• Contact Us
  • Student Login
  • My Cart

LSAT and Law School Admissions Blog

You are here: Home / Law School Admissions / Do Non-Traditional Law School Applicants Have an Admissions Advantage?

March 21, 2017

Do Non-Traditional Law School Applicants Have an Admissions Advantage?

Anyone who has been following posts on the PowerScore blog knows that I’m pretty interested in using data to get insights into law school admissions. For example:

  • What factors might affect law school admissions decisions?
  • To what degree do those factors have an impact?
  • How do different facets of an application package affect admissions decisions at different law schools?

So far, I have explored whether the timing of the application makes a difference, the benefits (or lack thereof) of binding early decision options, which schools are relatively more welcoming of splitter and reverse-splitter candidates, and how an applicant’s ability to claim underrepresented minority status may affect outcomes. In this post, we’ll dive into the data to try to get an idea of whether – and how – nontraditional students (or, in common shorthand, NonTrads) fare any differently in law school admissions outcomes.

What is a NonTrad?

“Nontraditional” status as an applicant is not an incredibly well-defined concept, but it kind of reminds me of Justice Potter Stewart’s famous statement in Jacobellis v. Ohio: I know it when I see it. The general idea is that a non-traditional law school applicant is one who hasn’t followed the typical high school-to-college-to-law-school track, and so is a bit older and probably with a little more experience – work and otherwise – than a typical “traditional” law school applicant.

How much older or more experienced is not an easily answered question. But for our purposes, nontraditional applicants are those in our data who self-identified as nontraditional, and that seems like a reasonable way to handle it.

NonTrad Boosts

Something else that’s a little different about analyzing a potential “nontraditional boost” (that is, an advantage given to nontraditional applicants based solely on their nontraditional status) compared to analyzing the same for, say, URM applicants, is that there’s quite a bit less in the way of theoretical underpinnings of such a boost.

If it exists, it might be because law schools expect someone who has a little more world experience to perhaps take law school more seriously and thus be more successful. On the other hand, a big gap between undergrad and law school might indicate that the applicant has been away from the academy for so long that re-integrating and succeeding might be difficult.

Maybe schools, in a quest for diversity, look not only to race, ethnicity, and gender, but also to age diversity? If anyone else has any input into why nontraditional students might receive a boost or, in the alternative, be disadvantaged, by all means use that comments section!

Quantifying the Boost

With that said, I plan to look for a potential nontraditional boost much the same way I did a URM-boost. I will first see if we can quantify such a boost by measuring the effects of nontraditional status on admissions outcomes, controlling for a variety of other quantifiable factors. Next, I will present average LSAT and GPA numbers for both nontraditional and traditional admits to those schools in the USNWR top 100 for which we have sufficient user-reported data.

As a preliminary: this analysis makes use of data reported by law school applicants themselves, and covers the 2009/10 through 2015/16 application cycles. Again, nontraditional status for individual applicants was also self-reported. As a final note: the tables here reflect the USNWR rankings for schools prior to the very recent 2018 release, but based on the 2018 rankings, I now include Top 13 tables instead of Top 14 (since I would argue that the concept of the Top 14 is no longer current since Georgetown dropped out and Texas has not always been there).

Does a nontraditional boost exist?

Unlike the URM boost, which existed in nearly every school we covered, the nontraditional boost only seems to exist in a few schools and, in fact, a handful of schools seem to disadvantage nontraditional applicants. Let’s take a look!

Note: The number given in the table is the % increase in chances of admission for nontraditional applicants compared to traditional applicants, controlling for LSAT, GPA, applicant sex, ED application, URM status, and month the application was sent.

