<p>This is an interesting lawsuit:</p>
<p>[Applicant</a> sues over law school’s alleged failure to account for grade inflation in admissions | Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/08/02/applicant-sues-over-law-schools-alleged-failure-account-grade-inflation-admissions]Applicant”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/08/02/applicant-sues-over-law-schools-alleged-failure-account-grade-inflation-admissions)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, it is interesting. Unfortunately the presence of grade inflation, like the absence of low back pain, is difficult to validate.</p>
<p>If he graduated from Texas A&M in 1979 then he is now about 55 and he wants to go to law school. I know this question isn’t relevant but … Why?</p>
<p>It is interesting but I see a few issues with this - </p>
<ul>
<li><p>It’s not ‘age discrimination’ as he states. His inference is incorrect. There’s nothing to say that one couldn’t attend undergrad at age 50, for example, and graduate at age 54 and then apply to LS in which case the GPA will be a recent GPA regardless of the applicant’s age. What this really would be is the ‘GPA attainment period’ discrimination which I doubt is illegal in any way.</p></li>
<li><p>There’s great variation in GPAs due to other factors than the point in time of when the UG degree was attained including the particular college attended (as indicated in the article), the major taken (compare the average Computer Science major GPA to the average History major GPA at the same college for example despite the CS applicants at the school having a higher bar for admissions at some colleges), and other factors.</p></li>
<li><p>Likely not ‘all’ colleges have had grade inflation. Some might have even had deflation from one year to the next, one major to another, etc.</p></li>
<li><p>There are other factors for LS admissions and perhaps for scholarships besides strictly GPA/LSAT score and even among the GPA/LSAT different weights will be given to the GPA vs the LSAT at different law schools. There’s not a strict objective formula based only on GPA and LSAT being used every LS.</p></li>
<li><p>There’s a difference between attaining a particular GPA at one school vs another school - some are simply more difficult than others and have more competition in the cohort of students than the other. People who get a 3.0 at a highly competitive school might have had a 3.9 at a much less competitive school.</p></li>
<li><p>Even if the average GPA at a particular college has gone up by, for example, 0.4 points over time, it doesn’t mean his GPA would have gone up had he attended recently rather than back then. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Many (most?) law schools say they look at the entire application and account for some variability in the UG college attended, the major attained, work experience, other attributes such as ECs, etc. and some of these might also account for the timing of the UG degree if there’s a major GPA inflation/deflation from then until now (I don’t know if any do this).</p>
<p>While I think the point about law schools considering an adjustment for GPA inflation/deflation over time is a good one, there are so many other variables I don’t see how he can prove that he himself would have had a different GPA according to a strict inflation formula or that it’s only the GPA that prompted the law school’s decisions.</p>
<p>Pea, to me the “why relevant” question is, why are his undergraduate grades relevant?</p>
<p>^^ So they can be included in the stats given to USNWR rankings for LS?</p>
<p>Well, there has been grade inflation at many schools, according to [National</a> Trends in Grade Inflation, American Colleges and Universities](<a href=“http://www.gradeinflation.com%5DNational”>http://www.gradeinflation.com) .</p>
<p>However, Texas A&M seems to have less grade inflation than most, according to [Texas</a> A&M](<a href=“http://www.gradeinflation.com/Texasaandm.html]Texas”>Texas A&M) . And student competitiveness at many colleges has increased, so it is at least theoretically possible that the grade inflation matched to increased student competitiveness at some colleges (though not necessarily all).</p>
<p>My H has run into a related issue. When he attended undergrad, classes like organic chem were 200 level. Now, many schools, including the one I work at where he got his teaching certificate,call organic 300. NJ needs a certain number of 300 or higher level classes for a physical science teaching certificate (he already has one for bio.) But they won’t count his organic,though he got an A in it in a really tough school. But if he took it at school X where I teach (a much less vigorous school), it would count because they call it 300 level. This is true for a few of the chem classes he took. It’s kind of credential inflation, I guess.</p>
<p>Racial discrimination cases have been proven using statistics, ie. that a certain job test produced few minority qualifiers. </p>
<p>And the ‘why’ question isn’t really relevant to the case legally, although it is certainly relevant to the case’s ultimate outcome. If the guy is 55 now, he could be well over 60 by the time this case winds its way through the courts. Then there is three years of law school. He will qualify for SS before he gets his law degree. And as a practical matter if the legal market continues as it is today, he won’t get a job.</p>
<p>I wonder if his LSAT is too low. Anyway, this man seems to be layer material, by the virtue of his lawsuit. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? I am not aware of ANY law school that says undergrad major plays a role in admission, or even undergrad institution matters.</p>
<p>^^ I think many do and it only makes sense that they do. An example - compare a 3.5 GPA from Harvard to a 3.9 GPA from non-selective nowhere regional state U, both with the same LSAT score and everything else the same - I think the institution will make a difference. And compare the person who graduated with a certain GPA in a major (i.e engineering) that’s on average for a particular school 0.4 lower than in other majors (i.e. humanities). If the LS only cared about the GPA they’d make no distinction but if they want different types of personalities, including some with perhaps heavy logical, critical thinking, and problem solving capabilities, it’d make sense for them to pay attention to the major. Besides, I’ve read excerpts from some admissions people that they do pay attention to these attributes - at least at their particular LS. I’m sure it varies.</p>
<p>The following is just one example from UVA LS - </p>
<p>
[Frequently</a> Asked Questions](<a href=“http://www.law.virginia.edu/html/prospectives/faqs.htm]Frequently”>Frequently Asked Questions - J.D. Admissions)</p>
<p>Also, if you go to the ‘top law schools’ website and read the statements from some of the admissions staff you’ll see where some of them state it. Here’s a quote (again, UVA as an example - I don’t know how representative it is) -
</p>
<p>Note - I have no connections to UVA - I just used it as an example.</p>
<p>
Apparently not for that LS - </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow, I’m surprised they didn’t have lawsuits about that. How on earth did that happen!</p>