34 replies to this topic

[cheframsey]

I graduated from the U of A with a Bcomm degree last April. My cgpa is 2.9 and I scored a 160 on the lsat. I got into university at a young age (16) and really wasn’t ready for it. I know my chances of getting into a Canadian law school as of now are almost zero. But is there any way to repair the damage that has been done to my undergrad gpa so I can get into a Canadian law school?

I was thinking about returning to the U of A under special student status so I can take more courses. Since U of A only looks at your last 60 credits, I was planning on doing 2 years of upgrading. But before spending around $15,000 taking meaningless courses in the hope that one day I will get accepted into law school, I wanted to get your opinion. Is it a good idea? Is there a better option? I really want to get into a Canadian law school and will do whatever it takes.

[conge]

I've heard of applicants upgrading their courses, or even taking on another degree (at some schools you could complete a B.A., for example, with only 2 additional years of study after completing a prior degree), in order to get into law school. However, in order to be sure that the school you want to apply to would accept these "upgrading" courses, you should call or write and get the answer directly. Contact all the schools you would apply to and find out if they would accept the courses.

Your LSAT isn't bad at all, so if schools will accept these courses towards your GPA, then it's a possibilty.

[PurpleMustang]

I am pretty sure that "last 60 credits" is referring to the last 60 credits of your undergraduate degree. In hindsight, you should have delayed graduation and taken one to two more years of undergraduate studies before graduating.

I don't know of any circumstances where a school will disregard your first undergraduate degree.

[fromeo]

The best way to gauge your chances is to look through the admitted threads for each school from years past. I found this site to also be useful: http://www.oxfordsem...at_profiles.php

What is your B2/L2 marks? If they are higher than your Cgpa you may be able to get into Calgary, TRU, Dal, etc...maybe even this cycle if you put your application in already. I would suggest looking at the website of each Canadian University to find out which ones focus on your B2/L2 (if your grades are better in the later part of your degree). I am not exactly sure the process of going back to upgrade but I am fairly confident that you will need to begin a new degree program given that you graduated already. You could also retake the lsat and try to score in the 170s to save yourself the $ and time commitments of returning to boost your gpa.

[Bonin18]

It would also be useful to know whether your transcript shows consistent poor grades or whether it is a mixed bag if high and low. Keep in mind that some schools will drop some of your worst credits. Do the calculations and see where you stand.

[staffer]

2.9/160 will make it pretty tough to be admitted anywhere in Canada (you're a long-shot candidate for TRU or Windsor Dual JD but I wouldn't bet on it). Can you break down your marks by year for us - that'll give us a better picture.

Also, is your 2.9 a result of consistent 60-75%ish marks, or are you pulled down by 4 or 5 really low grades? If so, consider UNB which will drop your lowest 5 marks.

[vanillacupcakes3]

i have 2 friends that applied to u of a and calgary last year with an after degree because they did not have the marks to get in after their undergraduate. one friend got into U of C so I am pretty sure both schools look at the last 60 with an after degree. One got a BA first and then a bcomm in 2 years, the other did a BA first then a native studies after degree in 2 years.

My advice to you is to take an after degree instead of a bunch of random courses. Choose something you are not only interested in, but will help make you a well rounded candidate for law school such as political science or criminology (Before I get slack from posters I am not saying these make you better lawyers or give you an advantage in law school, only that it would round out a bcomm nicely and give something to speak about in your personal statements).

Also more holistic schools like calgary and ottawa may give you some bonus points since going to University at the age of 16 is pretty spectacular. If you don't want to take more courses you should focus your energy on the lsat and shoot for 170s and you may have a shot. No matter what I think you should decide which schools you want to go to, and go sit down with their advisers and explain your situation. Advisers usually have a good idea of what to expect the following year by now too. I spoke to the admissions lady at u of a last year this time and she informed me that the cut off to get in would be raised this year and in fact it was.

Good luck with your decision making process!

[theiva4]

vanillacupcakes3, on 21 February 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

i have 2 friends that applied to u of a and calgary last year with an after degree because they did not have the marks to get in after their undergraduate. one friend got into U of C so I am pretty sure both schools look at the last 60 with an after degree. One got a BA first and then a bcomm in 2 years, the other did a BA first then a native studies after degree in 2 years.

My advice to you is to take an after degree instead of a bunch of random courses. Choose something you are not only interested in, but will help make you a well rounded candidate for law school such as political science or criminology (Before I get slack from posters I am not saying these make you better lawyers or give you an advantage in law school, only that it would round out a bcomm nicely and give something to speak about in your personal statements).

