Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

71 Decent People

About DescartesBeforeTheHorse

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

649 profile views
  1. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    How Long Were You Green Circled?

    I was green circle from early January until March 31 last year. I went green circle again in early January, and assuming it'll be roughly the same this year. I'm with G1 on this, I've also noticed that folks with strong stats or those on the medians tend to hear back sooner, for better or for worse. The only people with below average stats I've seen here who have heard back sooner went green circle before Jan.
  2. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Summer Job and Undergrad GPA

    As a non-law student myself, I know I'm not an authority on this, but for what it's worth I think you should worry first about getting into law school, second about getting strong grades in law school, and third finding summer work. I doubt if anyone really cares about your first or second year of undergrad after you've started law school unless it's somehow relevant to the position you've applied to.
  3. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Rejection Timeline?

    It depends on what you think is incredible. I think the folks with 3.9s and mid to high 150s have pretty good stats and are arguably more impressive than 3.4s with low to mid 160s, but based on what we can see on the forum, the adcom doesn't always agree. ECs mean something. I would guess you still have a decent shot based on stats -- you're above the medians on both, so you can probably afford to be a bit below median on soft factors, whatever such a median would look like. Then again, it doesn't really matter what I think since I don't decide who gets into law school There should be some examples in older rejected threads of people with traditionally good stats who didn't get in, but remember that these reports are unscientific samples and don't tell you a whole lot about your chances.
  4. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Accepted to Alberta 2018

    They should be taking the letter grade if it's available, which is a standard practice. This isn't confirmed, but I'm skeptical of the suggestion that UofA wouldn't convert each individual grade to a 4.0 scale and then take an average -- that seems like a very bad practice since it could disadvantage applicants from schools that use 4.0 scales. For example, if an A is 85% and I have 18 grades at 84% and two at 99%, my average becomes 85.5% and I'd convert to 4.0, while someone who went to a GPA school would have 3.73. That's a huge leap.
  5. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Wrote December LSAT, LSAT Scores still not received

    Most universities close during the holidays, and I can assure you they are trying very hard not to think about you or your application between Dec. 24 and Jan. 2 You can also check on LSAC to see if your score has been requested (I assume by now it has).
  6. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    rewriting lsat after an acceptance?

    Is that school U of A? They won't look at Feb. score for this cycle, so it may not matter at all.
  7. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    February Rewrite

    If you're considering a rewrite, here's what I've learned: First: My RC was pretty similar -- sometimes I'd hit around -2 to -4, sometimes I'd hit -13. It was brutal. Some of that has to do with what I've perceived as fluctuating difficulty over the years in PTs. Some of it was that I kept thinking I needed tips and advice to do better because I'm a relatively slow reader on average and often can't reasonably get through all 4 passages. I thought I had to learn to read faster and/or take better notes. In my experience, the shitty thing about RC is that a lot of advice out there just isn't helpful or doesn't take into account that people have different reading styles. In the end, I decided to just chill out and stopped rushing through the passages and ignored advice geared towards other people who have very different reading skills. The upside to my reading style is I'm very thorough and don't forget stuff when I take my time. I take zero notes, but underline key words and phrases in the text that I might need to find again later. This translated to a lot less time spent returning to the test, which was much better than other advice I'd read which included speeding through the passage twice. I still don't finish all the questions in the fourth passage, but I can consistently pick off 3-4 quick questions on that one and take my best guess at whatever else is left. This settled me at around -4 to -8 on the most recent PTs. It's still a wider gap than I'd like and I'll never hit 170s going like that, but it's stable enough. The only thing I kept from advice I'd heard was for the comparative passage. The first thing I do is skim the questions and note any questions that are just about passage A or B and mark them as such and return to them immediately after reading that section. I absolutely do not go to the extent that 7Sage does, which suggests going through each question after each passage eliminating answer choices. I don't know who the hell has time to read each question twice, but it definitely is not me. Maybe it works better for people who are fast readers with more trouble remembering where they read something. Second: For LR, mental fatigue seems to have a huge impact. I found that if I studied LR right after work, I'd consistently hit around -4 to -5, but if I'm still studying at 9:30pm and drilling timed sections, that score rapidly drops to -8 or -9 and I still can't get half of them back on blind review. All I can suggest is drill often and consider what time of day it is when you're doing them and consider what else you did that day. My score was lower when I was tired (surprise!) even though my confidence wasn't also lower. Probably the most useful thing to do is just try experimenting with a few different approaches to each section and take a moment to think about what worked and didn't. For a while, I straight up started journaling after each drill and PT and reflected on what worked and didn't. Use what you find from your journal to figure out what works and what doesn't and work on how to create for yourself the conditions in which you do everything well. This is not going to be the same thing for every person, so it's likely going to be the most useful thing you can do. Take people's advice as something to experiment with, not as the one and only way to do something.
  8. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    I totally f&^%$d up the written section

    I spent fifteen minutes on my written section and then just spaced out for the last twenty minutes. I was exhausted. Straight up blacked out during the logic games (I had two sections). I remember doing two games and having trouble on two more, but don't remember what any of the games were even about.
  9. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Waitlisted at Calgary 2018

