Top Law Schools

So, here is my situation:

3.91 GPA (top 5% of class at top 20 university)

LSAT: Taken three times

Oct 2011: Cancel
Dec 2011: ~170
June 2012: 174

I am sure the fact that I have taken it three times is going to hurt me. Also, I have taken many classes P/F at my school, which supposedly hurts your chances at a lot of schools. I have a solid resume, but am pretty young so do not have a lot of work experience.

I'm a Caucasian male. Btw, I know about lawschoolnumbers.com. The top schools appear to be interested in a lot of other stuff outside of your numbers. I just want to hear some thoughts by people about what is critical for applying to these schools and what my chances are looking like. Thanks much!

I have virtually the same stats as you with a negligibly higher GPA. Here is the thread I was in (http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 9&t=188267).

From what I understand you should probably be solid at CCN and down. You have a 50/50 chance at HYS, respectively. You are looking at money, possibly, at schools CCN on down as well.

Work on crafting a shiny essay and getting some good letters of recommendation.

possible money at CCNPVMBDCG, should get mostly acceptances in that group. H is possible, YS are reaches.

UtilityMonster wrote:So, here is my situation:

3.91 GPA (top 5% of class at top 20 university)

LSAT: Taken three times

Oct 2011: Cancel
Dec 2011: ~170
June 2012: 174

I am sure the fact that I have taken it three times is going to hurt me. Also, I have taken many classes P/F at my school, which supposedly hurts your chances at a lot of schools. I have a solid resume, but am pretty young so do not have a lot of work experience.

I'm a Caucasian male. Btw, I know about lawschoolnumbers.com. The top schools appear to be interested in a lot of other stuff outside of your numbers. I just want to hear some thoughts by people about what is critical for applying to these schools and what my chances are looking like. Thanks much!

congratulations on your terrific score! now i will tell you what is critical for a successful application cycle

logon to lsac.org and start applications at the following schools:
Harvard
Yale
Stanford
Columbia
Chicago
NYU
Virginia
Michigan
Duke
Georgetown
Northwestern
Cornell
Berkeley
Penn

once you've done that, complete your applications and submit them.

you're also going to want to submit your undergrad transcript to LSAC, and 2-3 letters of recommendation, if you haven't already.

fatduck wrote:

UtilityMonster wrote:So, here is my situation:

3.91 GPA (top 5% of class at top 20 university)

LSAT: Taken three times

Oct 2011: Cancel
Dec 2011: ~170
June 2012: 174

I am sure the fact that I have taken it three times is going to hurt me. Also, I have taken many classes P/F at my school, which supposedly hurts your chances at a lot of schools. I have a solid resume, but am pretty young so do not have a lot of work experience.

I'm a Caucasian male. Btw, I know about lawschoolnumbers.com. The top schools appear to be interested in a lot of other stuff outside of your numbers. I just want to hear some thoughts by people about what is critical for applying to these schools and what my chances are looking like. Thanks much!

congratulations on your terrific score! now i will tell you what is critical for a successful application cycle

logon to lsac.org and start applications at the following schools:
Harvard
Yale
Stanford
Columbia
Chicago
NYU
Virginia
Michigan
Duke
Georgetown
Northwestern
Cornell
Berkeley
Penn

once you've done that, complete your applications and submit them.

you're also going to want to submit your undergrad transcript to LSAC, and 2-3 letters of recommendation, if you haven't already.

Ahahaha, pretty much. Best of luck OP and grats on your score!

Bump

Anyone have general comments on how bad taking the LSAT three times hurts you at T6? Does it help that I only have two scores rather than three? Any schools more lenient about this than others, especially considering the fact that I had a 5 point improvement?

UtilityMonster wrote:Bump

Anyone have general comments on how bad a retake hurts you at T6? Any schools more lenient than others, especially considering the fact that I had a 5 point improvement?

it doesnt...at all.

