3.7, 170 PLSAT

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
MikeNorec
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 7:14 pm

3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby MikeNorec » Sat May 01, 2010 7:18 pm

x
Last edited by MikeNorec on Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Unemployed
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:35 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby Unemployed » Sat May 01, 2010 7:24 pm

MikeNorec wrote:I'm only a junior in college - but I am not really shooting for ''Ivy'' law. My GPA is kind of low, but do you think I have a good shot at Emory,NYU, or even Michigan?


If you get a 170+ on the real LSAT, sure.

NYU and Michigan are on par with or better than several Ivies :lol:

jetlagz28
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:56 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby jetlagz28 » Sat May 01, 2010 7:25 pm

Its all about the real LSAT scores.

MikeNorec
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 7:14 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby MikeNorec » Sat May 01, 2010 7:35 pm

I'm just frustrated because I do not know where I want to apply. I should of made a 176 on the 07 practice test I took... I have no problem with logical / comprehension tests. My GPA is very low though compared to most of my friends here at Georgia State.. I am also a URM. What schools would you guarantee acceptance if I land 172-176? I finished the practice for the first time (under a time limit) and had time to spare in between each section. I know I have not taken the real LSAT yet - but most of my friends and me are confident I will land nothing short of 170.

User avatar
pleasetryagain
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:04 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby pleasetryagain » Sat May 01, 2010 8:07 pm

MikeNorec wrote:I'm just frustrated because I do not know where I want to apply. I should of made a 176 on the 07 practice test I took... I have no problem with logical / comprehension tests. My GPA is very low though compared to most of my friends here at Georgia State.. I am also a URM. What schools would you guarantee acceptance if I land 172-176? I finished the practice for the first time (under a time limit) and had time to spare in between each section. I know I have not taken the real LSAT yet - but most of my friends and me are confident I will land nothing short of 170.


cool.. looks like youll have plenty of time to spend working on basic grammar.

khanvalescent
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:05 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby khanvalescent » Mon May 03, 2010 2:13 pm

pleasetryagain wrote:cool.. looks like youll have plenty of time to spend working on basic grammar.


You first.

User avatar
pleasetryagain
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:04 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby pleasetryagain » Mon May 03, 2010 3:18 pm

khanvalescent wrote:
pleasetryagain wrote:cool.. looks like youll have plenty of time to spend working on basic grammar.


You first.


Excusez-moi?

User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Mon May 03, 2010 7:42 pm

If you get a 170
NYU: Waitlist
Michigan: Accept
Emory: Accept

A 3.7 isn't low at all and with a 170.. that really helps you at a lot of places.
I think you'd get in anywhere you apply except Harvard/Yale/Stanford/Columbia/NYU/Chicago.

pattymac
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 7:44 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby pattymac » Mon May 03, 2010 7:48 pm

^ He's got URM status. Anything above 170 would probably lock up HYS.

User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Mon May 03, 2010 8:12 pm

pattymac wrote:^ He's got URM status. Anything above 170 would probably lock up HYS.


Oh wow.. that changes things. Definitely in CCN for sure.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby r6_philly » Tue May 04, 2010 10:22 pm

pleasetryagain wrote:
khanvalescent wrote:
pleasetryagain wrote:cool.. looks like youll have plenty of time to spend working on basic grammar.


You first.


Excusez-moi?


It's generally prudent to proof read one's critique of someone else's grammar. :lol: Ya I hate when that happens.

User avatar
KibblesAndVick
Posts: 541
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:29 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby KibblesAndVick » Tue May 04, 2010 10:29 pm

Flames should be funny. Please try harder.

User avatar
pleasetryagain
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:04 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby pleasetryagain » Tue May 04, 2010 11:00 pm

r6_philly wrote:
pleasetryagain wrote:
khanvalescent wrote:
pleasetryagain wrote:cool.. looks like youll have plenty of time to spend working on basic grammar.


You first.


Excusez-moi?


It's generally prudent to proof read one's critique of someone else's grammar. :lol: Ya I hate when that happens.


lol.. you dont think I saw the little red line firefox puts under misspelled words/missing punctuation? you think I didnt intentionally choose to not correct my typo for lack of caring? I was referring not to the technical precision of OPs post, as this is an internet message board, but to his use of "should of" instead of "should have."