Also more holistic schools like calgary and ottawa may give you some bonus points since going to University at the age of 16 is pretty spectacular. If you don't want to take more courses you should focus your energy on the lsat and shoot for 170s and you may have a shot. No matter what I think you should decide which schools you want to go to, and go sit down with their advisers and explain your situation. Advisers usually have a good idea of what to expect the following year by now too. I spoke to the admissions lady at u of a last year this time and she informed me that the cut off to get in would be raised this year and in fact it was.

Good luck with your decision making process!

Ignore the first sentence in the 3rd paragraph.

[orion88]

The advice here is pretty bad so far...OP you have a decent LSAT but you should be rewriting until you hit 170+ or run out of writings, you should also aim for a 3.6-3.7ish last two gpa, U of A and U of C will take undergrad courses done after your degree, do not do another degree that's a waste of time...what is your grade distribution? If your last year (last 30 credits) is strong than you may only need 1 other year of credits (30 credits). If you have to do a full 2 years (60 credits) to get your grades up high enough to get into U of C or U of A then if I were you I'd rethink law school and realistically asses whether if you will have the academic ability to handle law school...if your GPA is a consistent 2.9 then you will in all likelihood have serious problems in law school IMO.

[cheframsey]

Hey guys thanks for all the replies and advice. So my breakdown right now looks like this:

Year 1: 21 credits 2.0 gpa
Year 2: 18 credits 3.1 gpa
Year 3: 24 credits 2.2 gpa
Year 4 33 credits 3.2 gpa
Year 5 34 credits 3.1 gpa
Year 6: went back for upgrading after graduating. dropped out 3 weeks into first semester. 4 W's

What do you think?

[theiva4]

Not good. your best two last two is only 3.15 (by your calculations) you will definetly need a 168>.

[cheframsey]

So should I go back and a do a 2 year after degree would that be worth it?

[theiva4]

dont know sorry.

[KER_2012]

You're definitely not in the greatest position, but I wouldn't say that getting into a Canadian law school is impossible. You might want to try intensive studying for the LSAT and aiming for a 170+ before you decide whether or not to go back to school. An extremely score would give you an ok chance with the marks you have now and giving that a try would probably be preferable than spending the time and money on going back to school.

[Catalyst]

I would suspect that you'd be better to work on pulling a 98th, 99th percentile LSAT mark, but even my best guess here is just conjecture. You may also want to explore the joint US-Canada JDs, but make sure you really look at the risks and costs involved there.

As far as adding a couple years at this point, I'd approach schools directly about how they'd handle it. Even if people here have some anecdotal information, you're really way better to get a direct answer given the amount of time and money you are looking at investing.

[Tommy Jefferson]

Disclaimer: I know as much as anyone else who does not work in admissions at a Canadian law school, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

1) You have an interesting story to tell. I only know 3 things about you and already my curiosity is piqued regarding the tale of what got you in to university at such a young age. That right there should help you craft a solid PS.

2) You're problem isn't your GPA but rather the pattern you have demonstrated. Don't get me wrong, you're going to need a helluva LSAT score to compensate for a 2.9 (if they even look at your file) but I think the grades are overcomeable (a 2.9 is roughly 75%-- which is still above average in most programs) . The real issue is that you have not shown any potential (to AdCom) in the GPA department. That is to say that you have no standout years (e.g. a year with a 3.7 or something). Your grades are all similarly low and you dropped out of a possible sixth year. That's the the real dinger. You see, I believe that the people reading applicant files are looking for reasons to justify your admission but your current track record will make it very difficult for them to do this. Essentially, they want to know that you can succeed if given the opportunity.

Based on the above, I think that a Masters degree (if that is possible) with some stellar grades would go a long way in making your case to admissions. Failing that, doing another degree could only help your cause. By my count, you're still fairly young (22/23?). Spend a couple years upgrading your resume (grades, ECs, work experience, anything else) and you might find that you're in much better shape for applying to law school. Worst case scenario - you've developed a new set of skills or improved your current skill set.

In the end, no one is seeking to keep you out of law school, admissions file readers are simply trying to make sure that if you get there, you'll have the tools to succeed.

Also, I don't know if you have done this already but I suggest you peruse the forum, as there many examples of people in similarly challenging situations that have found unconventional ways of reaching their goals (see the post about the guy who did a UK law degree and is now doing an LLM at UBC).

Your situation is difficult but not impossible. I hope this post helped somewhat and I wish you the best of luck.

