Loyola Los Angeles this year with 90k, or retake. Forum

[BigZuck]

If ur stuck in socal, you should at least be able to shoot for UCLA/USC. To have a decent shot, you probably want at least a 168. That's only 6 points more, and you got -6 on LG, so that should definitely be doable.

But still UCLA/USC at full tuition sucks...

To get 120K at USC this cycle you needed, what? 168 and a pulse?

[Dr. Dre]

But still UCLA/USC at full tuition sucks...

even with a substantial amount of $$, the COL there will destroy you. . . well maybe not so much for USC because you can rent an apartment in the ghetto.

[bananapeanutbutter]

It seems to me very unlikely you'll get a high enough score on a retake that'll get you into USC/UCLA or higher.... I assume you understand the unemployment/underemployment risk you are taking... And that you are not a special snowflake... And that everything will probably not be okay.... But yeah, whatever. Go.

LLS '12

This is blatantly false. 5 points and he's in at USC. While USC isn't at sticker is rough it's better than a 90k scholarship to loyola. You would have a realistic shot at big law that makes the extra 90k worth it. It's still probably a non-wise move playing the odds, but if you get 8 more points you're looking at 90k from USC. That's just so much better than your current situation. Your admissions choice, and 1L will set the stage for much of your future. Don't fuck it up. There's a reason Phil Jackson won't coach the Bobcats. That logic applies here too.

[untar614]

If ur stuck in socal, you should at least be able to shoot for UCLA/USC. To have a decent shot, you probably want at least a 168. That's only 6 points more, and you got -6 on LG, so that should definitely be doable.

But still UCLA/USC at full tuition sucks...

It does. I wouldn't do it, but if he's intent on going, it's better than what he's looking at now. At least he'd have a good chance at an actual lawyer job, even though biglaw odds would still not be good. Would likely be on IBR/PAYE for 20 years, but idk...

[northwood]

op if you were to lose your scholarship would you drop out? if not, then definitely wait a year. if so, strongly consider waiting a year because you could probably score a better scholarship

[CO2016YEAH]

What *exactly* did you do to prep for the LSAT and how much time did you put into it?

Worked the first half of the LG and LR Bibles, followed by three practice tests, followed by 3 months in the onsite Blueprint course, accompanied by about 20-30 hrs. a week outside of class and about another 8-10 PTs. I have stacks of additional questions, though, as well as my books and all the PTs I've already worked, which can be reworked. I think repetition would help in spotting the flaws. There is an issue with there being only a fixed period of time to work in; by this point in my life I think my reading speed is only subject to minimal improvement.

If I'm reading this right, that's ~13 PTs. There are people who have taken all 68 PTs two or three times. You can absolutely push that score up.

Correct. About 13 PTs, plus probably another ~4's worth of questions integrated into the books from the course.

[ManoftheHour]

The only compelling reason to attend this fall is if you satisfy both these conditions:

1. You have a job lined up for sure. As in you'd bet your first born child that you do have a job lined up for sure. For. Sure.
2. You have considerable savings that you can tap into in the event that you cannot maintain the top 50% stip or your family is rich enough to bail you out.

If not, retake or don't go.

Also, you haven't reached your max score if you haven't tried the Manhattan series out yet. That, and tons of drills. I prefer the Cambridge series that you can purchase online.

And yes, make sure you have taken ALL 68 PTs. You really haven't maxed out. You can gun for that $$$ at USC/UCLA.

[Dr. Dre]

USC/UCLA at sticker is an insane idea only an unreasonable person would acquire.

Even with half tuition or 75%. Either full ride or don't go.

[Dr. Dre]

Manhattan LSAT Prep

[ManoftheHour]

This thing is so beast:

http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-LSAT-Pra ... tside+lsat

[y2zipper]

If ur stuck in socal, you should at least be able to shoot for UCLA/USC. To have a decent shot, you probably want at least a 168. That's only 6 points more, and you got -6 on LG, so that should definitely be doable.

But still UCLA/USC at full tuition sucks...

This. What OP has to do is get UCLA, get a couple other t-14's and negotiate up until UCLA/USC is worthwhile.

[Danteshek]

It seems to me very unlikely you'll get a high enough score on a retake that'll get you into USC/UCLA or higher.... I assume you understand the unemployment/underemployment risk you are taking... And that you are not a special snowflake... And that everything will probably not be okay.... But yeah, whatever. Go.

LLS '12

This is blatantly false. 5 points and he's in at USC. While USC isn't at sticker is rough it's better than a 90k scholarship to loyola. You would have a realistic shot at big law that makes the extra 90k worth it. It's still probably a non-wise move playing the odds, but if you get 8 more points you're looking at 90k from USC. That's just so much better than your current situation. Your admissions choice, and 1L will set the stage for much of your future. Don't fuck it up. There's a reason Phil Jackson won't coach the Bobcats. That logic applies here too.

How often does a retaker make a 5-point improvement? If he's lucky he'll improve 2-3 points, not 5.
http://lawschooli.com/lsat-retake-score ... -averages/

[BigZuck]

USC/UCLA at sticker is an insane idea only an unreasonable person would acquire.