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby stratocophic » Tue May 04, 2010 11:13 pm

--ImageRemoved--
C'mon. That one was just begging for it. It's taylor-made for the movie generator thing, too.

User avatar
pleasetryagain
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:04 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby pleasetryagain » Tue May 04, 2010 11:24 pm

stratocophic wrote:--ImageRemoved--
C'mon. That one was just begging for it. It's taylor-made for the movie generator thing, too.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby stratocophic » Tue May 04, 2010 11:33 pm

pleasetryagain wrote:
stratocophic wrote:--ImageRemoved--
C'mon. That one was just begging for it. It's taylor-made for the movie generator thing, too.



:lol: :lol: :lol:
I think recent flames (the Yale should-i-as-a-consultant guy, jumpjump, etc.) are having a subtle effect on TLSers' language mechanics (Pictured below: language mechanic)
Image

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby r6_philly » Wed May 05, 2010 1:32 am

pleasetryagain wrote:lol.. you dont think I saw the little red line firefox puts under misspelled words/missing punctuation? you think I didnt intentionally choose to not correct my typo for lack of caring? I was referring not to the technical precision of OPs post, as this is an internet message board, but to his use of "should of" instead of "should have."


I have no intention of arguing with you, I was commenting on the comment that commented on you. I am a bit perplexed however that you do not care enough to fix a punctuation but you care enough to point out someone miss used a word.

>80% of the world doesn't use firefox btw, so there is no reason to presume that you do.

But ok I get what you are saying. (I still don't get it though, what's the point of omitting apostrophes? Is it cool or something because you keep doing it)

User avatar
pleasetryagain
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:04 am

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby pleasetryagain » Wed May 05, 2010 7:36 am

r6_philly wrote:
pleasetryagain wrote:lol.. you dont think I saw the little red line firefox puts under misspelled words/missing punctuation? you think I didnt intentionally choose to not correct my typo for lack of caring? I was referring not to the technical precision of OPs post, as this is an internet message board, but to his use of "should of" instead of "should have."


I have no intention of arguing with you, I was commenting on the comment that commented on you. I am a bit perplexed however that you do not care enough to fix a punctuation but you care enough to point out someone miss used a word.

>80% of the world doesn't use firefox btw, so there is no reason to presume that you do.

But ok I get what you are saying. (I still don't get it though, what's the point of omitting apostrophes? Is it cool or something because you keep doing it)


to be honest, I dont know. its something I only do online. at least Im consistent :wink:

BenJ
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby BenJ » Wed May 05, 2010 10:43 pm

If you're actually a URM (AfrAm, NatAm, PR or MexAm), then a 170/3.7 should get you into at least one of Columbia, NYU and Chicago, possibly one of Harvard, Yale and Stanford. (URM cycles are hard to predict.) Emory shouldn't even be in consideration, and Michigan would be safe-ish, although you'd want to apply to some lower T14s as well.

Also, "Ivy" really doesn't matter. Yale is the best law school, with Harvard for number two, but Stanford is unequivocably better than Columbia, Columbia is really the same as non-Ivy NYU and Chicago, Penn is definitely below NYU and Chicago and on par with more non-Ivies (Berkeley, Michigan and Virginia), and Cornell is below all of the above and also below non-Ivy Duke and Northwestern.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby CanadianWolf » Wed May 05, 2010 10:51 pm

I am a bit surprised that a 3.7 GPA is considered "kinda low" at Emory. A low GPA from Emory & a practice 170 or higher LSAT from practice tests, plus three dollars will get you a cup of Starbuck's coffee.

User avatar
ozarkhack
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 2:48 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby ozarkhack » Wed May 05, 2010 11:00 pm

r6_philly wrote: someone miss used a word.


It's spreading Quick, mods: Lock thread before were all infected.

Tautology
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:40 pm

Re: 3.7, 170 PLSAT

Postby Tautology » Wed May 05, 2010 11:01 pm

ozarkhack wrote:
r6_philly wrote: someone miss used a word.


It's spreading Quick, mods: Lock thread before were all infected.


I see what you did there.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests