What's more important in Undergrad when applying to law? Cumulative or Major GPA?

Graduate School Law School
1

<p>I'm scratching my head on this one -</p>

<p>Currently I go to the UC Berkeley and, have decided to change my majors. The process has been long and a tad arduous; thus, creating a minor default in my cumulative GPA.</p>

<p>However, my Major GPA is astounding (in the 3.8++ range) -</p>

<p>The question that I have is this:</p>

<p>Law School Admissions care more about Cumulative or Major GPA?</p>

<p>And, I haven't received it just yet - but what about a NP on my transcript - how would that fair?</p>

2

<p>Cumulative is much more important</p>

3

<p>Major GPA doesn't matter at all. An NP, I believe, is likely to be counted on your GPA (I think) as 0.0 grade points, which will harm your average quite a bit.</p>

4

<p>Quantitatively it doesn't matter. It might matter subjectively depending on the major.</p>

<p>Two people:
1) 3.5 cumulative, 4.0 major (math), 3.0 GE
2) 3.5 cumulative, 3.5 major (math), 3.5 GE</p>

<p>I'd reckon the 1st person would have a slight edge. Pure speculation, of course.</p>

5

<p>In a situation where two people have identical cumulatives and identical LSATs, the vastly most likely outcome is that they're both rejected or both accepted. </p>

<p>If the adcom were (somehow) forced to choose between them, LORs, EC's, and essays would kick in.</p>

<p>If the adcom were (somehow) completely tied on all those three factors -- which is basically impossible -- then I can imagine that MP might be right. On the other hand, I can also see it going the other way, especially in a perceived "easy" major.</p>

6

<p>Absolutely. It works both ways. And I agree with you on the relative importance my scenario (impossibly low).</p>

7

<p>The most competitive law schools do not consider a 3.8+ GPA astounding even when it is your cumulative GPA, much less your major GPA. You need to be realistic about the level of competition you're about to face.</p>