    Calgary Accepts, Waitlists, and Rejects on an on-going basis, so this is pretty normal (check out old threads). Early Waitlist seems to mean "we like you as an applicant, but we'd like to see who else has applied before making a decision," particularly because there are folks who wrote Dec. LSAT or have courses in progress who won't be reviewed until January at the earliest.
  10. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Chances? LSAT: 160 Last 20: 3.65 Cumulative 3.2

    Not sure if you're making this confusion but just in case someone else does: a BEd is an undergrad. It's not a graduate program, even if you normally would do a separate undergrad first. In other words, if you did BEd as a second degree, that program should normally be considered in your last 20 courses. I think some institutions may call a BEd a Master of Teaching, but the credential is nevertheless undergrad unless it is an MEd, MSc in Education, MA in Education, etc, which would be separate credentials that don't necessarily qualify a person to teach. Similarly, a JD (Juris Doctor), MD (Medicinae Doctor), despite having 'Doctor' in their degree titles, are also technically undergrad, even if folks normally complete other degrees before doing them. This is useful to know because your stats may be stronger than you think.
  11. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Rejected 2017

    It was unchanged since January 11 when my final reference came in and I went to complete (i.e., no waitlist). At the end of day on Friday, I felt it was a good sign I hadn't been rejected yet (or so I'd thought, the rejection just went to the wrong email) because March 31 was the deposit deadline for a lot of the earlier admits. Now that I'm out for this cycle and I can think more clearly about it, it honestly probably doesn't mean anything at all. Letters go out when they go out and there's not much else to it than that.
  12. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Rejected 2017

    Rejected Friday. Found out via email to a secondary account I don't check often and did not use in my application. Bizarre, but it could be on file from a previous application for a different program I made to UCalgary. Confirmed on Student Centre. L2: 3.62 LSAT: 154 ECs: Various student organizations throughout undergrad, 6 years professional work experience, and a relatively prestigious award for my work. Not particularly surprised because of the LSAT score, but hoped nonetheless that my experience would give me a slim shot. I'll rewrite and try again next year.
  13. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Diversity, inclusion, integrity and all that stuff

    YB actually got accepted to law school after completing a second undergrad and improving his GPA. The thread I like to call the YogurtBaron Origin Story (among other things) started out with some of his early attempts to get in without success.
  14. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Waitlisted at Calgary 2017

    Did you get an acceptance? Or was it a rejection letter? Surprising if they're already rejecting the waitlist
  15. DescartesBeforeTheHorse

    Question: How is GPA calculated if you start a new degree?

    I have a lot of experience in this area, so although I think this question has been well answered, I'm going to run down a few items for anyone else interested in some boring technical details about why you should be careful about calculating your GPA, coupled with a series of fairly well-informed suppositions about how and why GPAs are calculated the way they are for admission purposes into professional programs like law. The latter parts I suppose you can take with a grain of salt (see*), since I don't specifically have experience in professional school admissions, and frankly, every school does things just a little different, but it illustrates why the advice I'm going to give is solid. That said: Your GPA is different in nearly every single situation, depending on who is calculating it and for what. Your university might calculate your GPA at the end of each year to make sure you're meeting minimum standards. It might also calculate your GPA over all courses used towards your degree to determine if you meet minimum graduation standards. Typically, the institution you're doing your undergrad at probably doesn't care about your cumulative GPA (i.e., every course you've ever taken), but it seems that for admissions purposes, some schools might.* Note that courses used towards your degree is usually different from cumulative. It excludes repeats, Fs, and anything otherwise excessive in your degree (e.g., that extra french credit maybe you got through Explore last summer, even though you'd already finished your options). Ok, so: You decide you want to do a second degree. Things get a little more interesting here. Typically, you will get some amount of credit from your previous degree that can then be applied to your second undergraduate degree. I don't know for sure, but I think up to 20 courses is typical. Double check wherever you apply. You may get nothing. In any case, this means that some amount of the courses from your first degree may be applied to your second. So, in your second undergrad, courses applied to your degree might include courses from your first degree.* BUT: In most cases, your transcripts will in no way make it clear at all which courses are being applied to which degree. And frankly, no university is going to go through the effort of having their admissions officers determine how courses were used just so that they can figure out what your GPA was in the courses you actually used in your degree.* The effort involved in doing that would be utterly ridiculous. SO: When people ask about GPA, what they're typically going to do is give a very specific criteria, like last 20 courses, your GPA in the last academic year, or best two years, or whatever. They may even define further limits on an acceptable number of courses in a year, or have some other provision to exclude repeats, intro courses, or some other thing. That said, I'm skeptical about a university that states they will only look at classes taken in your first degree.* I would guess what that technically means is "we'll only look at courses taken during your first degree."* Unless you're being asked for a letter to accompany your transcripts from an academic advisor stating each and every course used (which again, would be utterly ridiculous), there's no way they're going to bother to figure out what courses you actually used.* In many cases there's no distinction to be made here, especially if you took exactly the number of courses you needed for your degree.* Keeping all that in mind, you should be careful in calculating your GPAs without obtaining clear guidelines from the institutions you intend to apply to. Clarify what the criteria is if there's a question about it. The only GPAs that are really straight forward come from people who completed their degrees in four years, with 5 courses per Fall and Winter term at one and only one institution with no extra courses or withdrawals. Every other sort should be calculated with caution. Edit: I probably missed a few asterisks, but I think I otherwise qualified any comment that you should be careful about with "might" or "may" or similar.