC website. If my memory is correct, there was a section on how LGBT applicants offered LS more diversity. Would, then, being LGBT be equivalent to being URM?</p>
<p>
[quote]
There is no special consideration for asians.
[/quote]
Sure there is. It's negative, but it's "special". Heh.</p>
<p>Thanks for your help Wildflower. I'm actually thinking of majoring in either Economics or Hotel Administration, which I'm sure are transferable to wherever I go. I AM a diplomat's son, so that's why I'm on the A-2. Also, with the work visa, can you in time apply for residency?</p>