Schools for Which Nontraditional Status Seems to Matter
RankSchoolIncrease/Decrease in Chances of
Admission for Nontraditional Applicants
65U of Connecticut337%
72Loyola Chicago243%
22Notre Dame229%
40Wake Forest211%
50Tulane193%
28U Alabama184%
48U of Maryland169%
30William & Mary144%
17UCLA111%
15U Texas102%
2Harvard86%
14Georgetown76%
78American-50%
40U of Illinois-54%
40Washington & Lee-58%
18WUSTL-62%
48U of Florida-67%
4Chicago-73%

 

Schools for Which Nontraditional Status Does Not Seem to Matter
RankSchoolRankSchool
1Yale40U of Arizona
3Stanford40U of Colorado – Boulder
4Columbia45George Mason
6NYU45Southern Methodist
7U Penn45U of Utah
8UC Berkeley50FSU
8Michigan50Temple
8UVA50UC Hastings
11Duke50U of Houston
12Northwestern55Baylor
13Cornell55Richmond
16Vanderbilt57Case Western
19USC57Georgia State
20Boston U60U of Kentucky
20Iowa60U of Miami
22Emory65Loyola Marymount
22Minnesota65Pepperdine
25Arizona State72University of Denver
25GW74U of San Diego
25Indiana – Bloomington74Cardozo
28Boston College78U of Pittsburgh
30Ohio State82Northeastern
30UC Davis86Chicago-Kent
33U Georgia86Penn State (Dickinson)
33U Washington86Syracuse
33U Wisconsin – Madison92Lewis & Clark
37Fordham97Brooklyn Law School
38UNC100Michigan State

Analyzing the Charts

As you can see, only twelve law schools seem, based on the data, to provide any sort of boost to non-traditional applicants, and that boost ranges from 337% at the University of Connecticut to 76% at Georgetown. Half as many schools (six) actually appear to disadvantage nontraditional applicants, with those applicants having their chances cut from between 50% at American to 73% at the University of Chicago, when compared to otherwise identical peers (at least as far as our controls – LSAT, GPA, etc. go). And, of course, you can see that the vast majority of these schools demonstrate no statistically significant effects of an applicant’s nontraditional status.

Average Scores

In order to bring the analysis a little closer to a more easily-digested reality, I present a few tables that show the average LSAT and GPA scores for admitted nontraditional students vs. admitted traditional students for the schools in question here. The schools are listed in order of the difference between the average traditional admit’s LSAT and that of the average nontraditional admit.

Please note that nothing else is controlled for here, and these are just the raw numbers; in other words, these are just descriptive statistics for your viewing pleasure, and these tables alone aren’t indicative of any statistically significant difference in the acceptance rates of applicants based on their nontraditional status. (Due to rounding, the differential score sometimes seems off by 0.1.)

School

Traditional LSATNon-Traditional LSATLSAT Differential
Yale174.4171.82.6
UC Berkeley170.7168.81.9
Harvard173.3171.61.8
Michigan170.4168.81.6
Chicago171.6170.11.5
Georgetown170.6169.11.4
Cornell169.6168.31.2
Fordham166.9165.71.2
Iowa164.4163.11.2
U of Arizona163.1162.01.2
Minnesota167.5166.31.2
U of Connecticut162.3161.21.2
Arizona State163.9162.71.2
Temple163.0161.91.1
Northwestern171.0169.91.1
U Texas169.5168.51.0
Brooklyn162.4161.41.0
NYU172.4171.41.0
U Penn171.1170.11.0
Baylor163.4162.50.9
American160.7159.90.9
Michigan State158.3157.50.8
William & Mary166.3165.60.8
Hastings164.1163.40.7
Cardozo163.9163.30.7
UVA170.3169.70.7
Duke171.5170.90.6
U Alabama165.7165.20.5
Pepperdine163.3162.80.5
UCLA169.5169.10.5
UC Davis165.2164.80.5
U of Miami160.7160.30.3
U of Utah162.9162.60.3
WUSTL167.9167.60.3
U of Colorado – Boulder165.3165.00.3
Notre Dame166.5166.20.3
Vanderbilt169.1168.90.3
Northeastern162.8162.60.3
Ohio State163.9163.60.3
USC168.4168.20.2
Southern Methodist164.0163.90.2
Tulane162.7162.60.1
Lewis & Clark163.1163.00.1
Loyola (Chicago)161.3161.20.0
U of Maryland162.9162.80.0
U of Illinois165.6165.60.0
Houston163.8163.80.0
UNC164.3164.30.0
Emory166.9166.90.0
Boston College166.3166.4-0.1
GW167.1167.2-0.1
Washington & Lee164.9165.0-0.1
FSU162.2162.4-0.2
U Wisconsin – Madison164.2164.4-0.2
U of Kentucky160.6160.8-0.3
Columbia173.0173.3-0.3
Wake Forest164.0164.3-0.3
Richmond162.0162.3-0.3
Stanford172.4172.8-0.3
Loyola Marymount162.9163.3-0.4
Chicago-Kent161.4161.9-0.5
Penn State161.2161.7-0.5
U Washington166.4167.0-0.6
U of San Diego162.5163.1-0.6
Indiana – Bloomington164.9165.6-0.7
U Georgia165.9166.6-0.7
U of Pittsburgh161.3162.1-0.7
Georgia State161.2161.9-0.7
Denver160.5161.2-0.7
Syracuse156.7157.5-0.8
Boston U166.5167.5-1.0
George Mason163.3164.3-1.0
Case Western161.0163.1-2.0
U of Florida162.8165.0-2.2

