What went wrong?

[rosewood]

167 LSAT (once)
3.85 LSAC GPA at time of applying
Don't see why any of the LORs would be bad
Very good undergrad school (top 10, but transferred junior year from a not so great school)
Quite involved at school(s)
Prelaw dean said personal statement is excellent
Straight out of undergrad
No work experience b/c working for parents in the family biz, but wrote an addendum about that
Interesting academic background (skipping grades, transferring from a bad school to a great one, etc)
Applied early December

Applied to most of T14 + UCLA. I knew I had no chance at the top 5 but it looks worse right now - I've been rejected/waitlisted at the majority of the schools and haven't received an acceptance yet, and I don't think I'm getting in anywhere at this point in the cycle when all acceptances were probably sent out already. I am mostly freaking out because of the UCLA wait list and Michigan rejection. What do you think went wrong? Should I just reapply next cycle if it's an LSAT thing? How do you think age affects this? I'm two or three years younger than people my year because I skipped grades (but seriously? I skipped first and third grade).

[dr123]

weak softs and not a high enough lsat?

[dakatz]

What went wrong was your expectations. Your numbers make your target range the 15-25 schools, not 15 and up. Your target schools are ones like Vanderbilt, GW, BU, Notre Dame, etc. Sure, applying to T14 schools was a good idea since you need some reach schools thrown in. But applying to all reach schools is never a good idea. And you didn't apply to a single safety.

[rosewood]

Thanks for your inputs!
Do you think I should study for and retake the LSAT& reapply, then?

[Patriot1208]

What went wrong was your expectations. Your numbers make your target range the 15-25 schools, not 15 and up.

This, few people with your numbers and softs will break the top 15. An LSAT retake that gets you 170+ will open up those schools you want.

[dakatz]

Thanks for your inputs!
Do you think I should study for and retake the LSAT& reapply, then?

If you are deadset on a T14 school, then yes. But you would get some solid scholarship awards from schools in the 15-20 range. I wouldn't overlook those too quickly. But like I said, if you are T14 or bust, then its really important to hit that 170 marker.

[OGR3]

According to LSP, you were a 50% shot at Michigan.

You might get into Cornell and maybe one or two more. If that's not what you'e looking for, retake and apply very early next cycle.

I agree with the above poster though, you should have applied to some T25 schools...

[rosewood]

I see. Guess it's time to start cracking those books again (I did not apply to 15-20 range schools).

I've been waitlisted at UPenn and Columbia (reserve, as they call it), though. I thought it meant I'd probably get into UCLA...suppose I was being way enthusiastic.

[d34d9823]

What went wrong was your expectations. Your numbers make your target range the 15-25 schools, not 15 and up. Your target schools are ones like Vanderbilt, GW, BU, Notre Dame, etc. Sure, applying to T14 schools was a good idea since you need some reach schools thrown in. But applying to all reach schools is never a good idea. And you didn't apply to a single safety.

LSP has him as a consider from Berkeley on down. I can see not getting most of them, but not getting any sucks.

[Patriot1208]

According to LSP, you were a 50% shot at Michigan.

You might get into Cornell and maybe one or two more. If that's not what you'e looking for, retake and apply very early next cycle.

I agree with the above poster though, you should have applied to some T25 schools...

If you look at LSN, almost no one got in with an LSAT below 168 last year. LSP is very unreliable IMHO. I would say cornell is a possibility though, but probably the only one.

[d34d9823]

LSP is very unreliable IMHO.

This is definitely a possibility. It's too much work too look up LSN for every school, though

[d34d9823]

LSP is very unreliable IMHO.

This is definitely a possibility. It's too much work too look up LSN for every school, though

OK, yeah, LSN says every school above Cornell is a reach. He should get Cornell though.

[rosewood]

LSP has him as a consider from Berkeley on down. I can see not getting most of them, but not getting any sucks.

Exactly...I thought I'd get into few of the "consider"s given my undergrad school. Not getting any does suck a lot...

I would say cornell is a possibility though, but probably the only one.

hourumd.com had me down as 98% chance for both Cornell and UCLA, and I was waitlisted at UCLA. Thus, I am freaking out.

[Patriot1208]

LSP has him as a consider from Berkeley on down. I can see not getting most of them, but not getting any sucks.

Exactly...I thought I'd get into few of the "consider"s given my undergrad school. Not getting any does suck a lot...