[Fletcher Reed]

Tommy Jefferson, on 21 February 2012 - 07:23 PM, said:

Disclaimer: I know as much as anyone else who does not work in admissions at a Canadian law school, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

1) You have an interesting story to tell. I only know 3 things about you and already my curiosity is piqued regarding the tale of what got you in to university at such a young age. That right there should help you craft a solid PS.

2) You're problem isn't your GPA but rather the pattern you have demonstrated. Don't get me wrong, you're going to need a helluva LSAT score to compensate for a 2.9 (if they even look at your file) but I think the grades are overcomeable (a 2.9 is roughly 75%-- which is still above average in most programs) . The real issue is that you have not shown any potential (to AdCom) in the GPA department. That is to say that you have no standout years (e.g. a year with a 3.7 or something). Your grades are all similarly low and you dropped out of a possible sixth year. That's the the real dinger. You see, I believe that the people reading applicant files are looking for reasons to justify your admission but your current track record will make it very difficult for them to do this. Essentially, they want to know that you can succeed if given the opportunity.

Based on the above, I think that a Masters degree (if that is possible) with some stellar grades would go a long way in making your case to admissions. Failing that, doing another degree could only help your cause. By my count, you're still fairly young (22/23?). Spend a couple years upgrading your resume (grades, ECs, work experience, anything else) and you might find that you're in much better shape for applying to law school. Worst case scenario - you've developed a new set of skills or improved your current skill set.

In the end, no one is seeking to keep you out of law school, admissions file readers are simply trying to make sure that if you get there, you'll have the tools to succeed.

Also, I don't know if you have done this already but I suggest you peruse the forum, as there many examples of people in similarly challenging situations that have found unconventional ways of reaching their goals (see the post about the guy who did a UK law degree and is now doing an LLM at UBC).

Your situation is difficult but not impossible. I hope this post helped somewhat and I wish you the best of luck.

WOW, ignore this guy.

Rewrite the LSAT, and maybe look into getting a tutor or else just practice with real questions on your own until you start getting 170s or higher on practice tests.

You get 2 rewrites, so use them wisely. Your GPA cannot be changed now without massive pains in the rear end, but you only need to improve your last LSAT score by about 10 correct answers to get in somewhere in Canada (160=75 correct answers roughly, 167=85 correct answers roughly).

You obviously want to get higher than 167, but I think 167 would get you in somewhere and 165 might even get you in somewhere if you apply broadly enough.

I wish you all the best, and don't listen to some of the people on here, you can still do this. It will be a challenge, but you can totally do it, anyone who gets a 160 the first time can get a 167+ on their second or third try with the right preparation.

Edited by Fletcher Reed, 21 February 2012 - 07:46 PM.

[theiva4]

I too started university at 16 and I made no mention of it in my PS. too me it just sounds like an excuse and not a good one at that (not trying to be judgemental just MHO).

[Tommy Jefferson]

Fletcher Reed, on 21 February 2012 - 07:40 PM, said:

WOW, ignore this guy.

Rewrite the LSAT, and maybe look into getting a tutor or else just practice with real questions on your own until you start getting 170s or higher on practice tests.

You will have 2 more rewrites, so use them wisely. Your GPA cannot be changed now without massive pains in the rear end, and you only need to improve your last LSAT score by about 10 correct answers to get in somewhere in Canada (160=75 correct answers roughly, 167=85 correct answers roughly).

You obviously want to get higher than 167, but I think 167 would get you in somewhere and 165 might even get you in somewhere if you apply broadly enough.

I wish you all the best, and don't listen to some of the people on here, you can still do this. It will be a challenge, but you can totally do this, anyone who gets a 160 the first time can get a 167+ on their second or third try with the right preparation.

WOW, and what exactly should be ignored?

So the only thing left is to nail the LSAT and hope for the best? You know what, I would argue with you but what's the point. To follow in your use of absolutes, 'anyone' that thinks the difference between getting a 160 on your 1st try and 167 on your 2nd or 3rd is simply 'the right preparation' is unlikely to be someone with whom I can have a reasonable debate.

[Enhance]

Tommy Jefferson, on 21 February 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

WOW, and what exactly should be ignored?

So the only thing left is to nail the LSAT and hope for the best? You know what, I would argue with you but what's the point. To follow in your use of absolutes, 'anyone' that thinks the difference between getting a 160 on your 1st try and 167 on your 2nd or 3rd is simply 'the right preparation' is unlikely to be someone with whom I can have a reasonable debate.

