Cancellation vs. Low score - what's better and why? Forum

[Veyron]

You people are idiots, cancel. Many schools still average or at least take all scores into account.

What if you think you scored 160-165 but you practice in 167-170 and want a score around 170?

Still cancel? Or just take it and hope you got a few lucky guesses?

Yes, still cancel. You probably did worse than you think and besides, there is no school worth paying for at 160-165 absent an extremely high GPA and it is not a high enough score for a full ride to your state flagship.

Well I'm retaking either way.

The only reason I would like to have the score is even though I did bomb one section, I think I did fairly well on all the other sections.

Also I would like to see what score I got.

And does having a lower score HURT for schools that say they don't average or look at both?

If a school explicitly says that the look at the highest score, it won't hurt you except if you are virtually identical to some other candidate. However, most schools either average, look at all scores, or look at all scores but put more weight on the highest.

[tazmolover]

If a school explicitly says that the look at the highest score, it won't hurt you except if you are virtually identical to some other candidate. However, most schools either average, look at all scores, or look at all scores but put more weight on the highest.

The part I'm wondering about is the last part. It's true that most schools put more weight on the highest...but just how much does the lower score hurt?

I guess no one but adcomms can tell me this but I was seeing if anyone had any anecdotal evidence.

[BlueDiamond]

the part you highlighted basically answers the question you asked

Personally, I'm sending in the good old cancel slip.

[tazmolover]

"In general, Cornell Law’s policy is to take the higher score if it is at least 3 points higher than a prior score, but the Admissions Committee invites applicants to submit an addendum to their application explaining the different LSAT scores and why we should take the higher score."

Watch me be the unlucky fucker that is the exception to the "general" rule...where they look at my lower score instead.

[BlueDiamond]

Won't happen.. they report the highest.. as stated the only way you lose out is to someone who got the higher score on their first reported attempt

[CGI Fridays]

just how much does the lower score hurt?

My guess is that there's a positive correlation between a school's rank and how much your lower scores matter, with a lower threshold of "not at all" once a school is low enough in rank 'cause the adcomms are pressured into a pure numbers game.

[tazmolover]

just how much does the lower score hurt?

My guess is that there's a positive correlation between a school's rank and how much your lower scores matter, with a lower threshold of "not at all" once a school is low enough in rank 'cause the adcomms are pressured into a pure numbers game.

So I'm guessing it hurts for lower t14.

I'm seriously considering cancelling now.

[CGI Fridays]

So I'm guessing it hurts for lower t14.

I'm seriously considering cancelling now.

For lower T-14, IF it matters, I'm guessing will only impact your competitiveness against others with the same score as you, which Blue Diamond says is explicitly stated by Cornell (I can't verify this but I'll take his/her word)

[tazmolover]

So I'm guessing it hurts for lower t14.

I'm seriously considering cancelling now.

For lower T-14, IF it matters, I'm guessing will only impact yout competitiveness against others with the same score as you, which Blue Diamond says is explicitly stated by Cornell (I can't verify this but I'll take his/her word)

Ugh. I was hoping to score at median for Cornell.

I'm guessing this is bad news.

If Cornell medians are 168/3.7 and someone had a 163/168/3.7....bad chances?

[CGI Fridays]

Good, actually. http://cornell.lawschoolnumbers.com/sta ... Cycle=1011
GPA's clearing 3.7 with an LSAT of 168 were all admits, with one oddball ding. In your particular scenario, you won't be competing with your number peers; you'll all be getting in.

It's when there are admits AND waitlists among your peers that you have to worry.

[Disclaimer: I am pulling this out of my ass, oh and this year may be different]

[tazmolover]

Good, actually. http://cornell.lawschoolnumbers.com/sta ... Cycle=1011
GPA's clearing 3.7 with an LSAT of 168 were all admits, with one oddball ding. In your particular scenario, you won't be competing with your number peers; you'll all be getting in.

It's when there are admits AND waitlists among your peers that you have to worry.

[Disclaimer: I am pulling this out of my ass, oh and this year may be different]

well those were last year's cycle. medians went up.

[CGI Fridays]

Wow, TLS is still displaying 2008 info for 25th & 75th percentiles.

Also, the current medians are reflective of that cycle. That graph is only useless if they bump their numbers again.