You’ll note that, for the most part, accepted traditional applicants had higher LSATs than accepted nontraditional applicants, with the number sometimes being pretty substantial (Yale, Berkeley, and Harvard really stand out here). It’s also worth noting that 6 out of the top 10 LSAT differentials are Top 13 schools.

And now, for a look at just the Top 13 law schools, isolated.

School

Traditional LSATNon-Traditional LSATLSAT Differential
Yale174.4171.82.6
UC Berkeley170.7168.81.9
Harvard173.3171.61.8
Michigan170.4168.81.6
Chicago171.6170.11.5
Cornell169.6168.31.2
Northwestern171.0169.91.1
NYU172.4171.41.0
U Penn171.1170.11.0
UVA170.3169.70.7
Duke171.5170.90.6
Columbia173.0173.3-0.3
Stanford172.4172.8-0.3

There’s honestly not much to say here, and since we’re just looking at raw numbers. It may be worth noting that Columbia and Stanford actually exhibit the opposite tendency, in that nontraditional admits have higher average LSATs, whereas everywhere else traditional admits’ LSAT scores were at least 0.6 higher on average.

In the following tables, we repeat the same exercise for GPA:

School

Traditional GPANon-Traditional GPAGPA Differential
Arizona State3.583.210.37
U of Utah3.553.200.35
Baylor3.513.190.32
U Alabama3.553.260.29
Case Western3.433.160.28
Indiana – Bloomington3.533.260.27
U of Kentucky3.453.190.26
U Georgia3.523.290.23
Southern Methodist3.493.260.23
Georgia State3.513.280.23
Syracuse3.373.140.23
U of Pittsburgh3.453.220.23
Pepperdine3.573.350.21
Notre Dame3.643.440.20
Richmond3.423.220.20
U Colorado – Boulder3.553.360.20
U of Arizona3.533.340.20
Washington & Lee3.533.340.19
Denver3.403.210.18
Iowa3.613.420.18
Loyola (Chicago)3.383.190.18
Wake Forest3.523.340.18
U of Maryland3.493.310.17
Lewis & Clark3.443.280.16
UCLA3.743.590.16
U of Illinois3.513.360.16
American3.433.280.15
GW3.613.460.15
William & Mary3.643.500.15
Boston College3.623.480.14
Emory3.603.460.14
Penn State3.453.310.14
Loyola Marymount3.523.380.14
Minnesota3.543.400.14
UC Davis3.623.480.13
Georgetown3.723.580.13
Tulane3.473.350.13
Houston3.473.340.13
UVA3.743.610.13
Chicago-Kent3.343.210.13
Vanderbilt3.693.570.13
U of San Diego3.473.350.12
Stanford3.893.760.12
U of Miami3.453.330.12
U Texas3.713.590.12
Ohio State3.623.500.12
NYU3.783.660.11
U of Florida3.573.460.11
Columbia3.783.670.11
U Washington3.663.550.11
U Penn3.813.710.10
Temple3.463.360.10
Northwestern3.683.590.10
Cardozo3.503.400.09
Duke3.793.700.09
George Mason3.503.410.09
Yale3.913.820.09
WUSTL3.543.450.09
U of Connecticut3.443.350.08
USC3.733.650.08
Harvard3.873.790.08
Boston U3.663.580.08
Hastings3.543.470.07
Cornell3.743.670.07
Fordham3.613.540.07
UNC3.563.500.06
FSU3.483.430.05
Michigan3.743.690.05
Chicago3.833.790.04
UC Berkeley3.833.790.04
Northeastern3.473.450.02
Brooklyn3.403.380.02
Michigan State3.473.47-0.01
U Wisconsin – Madison3.473.49-0.03

