In need of advice

[Meleven]

Hi everyone, I have an important decision to make for myself and I would appreciate any advice on the matter.

Im currently in my third year of undergrad, and I applied to Oz, Uft, and Queens with a 3.85 and a 160. So far I’ve been accepted to Queens, which I am extremely grateful for. I have yet to hear from Osgoode, and I was rejected from Uft.

However, I’d really love to go to Uft, it was always my end goal. So now I need to make a decision of either going to Queens and trying to transfer to Uft after 1L, or staying back to finish my fourth year of undergrad. My GPA is on track to go up to about a 3.9 by next year, my B2 a little higher, and I would hope I would get my lsat to a 165+. I was practise testing at about a 165 by my January attempt, however I butchered it. So after 3 lsat attempts I applied this cycle with a 160.

What would you do?

Edited March 18 by Meleven

[Dinsdale]

Do you enjoy your undergrad and the undergraduate life?  Are you in a hurry (for financial or family or other reasons) to get your education finished? Personally, I wrote the LSAT in second year, did well, but finished my four year undergrad anyway.  I was having too much fun to pack it in and go to law school as one of the youngest people in the class.  You'll be a lawyer, with all its stresses and concerns, soon enough.  Enjoy your youth.  However, I also realize I went to school in a more carefree, and certainly far less expensive, era, so your circumstances could be completely different.

[Meleven]

Thank you for the reply. I don't mind undergraduate life, but I don't like it enough to have my enjoyment of it be a deciding factor for me. And no, I am not necessarily in a hurry for any reasons, I just saw an opportunity to finish a year early and thought of it as a chance to save a year of my time. I am very grateful for the offer from Queens, but my desire to graduate uft law is moreso a need to fulfill a life-long dream, one that I am afraid I would regret not fulfilling if I don't try. That being said, transferring after 1L would be ideal, because I wouldn't have to stay for another year of undergrad, but from my understanding, transferring in is more unlikely than getting in if I apply next year. But then again, if I don't raise my LSAT significantly by next cycle, I would've turned down Queens and wasted a year for no reason. 

Im also being pressured by my family with the idea that I got into law school now, why would I not go?

Edited March 18 by Meleven

[luckycharm]

1 hour ago, Meleven said:

Hi everyone, I have an important decision to make for myself and I would appreciate any advice on the matter.

Im currently in my third year of undergrad, and I applied to Oz, Uft, and Queens with a 3.85 and a 160. So far I’ve been accepted to Queens, which I am extremely grateful for. I have yet to hear from Osgoode, and I was rejected from Uft.

However, I’d really love to go to Uft, it was always my end goal. So now I need to make a decision of either going to Queens and trying to transfer to Uft after 1L, or staying back to finish my fourth year of undergrad. My GPA is on track to go up to about a 3.9 by next year, my B2 a little higher, and I would hope I would get my lsat to a 165+. I was practise testing at about a 165 by my January attempt, however I butchered it. So after 3 lsat attempts I applied this cycle with a 160.

What would you do?

I think you have a good chance with OZ

[WiseGhost]

Don't get too attached to the idea of UofT. Some things don't work out in life, but ultimately for the best. Life long dreams are overrated, and your LSAT is still a long way off from UofT's average. 

If you're going to make this decision, make it based on your needs.

[Dinsdale]

5 hours ago, Meleven said:

Thank you for the reply. I don't mind undergraduate life, but I don't like it enough to have my enjoyment of it be a deciding factor for me. And no, I am not necessarily in a hurry for any reasons, I just saw an opportunity to finish a year early and thought of it as a chance to save a year of my time. I am very grateful for the offer from Queens, but my desire to graduate uft law is moreso a need to fulfill a life-long dream, one that I am afraid I would regret not fulfilling if I don't try. That being said, transferring after 1L would be ideal, because I wouldn't have to stay for another year of undergrad, but from my understanding, transferring in is more unlikely than getting in if I apply next year. But then again, if I don't raise my LSAT significantly by next cycle, I would've turned down Queens and wasted a year for no reason. 

Im also being pressured by my family with the idea that I got into law school now, why would I not go?

