Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 191 Webinars
- 10 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 31 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 636 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
Related Discussions
3 Likes
Splitter Stories??
CurlyQQQ
Alum Member
Hey guys,
I've been doing research online about Splitters (Low GPA, High LSAT Score vice versa) and a lot of it is outdated. Does anyone else have any splitter stories they'd like to share? I'm interested to know if T14s still accept splitters. Or what these splitters showcased aside from GPA and LSAT scores that made them valuable candidates.
Thanks in advance!
Comments
In terms of your GPA, are we talking "above 3.0 low" or "below 3.0 low?"
Spliters are like unicorns. The data on us is small, and it really comes down to the statement of "it depends."
What I've gathered from this forum and others is;
1.) Distance yourself from the bad GPA/Score. For instance I have a 2.7 cumulative GPA but in-between my F's and D's I worked and joined the Marine Corps. I then finished my degree with a 4.0. This distance helps to show that I am not the same person I use to be.
2.) Your "strong" number needs to do the heavy lifting. If you want a shot at a t14 school, you need the GPA high or the LSAT high. For instance I have a 2.7 gpa so I really need to break 170 on my LSAT for a chance. It is possible for T14 to take me, but I need to make it worth their while.
3.) Keep your options as open as possible. As a spliter we can not be choosers. If a T-14 or T-20 school takes you, even if its not your dream school, you should really consider going. We have an up-hill battle to get into these competitive schools.
4.) Early admit is a boost we need as spliters. This process can boost our application, and since we are deficient compared to others we need all the help we can get.
5.) You are not alone. I have a terrible GPA but I am determined not to let that define me. @Mellow_Z is in the same boat and there are a few others here. You need to put your all into this to make up for things that are pulling you down.
I'm curious too. I spent two and a half years at Indiana University trying to sabotage my own life and ended up getting kicked out with a 1.9 gpa after failing every class my last semester. I took three years off and went back to school at Middle Tennessee State University and graduated with a cumulative gpa of 3.1 after seven semesters of straight "A"s. I've been studying the lsat on and off for a few years now and I've really kicked up the training in the last few months. I've been consistently scoring in the 168-172 range and my last test yesterday was my best one yet at 175. I have been striving for perfection the entire time and I really feel like I'm starting to get close to owning this test. With roughly 40 clean tests still to work with, I'm confident it is possible. I know I could write some pretty killer personal statements because I've been through insane ordeals in my life to get where I am today (like both my parents being incarcerated while I attempted to get my degree the first time, amongst other issues), which could help explain the low gpa.
I'm just wondering whether or not my efforts to get a perfect will be in vain because of my low gpa. Would someone like me even stand a chance of getting into the top schools like Yale, Stanford or Harvard? I feel pretty confident I could get into a nice school like Vanderbilt considering I live 20 minutes away and have decent connections with educators and some law professionals in the area for some references.
Sorry for the long winded post and tacking it onto somebody else's thread, but any comments would be appreciated.
@s_jricke With distance from the GPA and a high LSAT score, T-14 schools are possible. HYS are a lot harder to predict. Obviously those schools are highly competitive. Yale is it's own monster and from the research I've done, Standford is not very kind to spliters. That being said there is no solid way of knowing that each of these schools will do.
There's a lot of up to date splitter info on TLS.
if your GPA is at or below the lower quartile for your school, your LSAT should be from the mid to high end of their median for a good shot.
If your LSAT score is exceptional, I don't think a relatively low GPA will ruin you. I'm in the same boat. Idk about your situation but I slacked off on my GPA and now I need to put that extra work in on the LSAT.
I think that @CurlyQQQ mentioned in another thread being a URM. If so, a lot of the info is different.
Wow @uhinberg look at those critical reading skills. Lol ;p
@uhinberg is definitely on top of the small details haha!
Just to give you guys an idea I'm talking below 3.0. It's abysmal.
You're fine with a sub 3. Even more so being URM. The T14 is open to you, barring maybe YS, with a high enough LSAT.
Are you going to apply to go to Law School right out of UG? Or do you have any work experience?
