I didn't give this much though when I went to undergrad (and for most of us it's a moot point by now) but it still begs the question when thought about- Is the LSADAS culumaltive GPA standard fair, when applied the same way to all schools attended?
I don't think that it is. I say this for a few reasons. First, I (like many) attended an undergrad with a 4.0 grading scale. A 4.0 meant you got 100% on everything. Other schools have a 5.0 grading scale. You could do what got a 3.5 (ish) at the 4.0 school and still have ABOVE a 4.0 on their grading scale. That alone seems unfair.
Plus obviously not all schools grade the same, most would say community college is easier. Most would also agree that blow off electives are easier than most required courses.
I think that the LSDAS shoudl adopt a standard where it calculates the GPA from schools that grade above a 4.0 (with whatever math that would work) to bring them down to what they would be at an actual 4.0 school before creating the cumulative GPA. That would seem fair.
It also would seem fair, to remove some electives from the GPA calculation. I know that when applying to undergrad, a lot of the colleges told us that they did NOT factor in GYM and other simular blowoff classes into the GPA (and yes, there is college level gym)
Until this happens (don't hold your breath) would others agree that it would make sense to try to pick a 5.0 GPA school to go to undergrad at (and take as many blow off electives to get 5.0 in gym and the like) to artifically raise the GPA far above those applying for admissions from 4.0 schools? Wouldn't that seem like a logical choice to increase the odds of admissions and scholarships?