Deposited (Loyola LA) but took June LSAT and Improved...worth reapplying? Forum

[ghost5-0]

So I think the answer to this question is very obvious but I'll ask it anyway.

I applied before receiving my December LSAT score with anticipation of getting a score between 166-170, about where I'd been PTing.

Of course got a 164 and was a bit disappointed and ended up getting rejected to most places I wanted to go.

Loyola LA admitted me and gave me a full ride which, all things considered, is not a bad deal.

However, I retook the June LSAT (in Asia so just got my score back) and got a 167. (GPA is 3.52)

Not as good as I'd hoped, but 3 point is 3 points.

Assuming I'd like a shot at big law or would at least not want to be in a rough spot in terms of getting a job when I graduate, it makes good sense to re-apply and hope for USC/UCLA correct (assuming I want to stay in California)?

[Danimals18]

.

[FirmBiz]

Take a chance, pull out and reapply next year.

Let admissions know what you are doing first.

[unnamable]

Can you defer & keep the $ at Loyola? I'm not an expert on this stuff but even with that small bump you're still pretty iffy numbers-wise for USC/UCLA (sub-50% at UCLA) & even if you get in, those options will be very expensive. So the question becomes: Do you think sticker or close at USC or UCLA is better than a full ride at Loyola? If so, is that option enough better to risk another year of waiting, the costs & hassles of applying, and the risk of losing your Loyola $ for a 50%ish shot at schools that themselves do not guarantee the biglaw outcome you desire?

Also to consider: kill it at Loyola for a year and transfer. Assess if your transfer options from Loyola are similar to or better than your shot with your new (marginally) better LSAT. If those odds are more or less the same, then you could save yourself a year of tuition & waiting by going the transfer route.

[Winston1984]

Can you defer & keep the $ at Loyola? I'm not an expert on this stuff but even with that small bump you're still pretty iffy numbers-wise for USC/UCLA (sub-50% at UCLA) & even if you get in, those options will be very expensive. So the question becomes: Do you think sticker or close at USC or UCLA is better than a full ride at Loyola? If so, is that option enough better to risk another year of waiting, the costs & hassles of applying, and the risk of losing your Loyola $ for a 50%ish shot at schools that themselves do not guarantee the biglaw outcome you desire?

Also to consider: kill it at Loyola for a year and transfer. Assess if your transfer options from Loyola are similar to or better than your shot with your new (marginally) better LSAT. If those odds are more or less the same, then you could save yourself a year of tuition & waiting by going the transfer route.

I disagree with this advice. Loyola is going to give you much more $ (probably a full ride or close to it) next year too. Just send a polite email stating you decided to take a year off to work and you will be reapplying in a few months. Going into law school with the intent to transfer is not good advice. OP could easily end up median. All of his classmates will be looking to do really well and transfer too.

[unnamable]

winston -- you're probably right -- as i said, i'm not an expert but i did look at mylsn and i'm not so convinced as others seem to be that op will get in w/ $ at usc or ucla. i know most schools take highest lsat because that's what they report, but in terms of assessing a candidate, i can't see how a slightly higher score that's within the expected score range of the first lsat is all that impressive. maybe i'm wrong, but i'm assuming op already applied to usc & ucla with the 164 and was rejected (or else could send the new score to try to get in off of a waitlist). i'm not convinced that admissions people will see the new score and automatically admit the op just because it no longer drags down their medians. the gpa is still low for both usc & ucla & the combination of both lsats shows a testing aptitude right around or slightly below average for those schools.

op: if you're going to apply again next year, i would think it's best to try to use the time to improve your application as much as possible. possibly take the lsats again to show the 164 as the low outlier, do volunteer work, etc. if you're going to take a whole year off and go through the expense & time of applying again, make sure you're a better candidate, not just a slightly older one with a marginally more impressive lsat.

[ndirish2010]

If you're going to reapply, you might as well retake again.

[hearsay77]

Definitely reapply. You'll likely get into at least one of USC & UCLA and may get decent money. I had almost your exact numbers and got $$ from both of them, and USC even upped my offer twice without me asking them to. Good luck!

[Tiago Splitter]

winston -- you're probably right -- as i said, i'm not an expert but i did look at mylsn and i'm not so convinced as others seem to be that op will get in w/ $ at usc or ucla. i know most schools take highest lsat because that's what they report, but in terms of assessing a candidate, i can't see how a slightly higher score that's within the expected score range of the first lsat is all that impressive. maybe i'm wrong, but i'm assuming op already applied to usc & ucla with the 164 and was rejected (or else could send the new score to try to get in off of a waitlist). i'm not convinced that admissions people will see the new score and automatically admit the op just because it no longer drags down their medians. the gpa is still low for both usc & ucla & the combination of both lsats shows a testing aptitude right around or slightly below average for those schools.

op: if you're going to apply again next year, i would think it's best to try to use the time to improve your application as much as possible. possibly take the lsats again to show the 164 as the low outlier, do volunteer work, etc. if you're going to take a whole year off and go through the expense & time of applying again, make sure you're a better candidate, not just a slightly older one with a marginally more impressive lsat.

I don't think you understand how this stuff works. 90% of law school admissions is GPA/LSAT. OP moved his LSAT from below median to at or above median at USC/UCLA. That's huge. Admissions people don't care about "aptitude" or any of that other crap, they just want to hit their median targets.

OP I would suggest one more retake to try and squeeze out a few more points. Every little bit helps.

[ghost5-0]

OP I would suggest one more retake to try and squeeze out a few more points. Every little bit helps.

Unfortunately this was test #3 so a re-take is out of the cards.