Law School Discussion

168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere

SASS

  • ****
  • 260
    • View Profile
Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #20 on: May 01, 2008, 06:29:21 PM »
Please don't hire an "admissions consultant," who is just someone in a fake industry trying to make a buck.  I note earlier that you say the PS was excellent dealt with independent study... I think (and this has already been mentioned) it must really discuss the convictions and what she has done with her life since then.  If she just tried to slip those in via listing them I can understand how she would be rejected.

The "bar eligibility" concern is pretty much a crystal ball question, as far as I understand.  Some jurisdictions might have specific rules about convictions but must use a holistic review of the candidate.

Hmm...interesting. Anyone else think admissions consultants are a bunch of crooks? I have no idea.

I think what you said about the personal statement is correct though. She only addressed the pot charges and the shop lifting thing in her addendum (I am pretty sure). I think it probably should have been dealt with in the personal statement. Before she applied I wasn't even aware of this issue. Like I said this whole mess happened so long ago anyone who knows her would be shocked she wouldn't be able to get into law school because the person she is today is such a productive, intelligent person.

Cabra

  • ****
  • 682
    • View Profile
Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #21 on: May 01, 2008, 06:53:11 PM »

Hmm...interesting. Anyone else think admissions consultants are a bunch of crooks? I have no idea.


Generally no--they aren't crooks. Admissions Consultants (the company) and Anna Ivey have great reputations. A consultant won't make a difference for everyone, but this is a case when I think one would.

SASS

  • ****
  • 260
    • View Profile
Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #22 on: May 01, 2008, 06:53:48 PM »
It depends on the admissions consultant.  I'd pick one with a pretty decent resume actually working in LAW SCHOOL admissions -- Anna Ivey, for example.

I also disagree with the poster above.  I'd write a kickass personal statement (and FWIW an essay about an independent study sounds boring to me) and then deal with it succinctly in an addendum.  Just a guess, but I bet her personal statement is not as good as she thinks it is. 

I hear what your saying but I am pretty sure it wasn't the personal statement. Like I said, I didn't read it but we were english majors together in undergrad and she always wrote fascinating papers and wrote them very well. So while I didn't read it, I am know she is capable of producing a very good personal statement. I think the independent study with her Rabbi concerned Jewish law and her own spirituality or something like that. I am not jewish either so I am not sure what it entailed.....

SASS

  • ****
  • 260
    • View Profile
Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #23 on: May 01, 2008, 06:55:11 PM »

Hmm...interesting. Anyone else think admissions consultants are a bunch of crooks? I have no idea.


Generally no--they aren't crooks. Admissions Consultants (the company) and Anna Ivey have great reputations. A consultant won't make a difference for everyone, but this is a case when I think one would.

That's what I was thinking too.

Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #24 on: May 01, 2008, 06:58:21 PM »
With 168, 3.6, that should be in at Cornell and Duke.  Did your friend applied to those two? 

Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2008, 07:43:29 PM »
Well, part of it is trying to make up for the flaw.  But I guess what I'm getting at is, no matter how you dress the criminal record  up it's still just perfume on a pig.  Everything else in her application should be flawless and way above average for the schools she wants.  That means giving a hard look at the things she may think are fine in her application - softs, personal statement, recs, LSAT retake even...

LSAT retake?  With 168 and a 3.6, she should be in at several Top 14 law schools including Cornell and Duke. 

Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2008, 08:56:43 PM »
YBR, those applied/admitted numbers are misleading because (if they're the same ones I think they are) they include 165-169s. A 165/3.6 is not only more common than a 168/3.6, but a totally different candidate.

I think the issue here is that the OP is disregarding all the good advice in this thread as if it couldn't be the case for his friend. For instance, "the PS must be good, her English papers were amazing!" That's silly. Really, really silly.

The OP has gotten some really great advice in this thread. To reiterate, she needs to talk to a reputable (Anna Ivey seems to make a lot of people happy) consultant, talk to a few different bar C&F people, and polish up every piece of the application because they will probably look for excuses to turn her down or give her the go-ahead (depends on her numbers relative to the school of course).  I do think (contrary to a few opinions in this thread) that the appropriate place for her issues is an addendum, not the personal statement. That's contrary to everything I've ever read and contrary to what I did (I only addressed grades, so I'm not parallel).





SASS

  • ****
  • 260
    • View Profile
Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #27 on: May 01, 2008, 09:53:43 PM »
YBR, those applied/admitted numbers are misleading because (if they're the same ones I think they are) they include 165-169s. A 165/3.6 is not only more common than a 168/3.6, but a totally different candidate.

I think the issue here is that the OP is disregarding all the good advice in this thread as if it couldn't be the case for his friend. For instance, "the PS must be good, her English papers were amazing!" That's silly. Really, really silly.

The OP has gotten some really great advice in this thread. To reiterate, she needs to talk to a reputable (Anna Ivey seems to make a lot of people happy) consultant, talk to a few different bar C&F people, and polish up every piece of the application because they will probably look for excuses to turn her down or give her the go-ahead (depends on her numbers relative to the school of course).  I do think (contrary to a few opinions in this thread) that the appropriate place for her issues is an addendum, not the personal statement. That's contrary to everything I've ever read and contrary to what I did (I only addressed grades, so I'm not parallel).







Umm....I am in no way disregarding all the great advice I have gotten here and I believe I have expressed my gratitude numerous times throughout the thread. All I am saying is I am very confident that she didn't screw up the personal statement. I base that on the fact that I know her well, have read many things she has written in the past. Again, I am only speculating (as I have said at least twice now) because I did not read it.

The real question is how does one overcome the pot and shop lifting charges considering that was the real reason she is being blocked from law school. Again, probably not the personal statement. That only makes sense.

Again, I appreciate all the advice everyone has given. I will relay it all to her.

jacy85

  • *****
  • 6642
    • View Profile
Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #28 on: May 02, 2008, 04:17:33 AM »
All I am saying is I am very confident that she didn't screw up the personal statement. I base that on the fact that I know her well, have read many things she has written in the past. Again, I am only speculating (as I have said at least twice now) because I did not read it.



But just b/c she's a generally good writer and has written good things in the past does not in any way support a conclusion that her PS "must have" been good, too.  People turn out duds, it may have been well written but on a boring subject that adcoms didn't feel told them anything about her, etc.  I'm a relatively good writer, but I know I've written some crappy stuff before.

SASS

  • ****
  • 260
    • View Profile
Re: 168, 3.6 gpa Rejected everywhere
« Reply #29 on: May 02, 2008, 07:02:25 AM »
All I am saying is I am very confident that she didn't screw up the personal statement. I base that on the fact that I know her well, have read many things she has written in the past. Again, I am only speculating (as I have said at least twice now) because I did not read it.



But just b/c she's a generally good writer and has written good things in the past does not in any way support a conclusion that her PS "must have" been good, too.  People turn out duds, it may have been well written but on a boring subject that adcoms didn't feel told them anything about her, etc.  I'm a relatively good writer, but I know I've written some crappy stuff before.

Why did you misquote me as saying the PS "must have" been good when I clearly wrote I was speculating. Come on people. I am not trying to argue with you. Again, it probably wasn't the personal statement and probably the arrest record that kept her out of law school. Logic dictates that. I was posting this for advice on how one over comes a criminal record from years ago that does not represent who she is. And, I have received great advice. I was hoping maybe someone would have some actual experience with this although all advice is welcome and appreciated.