IBThatGuy wrote:Not sure I agree. I know I didn't kick butt yesterday, but I'd really like to know how I did, so I was wondering how much letting it stick would hurt me. I read the TLS interviews (http://www.top-law-schools.com/interviews.html) and searched every interview for "multiple." Here's the summary of how I classify the answers.
Noncommittal BS answer: Boston U (claim high, but sounds dubious)
Take high score: Northwestern, Drexel, Santa Clara, Richmond, Berkeley
Take average or all: Minnesota, Fordham, Vanderbilt, Tulane, Arizona State, Loyola, Cornell, Chicago
I'm tempted to toss Berkeley's response, since it was actually Ken's statement, simply affirmed (and not offered) by the interviewee (no blame pointed at Ken there).
So, of those 13, we've got one potential high-score-taker, four seemingly legitimate high-score-takers, and eight that average or claim to look at (as opposed to ssee) all of the scores. I'm not counting Berkeley for the reason mentioned. With Berkeley and Boston being outliers, it looks like the interest in all scores tends to go up with USNWR ranking. Northwestern would be an anomaly there, but not an outlier by my thinking. I saw another post earlier commenting that Harvard, Yale, and Stanford take averages, corroborating my analysis, which is, admittedly, based on a small sample. I trust the OP's girlfriend wasn't applying to HYS, though.
As far as advice goes, she should probably cool out a little before taking another test. If she doesn't have a consistent score in her practices, she definitely shouldn't take the real thing - and might not be well-advised to either way. She might consider waiting until that 145 expires (five years, I think). If I could pick any two of those scores, I'd like to have the 145 and the 171, since the 171 makes the 145 really look like it can be discounted, where the 163 is the score of someone who could at least end up in the same program as someone with a 171, and therefore closer to predictive. Having all three, though, could make her look more erratic, unpredictable, and even flaky than she probably is.
To be honest, I feel that taking adcomms at their word is probably not the best bet. They have an incentive to lie and say that "we look at admissions holistically" and "we don't have a cutoff" when those are pretty much blatant lies. Things like LSN are probably going to shed more light on the matter than the word of an adcomm.