You have a 174, period. Congrats and welcome to at least one of HYS.

UtilityMonster wrote:Bump

Anyone have general comments on how bad taking the LSAT three times hurts you at T6? Does it help that I only have two scores rather than three? Any schools more lenient about this than others, especially considering the fact that I had a 5 point improvement?

In an interview that the Dean of Admissions at Chicago gave, she said she would want an addendum explaining a significant jump. However, I don't know if that pertains from a 168-174 or if she was referring to larger jumps.

a 5 pt jump isnt significant..i mean its barely outside the score band anyway...no addendum is necessary

thederangedwang wrote:a 5 pt jump isnt significant..i mean its barely outside the score band anyway...no addendum is necessary

Doesn't a bigger jump make it more likely that they will ignore a lower score? I think I read that Columbia averages scores if they are within three points of one another (i.e. the score band)?

UtilityMonster wrote:

thederangedwang wrote:a 5 pt jump isnt significant..i mean its barely outside the score band anyway...no addendum is necessary

Doesn't a bigger jump make it more likely that they will ignore a lower score? I think I read that Columbia averages scores if they are within three points of one another (i.e. the score band)?

dude, dont worry. for all intents and purposes you have a 174. Schools on their website will say some things like "we look at all scores" but in reality, they take the highest scores. You will have a great cycle.

UtilityMonster wrote: Dec 2011: ~170

Do you not know exactly what you got? Just curious why you would list your exact recent score but not the previous one. I'm assuming this means you got a 168 or 169. In any case, with a 174 (regardless of retakes) and 3.91 I think you have good chances at HYS and are a lock for T6 (probably with money).

fatduck wrote:

UtilityMonster wrote:So, here is my situation:

3.91 GPA (top 5% of class at top 20 university)

LSAT: Taken three times

Oct 2011: Cancel
Dec 2011: ~170
June 2012: 174

I am sure the fact that I have taken it three times is going to hurt me. Also, I have taken many classes P/F at my school, which supposedly hurts your chances at a lot of schools. I have a solid resume, but am pretty young so do not have a lot of work experience.

I'm a Caucasian male. Btw, I know about lawschoolnumbers.com. The top schools appear to be interested in a lot of other stuff outside of your numbers. I just want to hear some thoughts by people about what is critical for applying to these schools and what my chances are looking like. Thanks much!

congratulations on your terrific score! now i will tell you what is critical for a successful application cycle

logon to lsac.org and start applications at the following schools:
Harvard
Yale
Stanford
Columbia
Chicago
NYU
Virginia
Michigan
Duke
Georgetown
Northwestern
Cornell
Berkeley
Penn

once you've done that, complete your applications and submit them.

you're also going to want to submit your undergrad transcript to LSAC, and 2-3 letters of recommendation, if you haven't already.

Considering OP is autoadmit to at least one T6, is it really necessary that he apply to lower T14 like GULC and Cornell? Would think MVP would provide more scholarship leverage anyway.

I'm sort of confused. I have similiar, but barely higher, stats than the OP. However, people were much more sanguine about my chances at Harvard than for this OP. Is there really a difference between a 3.99/174 and a cancel/169/174-3.91? I would have told OP he was a slam dunk at Harvard.

bernaldiaz wrote:I'm sort of confused. I have similiar, but barely higher, stats than the OP. However, people were much more sanguine about my chances at Harvard than for this OP. Is there really a difference between a 3.99/174 and a cancel/169/174-3.91? I would have told OP he was a slam dunk at Harvard.

I agree. OP has an excellent shot at Harvard. I think the difference is that your GPA is well above median, while his is right around it, though still above. Still 80% shot, unless "not a lot of work experience" means "K-JD", which may lower chances some.

http://myLSN.info/dispresults.php?usege ... d=Included

bernaldiaz wrote:I'm sort of confused. I have similiar, but barely higher, stats than the OP. However, people were much more sanguine about my chances at Harvard than for this OP. Is there really a difference between a 3.99/174 and a cancel/169/174-3.91? I would have told OP he was a slam dunk at Harvard.