Average Scores for Top Schools

School

Traditional GPANon-Traditional GPAGPA Differential
UVA3.743.610.13
Stanford3.893.760.12
NYU3.783.660.11
Columbia3.783.670.11
U Penn3.813.710.10
Northwestern3.683.590.10
Duke3.793.700.09
Yale3.913.820.09
Harvard3.873.790.08
Cornell3.743.670.07
Michigan3.743.690.05
Chicago3.833.790.04
UC Berkeley3.833.790.04

Summarizing the Data

Here again, we see a broad range of differentials, this time for the GPA. What really stands out to me is that almost all schools demonstrate at least a somewhat average GPA for traditional students, and that this is true of all Top 13 schools. This may be due to the fact that schools are willing to be a bit more forgiving of lower GPAs for nontraditional students, given that they’ve put some temporal distance between themselves and those GPAs, and have ostensibly matured and gotten more serious in the meantime.

On the other hand, if you just wrapped up your undergrad GPA before applying to law school (or are, in many cases, still forming it), there’s not much reason to believe you’ll be any different by the time you set foot in your first law class. That’s just conjecture on my part, though.

So, there you have it. In a nutshell, a quantifiable nontraditional boost does exist for some schools, but about half that many seem to actually disadvantage nontraditional applicants.

Facebook0Tweet0Pin0Email0

Posted by PowerScore Test Prep / Law School Admissions / Law School Admissions, Non-traditional Student 6 Comments

  • Michelle Gobar
    June 04, 2018 at 7:30pm

    Hi,

    I can already imagine what response I will receive to this message, but I won’t give up on my end goal regardless. I completed my undergraduate career at the University of Richmond with an accounting degree and GPA of 2.4. Prior to my Junior year, I was a straight A student, tutor, and athlete but encountered a severely abusive relationship. I did not know how I ended up in that relationship and was physically and emotionally trapped until I took the courage to take legal action, but this two year horrid experience caused me to suffer especially almost every night before exams, when he thought it was best to attack me. I managed my way out and learned immensely from this experience among many more and I landed a great accounting job post-graduation, but law is my passion and my end goal. It has been a dream of mine to attend Columbia for Law School and I am confident in achieving a high LSAT score, but is there any advice you have that would possibly help me reach my goal despite my undergraduate GPA?

    I apologize for the prolix message but hope it finds you well and to hear from you soon.

    -Michelle

  • Dave Killoran
    June 04, 2018 at 11:33pm

    Hi Michelle,

    Thanks for the message! You are right to be concerned about your GPA here. Columbia doesn’t really take applicants with GPAs lower than 3.1 or 3.2, but you have a compelling reason for that GPA, and so maybe they will look deeper than the numbers. For that to happen, you need to do three things:

    1. Max out on your LSAT score. This is absolutely essential, and the higher the better.

    2. Write a killer GPA addendum. You need to tell the story above in blunt, compelling terms and really engage with the readers so they can feel why your GPA suffered during your terrible ordeal.

    3. Write a great personal statement. I think this should be on a different topic and should focus on something positive. This might help!

