flexityflex86 wrote:According to LSN, a 159 might put you in the running at some t-14.
I disagree about retaking. You're an AA male.
Studying for the LSAT sucks for everyone. Who actually enjoyed it? Nobody likes studying in general. I think the point they're making is you should suck it up, but I think a 159 might be enough for some great schools.
that such a sentiment is coming from you.
OP, never settle. If you think you can do better, then study and retake. A 3-4 point increase will do wonders for your cycle, not only in terms of potential schools but also potential scholly money. A 159 may be enough but why be just enough if you think you can do better? If anything, you should go into the test center knowing that you're already in a good position diminishing any possible anxiety that may adversely affect your performance.
what i was saying is that most AA know particularly after speaking to somebody for consultation that a 159 will likely be enough for some top 10s, and my logic was if they can't use that as motivation to go from a 149 (cooley) to a 159 (upenn) then they should not be attending law school, and will likely make horrible lawyers if it is a lack of work ethic rather than just difficulty with the exam. let's just look at Jose Baez for instance - likely did terrible on the LSAT to go to St. Thomas where he had a ton of student loans from rather than UF, Stetson, UMiami, etc., but if you researched the case it was obvious that regardless of what you think about his trial skills, he worked his ass off.
I know you can argue that OP not retaking a 159 can show a lack of work ethic, but bypassing a retake on a 159 to try to get a 165 would be like a non-URM applicant bypassing a retake on a 170 to try to get a 175 out of fear of dropping/too much work for not a great return, etc. A retake might be TCR, but you can certainly see a counter argument, which you cannot see for a non-URM not retaking a 155 or a URM not retaking a 145, etc.
My point is bypassing a retake when objectively the current score has been shown time and time again to be enough is not irresponsible. It is when people assume they will be the great exception to the rule, because they were president of their frat or interned at some little piece of crap law firm that is redunkulous.