That doesn't sound like someone who enjoys undergraduate life or sees much value in getting an honours (four year) degree.  "I would have wasted a year for no reason".  My point is that, for me, those undergraduate years were not a waste at all, but were some of the best of my life.  If you don't feel that way, then yes, the choice is probably to start law school.  But I wouldn't count on transferring after 1L.  As you say, the odds of that are quite low.  Plus, you would have missed out on the formative 1L experience at U of T and would be joining a new school as something of an outsider -- worst of both worlds if you ask me, but YMMV.

  

[ZineZ]

3 minutes ago, Dinsdale said:

That doesn't sound like someone who enjoys undergraduate life or sees much value in getting an honours (four year) degree.  "I would have wasted a year for no reason".  My point is that, for me, those undergraduate years were not a waste at all, but were some of the best of my life.  If you don't feel that way, then yes, the choice is probably to start law school.  But I wouldn't count on transferring after 1L.  As you say, the odds of that are quite low.  Plus, you would have missed out on the formative 1L experience at U of T and would be joining a new school as something of an outsider -- worst of both worlds if you ask me, but YMMV.

  

I agree. OP - take the extra year before going to the rigors of law school.  If you were sold on your other choices, it would be different. But it sounds more like you're going a bit more half-heartedly.

You're not "saving a year of your life" - you're spending some more time to take another shot at what you want. And undergrad is a bit easier/more fun. Enjoy it.

[LMP]

This is obviously a personal choice, but in my view there isn't much to be gained from another year of undergrad. 

If you were going to do an interesting job or have a certian unique experince I'd get that, but just doing another year of undergrad? I don't think it is needed.

The exception would be if you're absolutely set on aiming for a higher LSAT and different school. I know you mentioned UofT is your goal. If that's truly the case and you absolutely want it (and can justify that desire) then take the year. But beyond that I don't think there's any advantage to waiting. 

[Naj]

What is your undergrad? If it's something brain-dead like HR then I'd just dip.

[SpaceTigerX]

Things to consider:

I can definitely understand the goal/want of attending a certain school, McGill was my goal. The universe had other plans. IF your goal is to be a lawyer, I guarantee you 5 years from now, 10 years from now you won't care that you didn't go to U of T, what you will care about is that you became a lawyer. I know there are corporations/people that will hire from only certain schools, but both Queens and Osgoode are great schools and obviously something did attract you to apply to them. Depending on your Law school performance, you will have job opportunities by going to Queens or Osgoode. 

IF being a lawyer is your goal, completing a 3 year degree instead of a 4 year degree won't impact you much. What might have an impact is if you go to law school and decide its not for you and then you want to do something else. I don't know what your major is, but using as an example my current field of work in Project Management/Business Analysis, some professional certifications (that you need to advance) will require less work experience for someone that has a 4 year degree vs someone that has a 3 year or diploma. 

As for U of T, I looked over the admission policies and stats. They use your best 3 academic years so if your GPA is 3.90 that will place you somewhere between the 50th and 75th percentile. However, the undergraduate degree you take, the course load you took also plays a role, so I suspect that individuals in STEM fields can get away with slightly lower grades vs someone that majored in history of vase making if they took an equal course load. Again, this is a generalization, but you get the point. They clearly state that its not just about your GPA, now if you worked full time, rescued children from a third world country while attending school, could maybe of set your stats.

Your admission is based on 2/3 GPA and 1/3 LSAT. If you have a lower LSAT, your GPA needs to be higher to compensate for the lower LSAT. A 165 will not do that, you need to aim for 166-170. Also, keep in mind that taking multiple LSATs will be reviewed as well. They say they try to compare similar students, so if student X has same type of courses, same type of GPA, but took 2 LSATs and went from a 160 to 165 versus you that took say 3 or 4 times to get a 165 they will most likely pick student X. 

Looking at their transfer process, I don't think it really changes much for you considering there is 10-20 spaces each year for transfer students. If they get 2,000 applications for first year, I suspect they get a fairly significant number of transfer requests as well. 

My advice:

Personally, If you are 100% set on being a lawyer I would go to Queens or Osgoode now and become a lawyer. Your experience at either of these schools will be just as good as at U of T unless U of T has something extremely unique no one else has (besides the price tag) that makes you want to go there. 