Well not to defend Fletcher Reed or anything, but we don't know under what circumstances the OP obtained the 160 under. What if he wrote it cold or with only a few weeks worth of studying? The "right preparation" may apply to him if he hasn't really reached his LSAT potential yet.

Just adding a little note.

[Fletcher Reed]

Tommy Jefferson, on 21 February 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

WOW, and what exactly should be ignored?

So the only thing left is to nail the LSAT and hope for the best? You know what, I would argue with you but what's the point. To follow in your use of absolutes, 'anyone' that thinks the difference between getting a 160 on your 1st try and 167 on your 2nd or 3rd is simply 'the right preparation' is unlikely to be someone with whom I can have a reasonable debate.

I'm primarily trying to advise the OP, not make fun of you (even though I did anyways).

The fact is that OP's GPA is 3.15 at all the schools that look at your last 60 credits, which is a lot of schools. A 167 with that GPA is good enough somewhere, even if it's TRU or Lakehead off the waitlist.

And no I shouldn't have used absolutes (watch out for those on the LSAT kids), but someone who gets 160 the first time is probably capable of 167+, and yes the right preparation will make all the difference. A good tutor might be what OP needs, or maybe he just needs a different book or course or more practice, that's up to OP.

For what it's worth by the way, "you're" grammar could use improvement

[orion88]

cheframsey, on 21 February 2012 - 04:47 PM, said:

Hey guys thanks for all the replies and advice. So my breakdown right now looks like this:

Year 1: 21 credits 2.0 gpa
Year 2: 18 credits 3.1 gpa
Year 3: 24 credits 2.2 gpa
Year 4 33 credits 3.2 gpa
Year 5 34 credits 3.1 gpa
Year 6: went back for upgrading after graduating. dropped out 3 weeks into first semester. 4 W's

What do you think?

4 W's in year 6? So essentially you need to do 60 more credits to have a shot at U of C or U of A, are you willing to invest that much time? And do you feel that you have the ability to succeed academically in university? You have to really think about that because your academic record is problematic...you may have a shot at U of S since I believe they take your best two years (60 credits) so year 4 and 5...but that's a long shot at best. I would invest one year, do 30 credits, see if you can acheive a 3.5+ gpa, if you can then do another year, apply the following september while you continue to do classes, so your applying with 75 credits (year 7 30 credits, year 8 30 credits, apply september year 9 while doing 15 credits).

But really ask yourself is law school is right for you before you invest the money and time, your year 6 is enough to worry any ad comm, and year 1-5 doesn't help either.

[orion88]

Fletcher Reed, on 21 February 2012 - 08:01 PM, said:

I'm primarily trying to advise the OP, not make fun of you (even though I did anyways).

The fact is that OP's GPA is 3.15 at all the schools that look at your last 60 credits, which is a lot of schools. A 167 with that GPA is good enough somewhere, even if it's TRU or Lakehead off the waitlist.

And no I shouldn't have used absolutes (watch out for those on the LSAT kids), but someone who gets 160 the first time is probably capable of 167+, and yes the right preparation will make all the difference. A good tutor might be what OP needs, or maybe he just needs a different book or course or more practice, that's up to OP.

For what it's worth by the way, "you're" grammar could use improvement

Actually fact is that the OP has 4 W's in the last 60 credits. And that is not good, especially when your bringing in holistic schools like TRU. OP needs a school that primarily focuses on numbers, such as U of A, so they can take an extra 60 credits and they can have the chance to have their previous academic record ignored.

[Fletcher Reed]

The Ws don't look good, especially not 4, but I don't think they matter all that much. If OP gets a good LSAT score, let's say at least 167 but hopefully higher, he has a chance somewhere. In any event, OP should rewrite and prepare properly to maximize his score, that is the best option. He/she might not succeed, but I hope he/she does. That is all I'm trying to say.

And with my understanding of U of S admissions, 167 and 3.15 would probably get him in. 170 would certainly get him in, 165 with a good personal statement and/or Saskatchewan connection might get him in. It's definitely worth a shot, and listening to all you nay-sayers won't do OP any good at all.

Edited by Fletcher Reed, 21 February 2012 - 08:17 PM.

[Tommy Jefferson]

Honestly, I would retake the LSAT as many times as you can to maximize your score. However, try not to think with the mentality of "law school or bust." You will find that the things you do to improve your life will also improve your application for law school (e.g. volunteering, working, completing an MBA). I have combed through a lot of posts on LS.ca and I have yet to find someone who can explain why two people with the same GPA and LSAT can have entirely different outcomes in the admissions process.Until I get a concrete answer to this, I will always advise people to think beyond just improving the LSAT and/or their grades. Remember, human beings read these applications. If it were just about numbers, the admissions process would not take 3-6 months.

edit: Fletcher says my grammar is poor, so you should probably disregard everything I have said.

