How accurately does LSAC convert Canadian averages?

[ace0260]

If you guys could list your Canadian averages and how LSAC converted them to GPA's id appreciate it. Im worried LSAC will be indifferent towards the different Canadian grading standard.

[tifftsun]

my percentage is converted properly. 80 = A-

[ace0260]

so did they give you a 3.67 or a 4.0 for an 80?

[idlewild]

It converts to a 3.66. An 80 is not an A its an A-. Over 85 is an A.

[Michael1985]

They totally screwed me. 80 = B- or 2.67.

[CNB]

Just running into this as we are working towards an app for 2008.

24 ch of Community College, all A's according to college.
3 courses @ 85%
4 courses @ 90%
1 course @ 95%

Top student in University Transfer Program, won bursary for being so.  (No Curve Grading here, getting an 85+ requires a review of work before it's awarded)
GPA as reported by College, 4.0
According to the table provided by LSAC, this converts to a 3.46!!

Spoke with Head Adminsistrator at college and Chief Registrar today.  Told them if they had simply reported letter grades, no problem, would have converted properly to 4.0.  They said...happy to write letters of support, and explain, but not possible to change transcript to letter grades.

LSAC Guide says...

There may be some variation in GPAs
calculated by LSAC and those calculated by
colleges or students; however, the variation is
rarely substantial. Because the law schools
that use the LSDAS understand its procedures,
variation in GPAis not likely to be crucial to a
law school’s admission decision.

I don't know what they call substantial, but holy smokes...4.0 to 3.46...

Fortunately Year 2 at university was 4.1/4.3...reported as letter grades.  But it still only averages up to 3.8 for LSAC.  To average up to 4.0 on LSAC it will take straight A's plus 10 more A+'s...tough row to hoe, just to get back to where it all started.

Anyone ever try appealing this issue to LSAC?

It seems that getting an 85-90 must be very different down south.

Edit...
OLSAS would have shown the College Year as 3.91/4.0 and after 2 years, 3.92/4.0...that seems pretty reasonable.

[Geo_Storm]

Seems like it would be easier to get high marks if you are not graded on a curve. Then everyone can get high marks. I think that's what happened to my CEGEP marks. The average in some classes was 83,85 ish so my 93 didn't look so hot.

[CNB]

Wow, a class average of 83-85...holy smokes. That would have been an Low A Average for the class here, not very likely.  If it were on a curve, they'd pick what the average mark they'd assign was, and then bell curve the marks on to it and re-assign final marks based on the curve.
Your 93 certainly doesn't look as good as it should against that average.
In my case, the class average would have to have been somewhere in the low 60s, the 85-90 was waaaay ahead of the average.  Fortunately Ido have letters from profs saying so, but that doesn't help with the pure numbers game that goes on down south for the early cuts.

[Geo_Storm]

Wow, a class average of 83-85...holy smokes. That would have been an Low A Average for the class here, not very likely.  If it were on a curve, they'd pick what the average mark they'd assign was, and then bell curve the marks on to it and re-assign final marks based on the curve.
Your 93 certainly doesn't look as good as it should against that average.
In my case, the class average would have to have been somewhere in the low 60s, the 85-90 was waaaay ahead of the average.  Fortunately Ido have letters from profs saying so, but that doesn't help with the pure numbers game that goes on down south for the early cuts.

Again it's CEGEP, and it was a private school full of competitive and motivated 16-18 year olds.