The Fine Print: I'm not saying you can't go to U of T. But either you need an outstanding LSAT score to compensate for GPA or you need GPA to compensate for LSAT. 

 

 

Edited March 20 by SpaceTigerX

[kollykibbler]

20 minutes ago, SpaceTigerX said:

Your admission is based on 2/3 GPA and 1/3 LSAT. If you have a lower LSAT, your GPA needs to be higher to compensate for the lower LSAT. A 165 will not do that, you need to aim for 166-170. Also, keep in mind that taking multiple LSATs will be reviewed as well. They say they try to compare similar students, so if student X has same type of courses, same type of GPA, but took 2 LSATs and went from a 160 to 165 versus you that took say 3 or 4 times to get a 165 they will most likely pick student X. 

On the website it says, "The admissions assessment is based two-thirds on the academic record and the standard LSAT score(s), and one-third on personal information," and "an applicant with superior LSAT results may be admitted with a less competitive academic record." There's something about the algorithm weighing GPA more heavily than the LSAT but I don't know if it's 2 parts GPA 1 part LSAT. 

UofT seems to have become more holistic. People with great stats were waitlisted or rejected this year while some people with worse (but still very good) stats were accepted. To be honest, I don't think they're making many decisions based off how many times two competing candidates have written the LSAT and I don't think OP should really see that as a discouraging factor.

[SpaceTigerX]

38 minutes ago, kollykibbler said:

On the website it says, "The admissions assessment is based two-thirds on the academic record and the standard LSAT score(s), and one-third on personal information," and "an applicant with superior LSAT results may be admitted with a less competitive academic record." There's something about the algorithm weighing GPA more heavily than the LSAT but I don't know if it's 2 parts GPA 1 part LSAT. 

UofT seems to have become more holistic. People with great stats were waitlisted or rejected this year while some people with worse (but still very good) stats were accepted. To be honest, I don't think they're making many decisions based off how many times two competing candidates have written the LSAT and I don't think OP should really see that as a discouraging factor.

Yeah, you're right. Its 2/3 GPA + LSAT and 1/3 Personal Information (statement), with more weight placed on the GPA portion. I misunderstood that part. 

 

[B_Stone]

2 hours ago, SpaceTigerX said:

Your admission is based on 2/3 GPA and 1/3 LSAT. If you have a lower LSAT, your GPA needs to be higher to compensate for the lower LSAT. A 165 will not do that, you need to aim for 166-170. Also, keep in mind that taking multiple LSATs will be reviewed as well. They say they try to compare similar students, so if student X has same type of courses, same type of GPA, but took 2 LSATs and went from a 160 to 165 versus you that took say 3 or 4 times to get a 165 they will most likely pick student X. 

As @kollykibbler pointed out, GPA and LSAT are weighted equally. I would disagree on the sentiment for LSAT scoring here. I do not remember what our 25th percentile was for LSAT, but I certainly know of a number of my classmates who have 165 as an LSAT score. You can have your stats be at the median for one category and be closer to the 25th for another. I do not believe that the number of times you took the LSAT is considered either. U of T Law cares deeply about your holistic background. You don't need to have won an Olympic Gold or be in the Peace Corps, but just the way you write your statements and present yourself makes a big difference. If you were to score a 165 and get a 3.9, it would depend a lot on your holistic factors. A hypothetical 3.9 and 165 COULD be more than enough, but I would not say for a certainty. 

I don't know how you truly feel about your undergrad, but I would be inclined to stay for a year and finish. Beyond getting into the school of your dreams, I think your undergrad years are a really fun part of life that you won't get back necessarily later. Your senior year is frankly your most fun, and you can make sure you get to try everything you have not done yet on campus. Food for thought. 

[enpassant]

2 hours ago, B_Stone said:

 You don't need to have won an Olympic Gold or be in the Peace Corps, but just the way you write your statements and present yourself makes a big difference. If you were to score a 165 and get a 3.9, it would depend a lot on your holistic factors. A hypothetical 3.9 and 165 COULD be more than enough, but I would not say for a certainty. 

 

Interesting. Always thought UofT was super stats-based.

Edited March 21 by enpassant