Even with half tuition or 75%. Either full ride or don't go.

75% scholarship would put COA around 100K which is plenty reasonable for USC/UCLA.

Look Dre, I'm all about a good troll but you need to be careful here, if you stop bringing something to the table (e.g. being funny, or at least making it worthwhile to read) then you'll become just another BruceWayne. And that's never a good thing.

[romothesavior]

I mean, wouldn't a couple of points at least make LLS & Co more affordable? 125k+ for these middling Cali schools is just crazy.

[ManoftheHour]

I mean, wouldn't a couple of points at least make LLS & Co more affordable? 125k+ for these middling Cali schools is just crazy.

A guy with a lower GPA and a 166 got a full ride + $500 stipend for LLS. At least go for that. Even if you get a 165, try to negotiate. It might work and it makes this less insane. You'll still have the top 50% to worry about though, but at least you wouldn't need loans.

[ManoftheHour]

OP, are you retaking this June? I just realized that we are numbers twins.

[bananapeanutbutter]

It seems to me very unlikely you'll get a high enough score on a retake that'll get you into USC/UCLA or higher.... I assume you understand the unemployment/underemployment risk you are taking... And that you are not a special snowflake... And that everything will probably not be okay.... But yeah, whatever. Go.

LLS '12

This is blatantly false. 5 points and he's in at USC. While USC isn't at sticker is rough it's better than a 90k scholarship to loyola. You would have a realistic shot at big law that makes the extra 90k worth it. It's still probably a non-wise move playing the odds, but if you get 8 more points you're looking at 90k from USC. That's just so much better than your current situation. Your admissions choice, and 1L will set the stage for much of your future. Don't fuck it up. There's a reason Phil Jackson won't coach the Bobcats. That logic applies here too.

How often does a retaker make a 5-point improvement? If he's lucky he'll improve 2-3 points, not 5.
http://lawschooli.com/lsat-retake-score ... -averages/

1.) The general population is lazy as hell, particularly our age group with the "college experience" and "you can be anything" rather than "you can work to be anything." Also, a large percentage of even law students approach studying in an idiotic fashion. These are the smart ones, mind you. I personally know and tutored people who improved 15 plus points. OP may not have the capacity to hit a 180, but few do, myself included. However, no incompetents hit a 162. He has untapped potential. He's in point per question territory. 2 more right per section, he's at 168-170.

[Dr. Dre]

WTF? comparing me to brucewayne, you're out of your mind, homie.

I specialize in three things: UCI, pencils, and california. That's my specialty. So when you call me out, label me as a troll, on my fucking specialty, bro you're the one who should be careful.

[boblawlob]

Even though I work with this kind of data all the time I still get shocked by the actual numbers. Perhaps 20% of Loyola LA's 2012 class had what could under an extremely generous definition be considered an arguably good employment outcome. This includes all FT/LT jobs with firms of more than 25 lawyers, all PI jobs, all judicial clerkships (state and federal), and all "government" jobs. Basically anything that might (I emphasize might) constitute a positive outcome relative to average COA.

Nearly a quarter of the class was completely unemployed, and that's not counting the 34 people in make-work law school funded jobs (most of which were both short-term and part-time).

But the scariest numbers are the 92 graduates that are not seeking/still unemployed (22.6%)

If you can retake it, then do it. You're a non-traditional who already has substantial work and life experience. The years might not be on your side at first glance relative to your fellow law school peers, but your resume would say otherwise to future employers.

After two LSAT takes, I was looking at Loyola IF I got off the WL. Now I'm going to a T30 school with a half scholly (still not a true TLS success story, but a success story relative to where I was at a year ago).

If you recognize that you want to go to Loyola only to hang up your own shingle/work for a local law firm in the community specializing in divorces, small claims, representing small business, etc, then maybe Loyola is right for you if you can accept the current price. If you have a bigger ego/plans for yourself in terms of career, then maybe Loyola is not it for you.

Now in regards to studying for the LSAT, taking a prep course and working diligently within the framework of the prep course's homework and offerings will not be enough for most people out there. You really need to go above and beyond what a prep course has to offer. Noodley's retake guide is the key for self-study. Prep courses are excellent starting points, but only you yourself can take yourself over that high 160s/170 mark.

If you can look in the mirror and tell yourself that you gave the LSAT your all and that you are truly happy attending Loyola at your current COA, then make the jump. If you have an ounce of doubt and you know you can do better, then you know what to do. But just be sure to know that retaking the LSAT will not automatically equate to a high jump in score if you do not put in substantial work. And even then, you can't control for the real test on the actual date. But you have to give yourself that shot.

You don't want to start attending a law school and have any "what ifs." You could attend LLS and be the next Arrow and starting gunning from the get go and then transfer to Boalt or something. But odds are not in your favor.

[BigZuck]

WTF? comparing me to brucewayne, you're out of your mind, homie.

