Top Law Schools

I know that in most cases it makes no difference, I realize that, I realize that people will say anyone who worries about this is being anal, I realize that in 99% of cases this is true, but there are cases in which it does matter. Schools with hard GPA floors, or scholarships with "no exceptions" requirements for consideration.

I've read that the LSAT doesn't round up at .005 (like normal math dictates ), but at .007 -- for instance, a 3.495 would stay a 3.49, but a 3.497 would become a 3.5. Is this true? If so, what about a 3.4967? The "final" digit there is a 7, does it round up, changing that to 3.497, which rounds up? Or does it not round up, because LSAC math is not just weird and illogical, but doubly weird and illogical?

I've seen cases of people saying "well I had a 3.496 and they rounded it up," but I'm assuming that this is just because the people hadn't calculated it the way LSAC does to begin with, and don't really know what they're talking about. Or am I wrong, and LSAC uses actual math, and these people are correct?

And I've read elsewhere that LSAC doesn't calculate quality points for each class/grade, add them all up, and divide by the number of credit hours, like a normal school does or a normal person would. I've read they calculate your GPA "per year" and round that using normal math (.005 would round up to .01), then multiply the number of credits you earned that year by the rounded GPA for that year, and add it all up, and divide by the total number of credit hours? Is any of this right? Is some of this right? Where does the .007 factor in here? Is the person wrong about the .005, or does the .007 rule only factor in for rounding the final GPA? Or is the .007 thing even a thing at all? Is it really academic year, or do they mean semester? Year would be very odd and arbitrary. Where would summer semesters fall in, also?

What do they actually do? What part of this is correct? Any of it? All of it? Does anyone know anything about any of this for a FACT? I need to know this, not because I'm anal, but because I'm in one of the aforementioned situations. I know this is a ridiculous question, an utterly ridiculous question, an absolutely asinine question, but which of the above arcane policies they use determines whether or not I need to register for another semester. I know this is ridiculous, but it's not my fault.

A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

sparkytrainer wrote:A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

That was an example. A 2.99 versus a 3.0 would.

SlackOff wrote:

sparkytrainer wrote:A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

That was an example. A 2.99 versus a 3.0 would.

Probably not, but that might be the 1 situation it does. But you gotta give us more info my friend.

How does a 3.496 not already round up under general rules of math?

But yes, this is an absurd question.

.

sparkytrainer wrote:

SlackOff wrote:

sparkytrainer wrote:A 3.49 versus a 3.5 literally will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things

That was an example. A 2.99 versus a 3.0 would.

Probably not, but that might be the 1 situation it does. But you gotta give us more info my friend.

Check out Michigan on MyLSN... Every single non-URM 2.9 gets waitlisted or rejected, not a single one gets in, but that's not the case once you hit 3.0.
Not even a 180 will get you in if you're a non-URM and below a 3.0, apparently. Possibly the same for NYU, but no one with a 2.9 and a 171+ applied, so GPA may not be the only factor at work there, whereas it definitely is at Michigan. At other schools, the jump has a big effect, but it isn't absolute. It definitely seems to be absolute at Michigan.

Plus, like I said, I believe there are some scholarships with hard and fast "no exceptions" policies... As in a 3.6 will be considered, but a 3.59 will not be. I can't name any off the top of my head, though.

cavalier1138 wrote:How does a 3.496 not already round up under general rules of math?

Don't ask me, (maybe) ask LSAC.
This is what I'm trying to figure out.

.

I take it this means no one knows for sure how they calculate it?
(Which is understandable given how asinine this question is on its face, lol.)

Looks like I might be spending some time on the phone with them soon.

Just call. It’s no big deal. Breathe. Be calm.

From what I can see on LSN, .01 seems to make a difference in some cases, so your question isn't just you being a worry wart. For example, you see more than a few Hamilton scholarships at Columbia with exactly a 3.8 and 175+, but virtually none with a 3.70-3.79 and 175+. But obviously the only way to find out is just to submit your transcripts and see what happens.

Veil of Ignorance wrote:From what I can see on LSN, .01 seems to make a difference in some cases, so your question isn't just you being a worry wart. For example, you see more than a few Hamilton scholarships at Columbia with exactly a 3.8 and 175+, but virtually none with a 3.70-3.79 and 175+. But obviously the only way to find out is just to submit your transcripts and see what happens.

They're probably using their 75th percentile (3.81) as a soft cutoff. If you're only below that mark because of a rounding error, and otherwise the kind of candidate Columbia wants to spend Hamilton money on, you're probably fine.