[tazmolover]

Wow, TLS is still displaying 2008 info for 25th & 75th percentiles.

Also, the current medians are reflective of that cycle. That graph is only useless if they bump their numbers again.

Seems like the trend. Every year LSAT goes up a point =/

[CGI Fridays]

Seems like the trend. Every year LSAT goes up a point =/

? Really?

[CanadianWolf]

@Bruins101:
Based only on the information shared in your post above, consider cancelling this test & getting permission from one of your targeted law schools to sit for a fourth test in December or February.
Were you late in arriving at the test center, or were you seated by 8:30AM & didn't realize that you were in the wrong room until after the instructions were read ? Also, isn't the seating pre-assigned ?

[AreJay711]

Good, actually. http://cornell.lawschoolnumbers.com/sta ... Cycle=1011
GPA's clearing 3.7 with an LSAT of 168 were all admits, with one oddball ding. In your particular scenario, you won't be competing with your number peers; you'll all be getting in.

It's when there are admits AND waitlists among your peers that you have to worry.

[Disclaimer: I am pulling this out of my ass, oh and this year may be different]

well those were last year's cycle. medians went up.

How have medians went up when this admissions cycle hasn't started (Minus Duke and UVA)? And the medians went up last year but that doesn't mean that the will go up every year. That would mean in 5 years Cornell will have a median higher than Yale today. The jump last year is probably in part because of more graduates not having jobs and applying to law school and in part more people shooting for top 14 than in years where legal hiring is strong at lower ranked schools.

[hokie]

I am in the same situation, but am deciding to keep the score for several reasons (I am also retaking in December). Although it is highly likely that I did not do well (at least 170+ as I was expecting), you just never know. Yes, even though I had a few questions where I ran out of time and had to divert to guessing, I am still holding on to the possibility that God will bless me with a miracle. In addition, canceling would eliminate all possibilities of ED/EA which as a splitter, I am hoping for a small boost to schools like UVA/Georgetown. Just my two cents

[tazmolover]

Good, actually. http://cornell.lawschoolnumbers.com/sta ... Cycle=1011
GPA's clearing 3.7 with an LSAT of 168 were all admits, with one oddball ding. In your particular scenario, you won't be competing with your number peers; you'll all be getting in.

It's when there are admits AND waitlists among your peers that you have to worry.

[Disclaimer: I am pulling this out of my ass, oh and this year may be different]

well those were last year's cycle. medians went up.

How have medians went up when this admissions cycle hasn't started (Minus Duke and UVA)? And the medians went up last year but that doesn't mean that the will go up every year. That would mean in 5 years Cornell will have a median higher than Yale today. The jump last year is probably in part because of more graduates not having jobs and applying to law school and in part more people shooting for top 14 than in years where legal hiring is strong at lower ranked schools.

I'm pretty sure the latter part of your reasoning (worse economy+more people aiming for t14) still holds true today.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Good, actually. http://cornell.lawschoolnumbers.com/sta ... Cycle=1011
GPA's clearing 3.7 with an LSAT of 168 were all admits, with one oddball ding. In your particular scenario, you won't be competing with your number peers; you'll all be getting in.

It's when there are admits AND waitlists among your peers that you have to worry.

[Disclaimer: I am pulling this out of my ass, oh and this year may be different]

well those were last year's cycle. medians went up.

How have medians went up when this admissions cycle hasn't started (Minus Duke and UVA)? And the medians went up last year but that doesn't mean that the will go up every year. That would mean in 5 years Cornell will have a median higher than Yale today. The jump last year is probably in part because of more graduates not having jobs and applying to law school and in part more people shooting for top 14 than in years where legal hiring is strong at lower ranked schools.

Schools don't publish their new medians until they know what their class looks like (aka, after school has started). So schools have released their new numbers in the last few months for the incoming 2013 class.

Medians don't go up every year. They have gone up the last two years for a lot of schools though. While it's pretty common knowledge that applying is more competitive than it was 10 years ago and applying in 2000 was more competitive than in 1990, schools simply cannot maintain a point increase in LSAT median on a yearly basis. It will happen every so often though, especially based on the economy (i.e. Dot-com bubble bursting in early 2000's, our current situation).

With all that said--you guys will still likely be in a very competitive cycle for starting next fall.

[Bruins101]

.