    Also, Columbia may be your dream, but Columbia is not the only great law school in America. If you do the above, you may find that you have some great offers on tap, whether those are Columbia or not.

    Please let me know if that helps. Thanks and good luck!

Comments

  1. Bluehair says

    December 7, 2019 at 5:17 pm

    I’m 61 years old and a disabled vet. I have been a congressional staffer and then worked as a bus driver until my health would not allow me to pass a physical. I have income from the VA Disability program and Social Security. I would like to go to law school to be able to provide pro bono legal services to the poor and disabled. My GPA from the 1980’s as an undergrad was a 2.88 but the LSAC adjusted it from quarter hours to semester hours and they say it’s a 2.73! Ouch! I went to a semester at another school a few years later and I have a 4.0 there but LSAC said it doesn’t count because it’s Grad coursework.

    I am taking an LSAT prep course, but I’m realistically thinking I’ll get a score of 150-152.

    I would like to go to an online program like Mitchell Hamline if possible. Do I have any chance? How about if I have a bad test day and get a 148?

    Reply
    • Dave Killoran says

      December 8, 2019 at 5:56 pm

      Hi blue,

      Thanks for the message! I previously lived in Minneapolis and am fairly familiar with Mitchell Hamline. Your GPA is just under their 25th percentile, but your life experience will likely offset that (I’d recommend making sure you write a fantastic personal statement, using some of the principles I talk about in this free seminar: PowerScore’s Law School Personal Statement Seminar. Your work as a bus driver could probably be used as the backbone for a tremendous statement, since you get to interact with such a wide variety of people in that job. That’s just one thought, though, and there are other options based on what you said.

      Since your GPA will come in under their 25th, you don’t have a whole lot of latitude on your LSAT score. The part time program is slightly more lenient than the full time program (on both GPA and LSAT), but the full-time numbers are: 149 / 152 / 156. I’d argue that you need to hit at least 152 to make them feel confident for full-time admission. Score below that and you still have a shot, but it gets harder for them.

      You mentioned you were taking an LSAT course, and I hope it’s one of ours! If not, make sure to pick up the LSAT Bibles and take tests in a Digital format.

      Good luck!

      Reply
  2. Sum dude says

    November 26, 2019 at 8:53 am

    Hi, I’m a nontraditional hoping to get a significant scholarship to CCN.

    I have the scores for it (99.3-percentile LSAT, 3.9x GPA), so just want to make sure I don’t step wrong with my recommendations.

    I finished undergrad 20 years ago and have worked continuously since then, achieving a degree of success in a technical/specialized type of consulting.

    I don’t have relationships with old college profs, so for one I’m planning to go with a more-senior colleague at my consulting firm who I’ve worked with for 7 years. For another, I’m thinking of going with a contact from a client company — a retired partner from an AmLaw 100 law firm (the firm is my client). I gave him consulting advice for years, and he knows my capabilities since the consulting we do is fairly technical.

    Does that seem like a good approach? Any other thoughts?

    Reply
    • PowerScore Test Prep says

      November 26, 2019 at 4:50 pm

      Thank you for your question!

      One of the most important things about letters of recommendation is to choose people who know you well because detail is critical, so you’re off to a good start! The fastest way to get yourself in trouble is to have a recommender who doesn’t know you and is then very general in what they say. Make sure they talk in a specific fashion about you: detail is king. Please check out our PowerScore video on YouTube that covers a discussion we had about the LORs in great detail here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56JHjSDVn7Q

      Good luck!

      Reply
  3. Rachael says

    October 14, 2019 at 8:00 pm

    I would say I am a nontraditional student. 43 year old recent college grad, working for over 20 years and going to school, planning to go to law school. My gpa total is 3.1 due to 1 bad year in 1999. GPA is 3.9 in my major and cumulative 3.5 without that bad year. LSAT marginal at best at 141. I’m trying to decide how important it really will be to try to increase my LSAT while working full time and still not much more time to study ahead of time. The plan is to go to law school full time so, while in law school, I won’t have the work/school issue. Is the nontraditional student that much a boost in a situation like this? I worry my LSAT and GPA will automatically put me in the deny pile without a second look at my resume, personal statement, etc. Thoughts?

