173 LSAT, question with my GPA

['blueskies]

Flat out wrong but not as harsh as jamie.  My hypothetical has a great shot at at least one of CCN if not all.

Undergraduate school matters a lot.  A 3.5 GPA from a mediocre state school is vastly different from a 3.5 from Columbia.  CCN may take a small handful of students from mediocre state school while they may take 20-40 students from Columbia College.  Grade trends such as OP's do matter.  One bad year and 3 years of almost 4.0.

noob...no.  not in terms of law school admissions.

[Jamie Stringer]

Where did you go to law school and what were your numbers?  I don't want to go through all your posts to find them.  I'm not taking it personally at all. I just think you are wrong and have a very negative view that does not reflect reality.

Let me ask you one question that should clear it all up for everyone.

How good of a chance at CCN do you think of the following hypothetical person?

Columbia undergrad/3.5 with 3.9 sophomore through senior years/173 LSAT/some work experience? 

Keep in mind I stated from the beginning that undergraduate school will matter a lot and we don't know which school OP went to.

I go to one of HYS and I have a higher ed background.

In terms of the above hypothetical person's chances at CCN, I think they'd have a better shot at NYU than Columbia or Chicago (and NYU with possibly $25K/year of Dean's Scholarship). My guess would be a hold at Chicago and Columbia at the outset barring some additional information (URM? Any significant awards?).

[llsatt1]

That tone tickles me.  It matters.  For every 3.5 CLS takes from mediocre state school CLS takes five to ten 3.5 type students from an Ivy.  Are you familiar with probability?  YLS may take 5 from Columbia College while taking 60 students from Harvard College even though gpa and lsat statistics are equal or similar between the two.

[llsatt1]

If you really go to HYS then I am amazed.

Hypothetical student has a very good shot at all of CCN.  There is no debating that.

Where did you go to law school and what were your numbers?  I don't want to go through all your posts to find them.  I'm not taking it personally at all. I just think you are wrong and have a very negative view that does not reflect reality.

Let me ask you one question that should clear it all up for everyone.

How good of a chance at CCN do you think of the following hypothetical person?

Columbia undergrad/3.5 with 3.9 sophomore through senior years/173 LSAT/some work experience? 

Keep in mind I stated from the beginning that undergraduate school will matter a lot and we don't know which school OP went to.

I go to one of HYS and I have a higher ed background.

In terms of the above hypothetical person's chances at CCN, I think they'd have a better shot at NYU than Columbia or Chicago (and NYU with possibly $25K/year of Dean's Scholarship). My guess would be a hold at Chicago and Columbia at the outset barring some additional information (URM? Any significant awards?).

[Jamie Stringer]

If you really go to HYS then I am amazed.

Where do you go to law school, genius? From reading your prior posts, it looks like you're still tackling the LSAT.

Hypothetical student has a very good shot at all of CCN.  There is no debating that.

You are moving the target here. Your original point was that the OP had a legit shot at HYS (and you were wrong). I just decided to look up the LSN data now to prove my point re: CCN and, unsurprisingly, it basically backs up what I said above (which is to say that the OP has a better chance at NYU than CC and that those schools will also be tough):

http://columbia.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats
http://nyu.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats
http://chicago.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats

In short, please DIACF.

[llsatt1]

The first thing that is wrong is that you picked stats for the toughest admissions season in the last several decades.  The second thing that is wrong is that you are severely discounting OP's three stellar years and one bad year.  The third ting that is wrong is that you and others are severly discounting the strength of applicant's college and your distorted concept that only HYP get a boost.  OP does have a legit but not good shot at HYS if OP goes to a respectable school.  Even taking the HYS discussion off the table you are still undeniably wrong about the chances of the hypothetical student getting into CCN.  In no place have I gone off table since the original post was also about chances at a top 10 where you replied OP should be targeting MVP rather than schools ranked above....WRONG

I won't count on any 0L, current student, or lawyer to concede their point so I suppose this exercise is pointless. 