I specialize in three things: UCI, pencils, and california. That's my specialty. So when you call me out, label me as a troll, on my fucking specialty, bro you're the one who should be careful.

Just looking out for you Dre. If you don't put some care into your trolling then before you know it you'll be a regular Bizzybone/BruceWayne/JCougar writing inane walls of texts that people could care less about. The Internet needs good trolls like you, I just don't want you to jump the shark here.

Back on topic: agreed that the OP has untapped potential and could probably do better on the LSAT with some focused self-study and more PTs

[Paul Campos]

Even though I work with this kind of data all the time I still get shocked by the actual numbers. Perhaps 20% of Loyola LA's 2012 class had what could under an extremely generous definition be considered an arguably good employment outcome. This includes all FT/LT jobs with firms of more than 25 lawyers, all PI jobs, all judicial clerkships (state and federal), and all "government" jobs. Basically anything that might (I emphasize might) constitute a positive outcome relative to average COA.

Nearly a quarter of the class was completely unemployed, and that's not counting the 34 people in make-work law school funded jobs (most of which were both short-term and part-time).

Closer to 30% according to LST (counting firms with 26+ attorneys, fed clerkships, gov't, and PI jobs). But I'm just being a stickler for accurate numbers.

But the scariest numbers are the 92 graduates that are not seeking/still unemployed (22.6%)

If you can retake it, then do it. You're a non-traditional who already has substantial work and life experience. The years might not be on your side at first glance relative to your fellow law school peers, but your resume would say otherwise to future employers.

After two LSAT takes, I was looking at Loyola IF I got off the WL. Now I'm going to a T30 school with a half scholly (still not a true TLS success story, but a success story relative to where I was at a year ago).

If you recognize that you want to go to Loyola only to hang up your own shingle/work for a local law firm in the community specializing in divorces, small claims, representing small business, etc, then maybe Loyola is right for you if you can accept the current price. If you have a bigger ego/plans for yourself in terms of career, then maybe Loyola is not it for you.

Now in regards to studying for the LSAT, taking a prep course and working diligently within the framework of the prep course's homework and offerings will not be enough for most people out there. You really need to go above and beyond what a prep course has to offer. Noodley's retake guide is the key for self-study. Prep courses are excellent starting points, but only you yourself can take yourself over that high 160s/170 mark.

If you can look in the mirror and tell yourself that you gave the LSAT your all and that you are truly happy attending Loyola at your current COA, then make the jump. If you have an ounce of doubt and you know you can do better, then you know what to do. But just be sure to know that retaking the LSAT will not automatically equate to a high jump in score if you do not put in substantial work. And even then, you can't control for the real test on the actual date. But you have to give yourself that shot.

You don't want to start attending a law school and have any "what ifs." You could attend LLS and be the next Arrow and starting gunning from the get go and then transfer to Boalt or something. But odds are not in your favor.

FT/LT jobs:

61 with firms of 25+
12 government
5 PI
6 state/fed clerkships

84 of 411 graduates = 20.4%

[Dr. Dre]

damn, just lost a lot of respect for you BigZuck, not cause your calling me out bro, but for actually putting forward that UCLA/USC at the prices you listed are good investments. You could have been the next rad lulz, but obviously you don't have it in you.

[boblawlob]

FT/LT jobs:

61 with firms of 25+
12 government
5 PI
6 state/fed clerkships

84 of 411 graduates = 20.4%

apologies. I did not notice the FT part at first glance. stupid me.

damn, just lost a lot of respect for you BigZuck, not cause your calling me out bro, but for actually putting forward that UCLA/USC at the prices you listed are good investments. You could have been the next rad lulz, but obviously you don't have it in you.

Half scholly at UCLA/USC is pretty good imo. I was looking at some MPP programs (2 yrs) last night and the majority of the good programs cost 30k+ (Top ranked MPP program at USC Price School is 35k). Without arguing the difference between a masters and a JD being a 1 yr additional cost of 50k (if paying sticker), it just seems to be that a lot of TLS posters expect to go to law school for free with room and board paid for if they don't get into T14. Now, I will agree that should be the case for a majority of the schools out there, but USC is pretty solid if you're paying only half in tuition.

[CO2016YEAH]

OP, are you retaking this June? I just realized that we are numbers twins.

I've been half-assed planning on it. But I've also been half-assed prepping as it will make little difference this cycle. The idea would be to try to gain a full scholly at LLS or to know in advance of foregoing this year as to whether I stand a good shot at a rankings jump next year.

However, if I decide to definitvely wait a year I might save the retake for Dec. in case Oct. doesn't work out. I'm quite sure I won't max out by June, so it would likely be a waste of a retake.

[bananapeanutbutter]

WTF? comparing me to brucewayne, you're out of your mind, homie.

I specialize in three things: UCI, pencils, and california. That's my specialty. So when you call me out, label me as a troll, on my fucking specialty, bro you're the one who should be careful.

Deep breaths, bro. Your life is gonna get much more stressful; don't take accusations personally. Also, brucewayne is a fountain of experience and knowledge.