The good news is, for reporting purposes, there is absolutely no difference between a 3.2 and 2.5. They are both below the 25% range, so they get calculated the same. The only difference is the story that the GPA will tell. A 2.8 in a pre-med or STEM program can be justified easier than a 2.8 in a poli-sci or english program (this doesn't carry much weight, but bear with me). If you are applying as K-JD with no real excuse as to why your GPA was low, they will think you're a bad student, and rightly so. If you have an addendum such as health issues, family issues, etc. then they will be more inclined to look over your GPA. If you work for a few years between undergrad and applying for LS, then you can write your narrative as being immature at the time and having progressed professionally, so they should judge you based on the professional that you are now, and not the student you were x years ago.
Read my above post. You have a good story to tell. You were immature at the time of starting UG, and when you came back a few years later you finished what you started and had all A's. This is positive growth. If you scored anything above a 170 I'd be fairly confident in saying you will get admitted into a few of the lower ranked T14s. Anything above 172 will be working towards scholarship money.
Work experience also applies in your situation, which I'm assuming you have since you took a few years off school and worded it like you graduated awhile back.
This is just false. An applicant with a 2.0 has a significantly less chance of getting into a T14 or even a Top 30 school than a applicant with a 3.2. An applicant with a 2.0 pulls a schools median acceptance GPA down significantly more points than a person with a 3.2. This will make the school more reluctant to accept an applicant.
When your GPA is at the bottom 25%, schools don't just say "Oh, he hit the bottom 25%! GPAs below this are all equivalent!"
Columbia's 25% percentile GPA is 3.56. According to what you are saying, for reporting purposes, a person with a 3.55 is on the same playing field as a person with a 2.5, all other things being equal.
Your major matters as well. Low GPA with a humanities, polysci, or business majors are usually expected to be higher than a STEM major. There are also differences between similar majors such as chemistry vs biology with chemistry yielding an even lower average GPA than most engineering fields. Single major vs double major? It's all relative. My current pre law advisor (used to work on the admissions council to a T14 school for years, is a JD herself, and is a very reliable source for advice) basically she said most schools are looking for students that can provide evidence that they will be successful in their law schools class. Now if you are applying to T14's or any school for that matter, ask yourself, do you have what it takes to at least be competitive for the top 25% of the class? Granted not everyone will make this cutoff, but can you at least put up a solid fight without getting left behind by the class. If you think you can, ask yourself what evidence do you have to support your statement? Did you do exceptionally well in your class work thus far (high gpa,) but also consider how hard you worked for that GPA. Or rather, can you simply be disciplined enough to out work everyone through pure grit (as represented by crushing everyone on an LSAT). If you are weak on one area, can you at least give a good reason from personal challenges, to life experiences that demonstrates you will be able to stay in the game from your ability to overcome and adapt? Bottom line, there are many ways to show you are a strong candidate. It is very hard to mend GPA's and despite being a number, they are incredibly subjective. However if you study hard enough and plan out your time correctly, possibly even postponing applications for a year, anyone can score top 10% on an LSAT. With this in mind, low LSAT scores look very very very bad because it reflects that you just didn't try hard enough or didn't take it seriously. If you are a splitter with a low LSAT vs high GPA you should definitely reconsider applying until you achieve an acceptable score. If you have a low GPA it is much more understandable, and the LSAT is designed to hep you shine.
Your LSAT can do a lot. Prob the best splitter story I know is Nicole she was a sub 3.0 UGPA and a 170 LSAT and is now a very successful 2L at Northwestern. It a lot easier to be a High LSAT low GPA than the reverse as far as splitters go.
@Mellow_Z
I initially started as a STEM major then switched to other stem majors then finally came back to my roots as an English major with a minor. I wouldn't apply to law school if I knew I couldn't keep up. My highest ending goa was a 3.7 with 6 classes of course work, a part time job, a lead position in a community service org, whilst preparing to study abroad. I can handle myself.
I graduated in 2016 so I'm not straight out of undergrad. I had a lot of background issues throughout undergrad that I hadn't anticipated. I don't even want to give excuses. But I'm currently working and I'm a board member of a grassroots ngo and volunteer with two other organizations. I'm really trying to make up for the past.
It wasn't so much immaturity as it was circumstance.
A high LSAT score can compensate for a low GPA, but splitter cycles (and URM cycles~so very unpredictable for both a splitter and URM applicant) are very unpredictable so you would have to go with the flow of the cycle and see what you get.