Edited by Tommy Jefferson, 21 February 2012 - 08:40 PM.

[KidAmnesia]

I would say it would not be hard to make a compelling personal statement about going to University at that young age without it reading like an excuse. I went into undergrad at the ripe old age of 19, on my third year I went on exchange (no usable grades) on my fourth year I came back with an increased appreciation for cannabis and graduated with a 3.13 in my final year. I did a full year plus two summers at Ryerson to upgrade for 16 credits (1 full academic year would be 10 credits), and managed to pull my 3 year cGPA from a 3.32 to a more respectable 3.5. My Lsat was a good but not ridiculously good 165.

I offer my story as one potential route the OP could take. I have read some talk on the boards that schools won't look at your non-degree undergrad courses, but I can only assume with how quickly I've gotten into some good schools (Queen's, Dal) that is not the case. I think OP if you want to do law school you could put yourself in a position where'd you'd be sitting pretty if you took 2 more years to do it. The grades could easily be where they need to be if you do a full summer course load this summer plus another year of courses over 2012-2013 and maybe the next summer, then apply to get in for 2014. Granted that's some time investment and a lot more undergrad work, but you're young and I assume you like school. If you took some time with the LSAT you could probably get yourself in the 90+ percentile range. Decide if you want it badly enough, and if you do I'm sure it will work out.

Edited by KidAmnesia, 21 February 2012 - 08:52 PM.

[QuincyWagstaff]

You'll get far more bang for your buck by retaking and crushing the LSAT. Take 30 credits of something you can get a 4.0 in, and you'd be in at UofA; you don't want to resort to the inferior holistic-admissions schools.

[cheframsey]

Thanks for all the advice guys. I've decided to enrol in 2 psych classes at the U of A this spring semester. If I get a 4.0 in them I'll take that as a sign I've matured and am ready to take another 60 credits and do well in them. I'm also going to rewrite the Lsat in October. It's going to be a long road to get into law school but I'm up for it! It seems like my best options from what you guys are saying is U of A or U of C.

[PurpleMustang]

cheframsey, on 21 February 2012 - 09:43 PM, said:

Thanks for all the advice guys. I've decided to enrol in 2 psych classes at the U of A this spring semester. If I get a 4.0 in them I'll take that as a sign I've matured and am ready to take another 60 credits and do well in them. I'm also going to rewrite the Lsat in October. It's going to be a long road to get into law school but I'm up for it! It seems like my best options from what you guys are saying is U of A or U of C.

Kudos to you for trying so hard to achieve what you want. Many people wouldn't bother.

[Fletcher Reed]

cheframsey, on 21 February 2012 - 09:43 PM, said:

Thanks for all the advice guys. I've decided to enrol in 2 psych classes at the U of A this spring semester. If I get a 4.0 in them I'll take that as a sign I've matured and am ready to take another 60 credits and do well in them. I'm also going to rewrite the Lsat in October. It's going to be a long road to get into law school but I'm up for it! It seems like my best options from what you guys are saying is U of A or U of C.

I have one friend who got into U of S in 2010 with a 3.2 and a 164, and another who got in with 3.2 and 167. Do whatever you want, but I'm in law school unlike some of the people giving advice on here and the best play for you is to start preparing for the June LSAT now, do whatever it takes to max out your score even if that means paying a tutor, and then seeing how June goes.

At that point, you could be registered in summer classes and then drop them if your score is high enough (you would have the score back by the end of June probably and summer classes start in July). If your score is not good and you want to take the classes, then take them, and proceed with your plan.

For the record I admit that it was douchey to say that "anyone who gets 160 the first time can hit 167 by their 2nd or 3rd try," but I really think that in your case it is the best option to try to get those extra 10 raw points on the LSAT and then apply. Frankly, it seems like a cop-out to me to decide on taking courses when you know that a very reachable LSAT score is all you need, and it happens to be February, the next test is in June, and you could still take summer classes after that if you need them.

That said, if you find out for sure from admissions that you can get in with a big GPA improvement over 1 or 2 years with the 160, and you prefer that option, then go with it. But I still would have to wonder why anyone would do that before genuinely proving to themselves that 160 give or take a few points is their maximum possible LSAT score.

In any event, good luck.