    Reply
    • Dave Killoran says

      October 16, 2019 at 1:36 pm

      Hi Rachael,

      Thanks for the message! You are definitely a nontrad student, which is indeed helpful 🙂 Is it enough to offset the numbers situation you currently face? No, so let’s talk about that:

      1. GPA. Law schools report the CAS GPA, and so that’s the number the focus on. That means your 3.1 is what will be used for admission decisions and reporting. You can’t change that at this point, so it is what it is. I would write a GPA addendum explaining the one bad year, which will help explain what happened and ease some minds, but this can’t be entirely erased.

      2. LSAT. Because your GPA is fixed, your LSAT score becomes even more important. At your current score, you will face an uphill climb at most law school in terms of being admitted. The best way to fix that? Retake the LSAT and improve your score. That may sound daunting, but you have plenty of room to raise your score, and getting into the middle of the scale would have a huge effect on your options and results. In my personal opinion, it’s essential that you retake the exam.

      So, the short answer is that the nontrad boost won’t offset the GPA/LSAT problems, and as it stands, at many schools you wouldn’t get far.

      Sorry for that news, but there is still a pathway here for success, if you can focus on that LSAT score. It’s what we do here, so if we can help just let us know. Thanks!

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Subscribe to our LSAT Blog

PowerScore Getting Started with the LSAT Guide
Attend a PowerScore Webinar!

Recent Posts

  • LSAT Podcast Episode 80: The February 2021 LSAT-Flex Review
  • Should I Apply to Law School This Year or Wait ’til Next Year?
  • LSAT Podcast Episode 79: The Death of the LSAT Flex
  • LSAC Announces Tests Through June 2022 & More
  • LSAT Podcast Episode 78: What’s the Deal With Addenda?
Last-Minute LSAT Advice

Categories

  • Conditional Reasoning
  • Law School Admissions
  • Logic Games
  • Logical Reasoning
  • LSAT PodCast
  • LSAT Prep
  • Reading Comprehension
  • Studying
  • Test Archives

powerscore

Don't go into your test day blind! Be prepared for Don't go into your test day blind! Be prepared for the conditions of that day.
•
•
•
#lsatprep #futurelawyer #lawschoolbound #logicgames #logicalreasoning #readingcomprehension #logic #lgtips #lrtips #rctips #lsattips #studygram #studywithme #studying #studyspace #studymotivation
"Be brave. You'll get there. • • • #motivat "Be brave. You'll get there.
•
•
•
#motivationalmonday #motivation #lsatprep #futurelawyer #lawschoolbound #digitallsat #inspirational #inspiration #quote #motivationalquote #lawschool #1L #study #studymotivation"
Your score is king. It can mean the difference bet Your score is king. It can mean the difference between your dream school or a full ride. What is your goal?
•
•
•
#motivationalmonday #motivation #lsatprep #futurelawyer #lawschoolbound #digitallsat #inspirational #inspiration #quote #motivationalquote #lsatgoals #lsatscore #powerscore
Follow Us!

Popular Topics

Accommodations Addendum Cancelling Your Score Causal Reasoning Choosing a Law School Conditional Reasoning Diagramming Digital LSAT GPA International Student Law School Law School Admissions Law School Applications Letters of Recommendation Logical Reasoning Logic Games LR Flaws LSAC LSAT Bibles LSAT Courses LSAT Flex LSAT Percentile LSAT Podcast LSAT Prep LSAT Score LSAT vs GMAT Mentality Non-traditional Student Personal Statement Practice Tests Predictions Prep Courses Private Tutoring Reading Comprehension Retaking the LSAT Scholarships Score Increase Scoring Scale Self-Study Studying Study Plan Test Archives Vocabulary Waitlist Webinar
  • Pinterest
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!