I have an example of a 7sager who was also a tutor, her name is Nicole Hopkins, she got a 170 on the LSAT and if I remember correctly she said she had like a 2.8 or something. she got into Northwestern, which is an amazing school. This is anecdotal, but I'd say it's a good splitter story haha.
Just throwing this out there - knew a guy who had a 2.7 GPA from a meh undergrad institution. Got a 177 on his LSAT, got into every T-14 school besides Stanford and Yale (yep, got into Harvard). He now goes to UVA because they gave him a full ride.
To add to @TheMikey 's story. @"Cant Get Right" has posted that Nicole is also at the top of her class after 1L. That is a very significant next chapter of the story, b/c it happens to be that research has shown that high LSAT scores are of particularly bad predictive value of law school success for splitters.
that is awesome!!!
that is also awesome!! and I do feel like the LSAT in general is kind of a bad way to predict how someone will do in LS. screw all of the research, the LSAT sucks in general lol.
Anecdotal, but I knew 2 people who went to Fordham Law, one got lots of money because of his 171, the other was there with idk how much money, probably none tbh with her 159 since that's I think below their 25th. She ended up higher up in their class than he was.
I think a lot of the LSAT predictive ability is in being able to figure out how to work effectively. Most of us aren't challenged in UG in quite the same way as the LSAT. The LSAT requires us to take it to the next level and our ability to do that when we put our mind to it is, I think, a more important quality than intellect in many ways.
Just to add my splitter success story to the thread, I was a splitter last cycle and am in at UPenn on a deferral. Like others have mentioned, an above median LSAT is a premium that can often carry it's weight against an under median GPA. Compared to top LSAT scores, 3.9's are a dime a dozen; it's the LSAT's they've really got to fight for. And I'm really thankful for that. I had a great undergrad career with the exception of one semester where I was dealing with some personal things. The LSAT means that 2 rough months from 2007 don't have to dictate my future, which would really be kind of absurd.
I know an AA female with a 2.9 and a 172 (originally applied with 164) that got into Georgetown (attending), Cornell, USC, Vandy, BU, and a few others. She was also waitlisted at Harvard, UCLA, Northwestern, Duke, UVA, Penn, and Columbia.
Get that LSAT as high as possible and cast your net far and wide. URM cycles are unpredictable.
Huh, that is quite something. Always felt like Harvard had 3.6ish cap - at least TLS seems to say so. Just wondering - was this person a non-traditional applicant? URM? Was faced with various life circumstances that affected his/her undergrad?
Yep, been working full time and > @Mellow_Z said:
Yep, I've been working full time and investing in stocks ever since I left school the first time. I had to, considering I lost a full ride scholarship and had to pay for the rest of school minus pell grants out of my own pocket.
All I have to say is thank goodness for these forums! I'm a splitter as well, and reading this gives me hope *continues this full day of studying #LongtimeLurker lol
@thisissparta He took 4 years off of school before applying. He worked on the Obama 2012 campaign, a couple of mid-term elections in between, and then Hillary 2016 where I met him lol.
That being said his work experience on the campaigns wasn't anything stellar. If I remember correctly he was like a door-knocker in 2012. What really got him ahead was his LSAT.
Your post demonstrates that you have no idea how the percentiles work. Law schools basically line up their applicants from lowest to highest, and at 25% of the way through their ranks, that is their "25th percentile GPA". So, if their reported GPA is a 3.5, whether you are a 3.2 or a 1.0, will not change what they report- it will still be a 3.5. So before you jump the gun in saying that my post is false, please know what it is you are talking about. It isn't an average.
@Mellow_Z is, of course. 100% with regard to percentiles. But although law school admissions is primarily a numbers game, there is a bit more to it, and it is likely that a 2.0 will be looked at with more of a jaundiced eye than a 3.2, and give the choice between two splitters with such GPAs, I'd think that the 3.2 would win out 99.9% of the time. That would not be the case, however, if both were below median GPA and the difference was, say 3.54 and 3.49. Such minuscule differences make a difference only when one is above median and the other not.
I agree. And I think I hinted towards that in my original post :
Obviously if neither candidate had an addendum and both applied with the exact same app (this is impossible), the 3.2 would get chosen over the 2.0 every time. But there are definitely things to sway the application in the 2.0's favor, such as addendum, work experience, softs, etc.
@uhinberg I am by no means trying to argue, or disagreeing with what you said, just wanted to clarify in case it came off some other way.