I would say cornell is a possibility though, but probably the only one.

hourumd.com had me down as 98% chance for both Cornell and UCLA, and I was waitlisted at UCLA. Thus, I am freaking out.

Seriously, I think hourumd and LSP are useless. LSN gives you a far better understanding of the nuances of admissions. Some schools have gpa floors or LSAT floors. For instance, your GPA is at or above median for just about every top14 school. Which is why LSP and hourumd gave you good chances. But, your LSAT is below median and below most schools "soft" floor for the LSAT. And, LSAT matters much more in admissions.

[rosewood]

Thanks guys, this is really helpful. I only started reading around here after I applied...sigh.

Does it look bad if I reapply to a school I was denied at/eventually denied at?

[d34d9823]

Seriously, I think hourumd and LSP are useless. LSN gives you a far better understanding of the nuances of admissions. Some schools have gpa floors or LSAT floors. For instance, your GPA is at or above median for just about every top14 school. Which is why LSP and hourumd gave you good chances. But, your LSAT is below median and below most schools "soft" floor for the LSAT. And, LSAT matters much more in admissions.

hourumd claims to just be a statistical representation of LSN. LSP is a linear fit, which is pretty obviously flawed.

[d34d9823]

Thanks guys, this is really helpful. I only started reading around here after I applied...sigh.

Does it look bad if I reapply to a school I was denied at/eventually denied at?

You mean next cycle?

[Patriot1208]

Thanks guys, this is really helpful. I only started reading around here after I applied...sigh.

Does it look bad if I reapply to a school I was denied at/eventually denied at?

No, it doesn't look bad. Study your ass off for the June LSAT, retake, get higher score, and profit.

[dakatz]

LSP is very unreliable IMHO.

This is definitely a possibility. It's too much work too look up LSN for every school, though

LSP paints an unrealistically rosy picture because its based on LSN. And LSN is a site that is skewed due to the number of high achieving students who post. You really think most people who get rejected take the time to post that info online on LSN? I had a number of "considers", maybe 8 or so. I applied to all 8 and got into 0 (yet got into a school that LSN told me was a reject. Go figure). But moral of the story is that LSP should only be a rough guide.

[Patriot1208]

LSP is very unreliable IMHO.

This is definitely a possibility. It's too much work too look up LSN for every school, though

LSP paints an unrealistically rosy picture because its based on LSN. And LSN is a site that is skewed due to the number of high achieving students who post. You really think most people who get rejected take the time to post that info online on LSN? I had a number of "considers", maybe 8 or so. I applied to all 8 and got into 0 (yet got into a school that LSN told me was a reject. Go figure). But moral of the story is that LSP should only be a rough guide.

No, it's not. And no, that isn't why. LSN is much more negatively skewed than LSP.

[d34d9823]

LSP is very unreliable IMHO.

This is definitely a possibility. It's too much work too look up LSN for every school, though

LSP paints an unrealistically rosy picture because its based on LSN. And LSN is a site that is skewed due to the number of high achieving students who post. You really think most people who get rejected take the time to post that info online on LSN? I had a number of "considers", maybe 8 or so. I applied to all 8 and got into 0 (yet got into a school that LSN told me was a reject. Go figure). But moral of the story is that LSP should only be a rough guide.

I would have guessed the LSN demographic was "neurotic internet browsers". I think the real high achieving students are busy working on their impressive activities.

Also, SF has exceeded their LSN projections this year, so take that for what it's worth.

[d34d9823]

No, it's not. And no, that isn't why. LSN is much more negatively skewed than LSP.

I think it depends on where you are in the graph. For splitters I definitely agree. LSP is supposed to be statistically fit off of the LSN data, though, so you would hope it would be accurate in the crowded center.

[Cupidity]

I had a 166 3.89 and didn't break t-14 your expectations were too high.

[rosewood]

I had a 166 3.89 and didn't break t-14 your expectations were too high.

Yes, now I know that.

I do mean the next cycle. I was planning on taking the October test, though, since June is so close. Is this a bad idea? :/

[d34d9823]

I had a 166 3.89 and didn't break t-14 your expectations were too high.

Yes, now I know that.

I do mean the next cycle. I was planning on taking the October test, though, since June is so close. Is this a bad idea? :/

Timing of June will help a little, but if you have everything ready and can submit as soon as you get your score, October will be fine.

Alternately, you could do June, see what you get, and take a third time in October if you're still unhappy.