Jump to content
darklightness

Is this chart accurate in terms of how each law school looks at GPA?

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, navyblue11 said:

I always thought Queens looked at B2, but I might be getting it confused 

You’re correct, Queen’s does look at best 2. I recently emailed them and this is part of the response I received: 

“Queen’s Law looks at your best two years. We define a “best year” as your highest scoring Fall & Winter terms that were completed at a full load.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, guccimeeg said:

UBC doesn't look at cGPA; they drop your 4 lowest half credits.

UVic also isn't cGPA, they drop a few of the worst credits depending on how many credits a transcript has.

I'm also very curious about the colour-coding on this chart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OZ 3.9 is a bit high and L2?

I thought U of T is B3 3.8

U of Ottawa is around 3.6

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For context, the source of this chart is a 6 year old blog post from badasslawyer.wordpress.com. 

35 minutes ago, Firecracker said:

UVic also isn't cGPA, they drop a few of the worst credits depending on how many credits a transcript has.

I'm also very curious about the colour-coding on this chart?

"Schools highlighted in purple put a heavier weight on applicants cumulative cgpa than schools highlighted in white which look more closely at last two years sessional gpa."

Weirdly, the blogpost acknowledges that Osgoode and UofT admit most of their applicants with ~3.8 cGPA, but still wrote 3.9 on the chart for no apparent reason. It also sourced it's data from this forum, so I think it's safe to say that you'd be better off reading last year's accepted threads than this old chart.

https://badasslawyer.wordpress.com/2015/05/28/last-twos-best-threes-cgpas-oh-my/

Edited by StephenToast
Formatting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there's much baby to save with the bathwater of this chart; I would just discard it as a source. For many (perhaps even most) there are outright errors, and if not, at least unhelpful oversimplifications!

-GM

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming those GPAs are averages:

Both Alberta schools are L2 (though U of C is indeed holistic). U of A average is 3.8 and U of C is 3.6.

Sask is B2, not L2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Twenty said:

Also, U of T's admission process is holistic. 

not exactly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many of us could come up with a better chart than that off the top of our heads. CGPA and L2 and such are fairly worthless when the LSAT score is not also considered.

For example, if a guy told you he applied broadly with a 3.6 cGPA, 3.6 L2 and a 165 you'd all be telling him he would get into several schools. Change that to a 155, and it alters the picture dramatically.

Giving Lakehead a 3.0 cGPA is BS. It may be the easiest Ontario school to get into, but I actually think it would fall between Ryerson and Ottawa as far as cGPA goes (unless you are Indigenous).

If anyone were interested which Ontario schools look at cGPA, B2, L2, B20 and so on, just go on the main OLSAS website and look at the school summary. https://www.ouac.on.ca/guide/olsas-program-requirements/

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...