['blueskies]

You could never get into H,Y, or S

First of all, she did.  You are the one who doesn't know how the law school admissions systems works and you don't want to believe the truth.  She knows how the system works and what it takes to get into those schools.

The first thing that is wrong is that you picked stats for the toughest admissions season in the last several decades. 

She picked the most recent year, which is not wrong.  Because the economy is still recovering, this admissions cycle will be very similar.

The second thing that is wrong is that you are severely undervaluing OP's three stellar years and one bad year.

You are overestimating the effect of three good years.  Yes, it's better that the OP has three good years to show instead of 4 mediocre years, but in the end it's just a 3.5 that will be submitted to US News and that's what matters to law school admissions, not grade trends. 

[llsatt1]

This could continue forever so I'll stop. 

[Morten Lund]

While I think Jamie Stringer may be rather dream-crushingly blunt, I have to mostly agree with her statements.  The first admission gate is the GPA/LSAT matrix, and to the best of my knowledge it is applied pretty mechanically without any regard to undergraduate institution.  Only applicants in the good part of the matrix get looked at by a person.  A 3.5 GPA will be at or below the outright cutoffs for many of the top schools, regardless of LSAT, and that makes everything else irrelevant. 

That said, my understanding is that the top schools have a gray area, where applicants with some characteristics (such as borderline GPA and high LSAT) get a subjective review, even if their stats otherwise would not qulify. 

If OP makes it to the subjective review stage, then other things come into play, including the higher second-attempt GPA.  As I indicated in my earlier post, I believe Yale (and some of the other top schools) might give OP a second look, but emphasis on MIGHT.  And even then, admission is (IMO) unlikely.  I am just more optimistic than Jamie, and encourage people to apply - just in case.

Does undergraduate institution matter?  Yes and no.  The GPA is the GPA.  Once in the subjective review, schools might conceivably give preference to applicants from the very best schools over equivalent applicants from the very worst schools, but it would have to be an extreme situtation - and those are by definition rare.  I expect that undergraduate school comes in to play more often as a diversity play - law schools might give preference to applicants from underrepresented geographic areas or underrepresented schools.  And, of course, the anti-diversity - law schools might give preference to applicants from their own universities.

Short version:  OP is unlikely to get in to YHS (the correct order), but just might, and should certainly try.  Same for other top schools, although admission becomes decreasingly unlikely, of course.

Also - I am amused/befuddled by the acronym lingo.  Can somebody translate for me?  I got YHS figured out, but CCN?  MVP?  CLS?  URM?

[Jamie Stringer]

CCN: Columbia, Chicago, NYU
CLS: Columbia Law School
MVP: Michigan, Virginia, Penn
URM: Under-represented minority

The first thing that is wrong is that you picked stats for the toughest admissions season in the last several decades.  The second thing that is wrong is that you are severely discounting OP's three stellar years and one bad year.  The third ting that is wrong is that you and others are severly discounting the strength of applicant's college and your distorted concept that only HYP get a boost.  OP does have a legit but not good shot at HYS if OP goes to a respectable school.  Even taking the HYS discussion off the table you are still undeniably wrong about the chances of the hypothetical student getting into CCN.  In no place have I gone off table since the original post was also about chances at a top 10 where you replied OP should be targeting MVP rather than schools ranked above....WRONG
I won't count on any 0L, current student, or lawyer to concede their point so I suppose this exercise is pointless.

You do understand the difference between a target and a reach, don't you? I didn't say that the OP shouldn't apply to schools ranked above MVP, I simply said that MVP was the target range. By all means, the OP should apply to higher ranked schools. If I was the OP, I'd personally only apply to CCN as my reaches, MVP as my targets, and the rest of the T-14 as my safety range.

Your posts are white noise. Since you've made it clear that you're guessing and haven't actually been through the process, then trying to talk sense to you is like beating one's head into a brick wall. I'd prefer to do other things.