The difference between a 3.91 and a 3.99 for applicants to Harvard is huge. At most schools, however, it probably wouldn't make a huge difference. Out of curiosity, did your school have A+'s, or did you just get a single A-?

Two of my primary gripes about the whole law school application process are how little they weight the prestige/difficulty of the undergrad school and how they do not equate A+'s with A's at schools that don't have A+'s.

You're median/above median (except arguably youre in a better spot than me since lsat is more important than gpa for harvard).

Much like me except in reverse. I was also K-JD with no work exp. Apply early and I'll see you up at Cambridge

UtilityMonster wrote:

bernaldiaz wrote:I'm sort of confused. I have similiar, but barely higher, stats than the OP. However, people were much more sanguine about my chances at Harvard than for this OP. Is there really a difference between a 3.99/174 and a cancel/169/174-3.91? I would have told OP he was a slam dunk at Harvard.

The difference between a 3.91 and a 3.99 for applicants to Harvard is huge. At most schools, however, it probably wouldn't make a huge difference. Out of curiosity, did your school have A+'s, or did you just get a single A-?

Two of my primary gripes about the whole law school application process are how little they weight the prestige/difficulty of the undergrad school and how they do not equate A+'s with A's at schools that don't have A+'s.

Yeah, I had no A+s (maybe we go to the same T20?), just a single A- freshman year. The A+ thing really is absurd. WRT your second point, people have said it matters a little bit at the top (like just HY) schools. Look at our numbers on myLSN.info and notice the 10% of people who got waitlisted. Who is to say that those aren't people from really poor undergrads? Obviously this is wishful thinking, but it's a possiblity.

bernaldiaz wrote:

UtilityMonster wrote:

bernaldiaz wrote:I'm sort of confused. I have similiar, but barely higher, stats than the OP. However, people were much more sanguine about my chances at Harvard than for this OP. Is there really a difference between a 3.99/174 and a cancel/169/174-3.91? I would have told OP he was a slam dunk at Harvard.

The difference between a 3.91 and a 3.99 for applicants to Harvard is huge. At most schools, however, it probably wouldn't make a huge difference. Out of curiosity, did your school have A+'s, or did you just get a single A-?

Two of my primary gripes about the whole law school application process are how little they weight the prestige/difficulty of the undergrad school and how they do not equate A+'s with A's at schools that don't have A+'s.

Yeah, I had no A+s (maybe we go to the same T20?), just a single A- freshman year. The A+ thing really is absurd. WRT your second point, people have said it matters a little bit at the top (like just HY) schools. Look at our numbers on myLSN.info and notice the 10% of people who got waitlisted. Who is to say that those aren't people from really poor undergrads? Obviously this is wishful thinking, but it's a possiblity.

The whole "should a better UG give you an admissions boost" debate has gone back and forth on TLS for years. I say that the average GPA at my public school was lower so our grades were less inflated, you say that's just because we had shittier students, no one wins.

The fact is your prestigious UG did help you -- it offered you better internship options while you were student, gave you a better chance to get an interesting job once you graduated and connected you to people who will be, on average, more successful than my classmates. It's also apparent that HYPS students get a noticeable boost at HYS, and lower ivies and such probably get a marginal advantage. So it's not like your T20 degree is useless.

Personally, I'm glad that how much I studied when I was 16 doesn't have a substantial effect on my admissions chances now that I'm 23.

UtilityMonster wrote:Bump

Anyone have general comments on how bad taking the LSAT three times hurts you at T6? Does it help that I only have two scores rather than three? Any schools more lenient about this than others, especially considering the fact that I had a 5 point improvement?

I got money at NYU, which is supposedly the only non-HYS that cares about multiple scores.

Multiple LSAT scores:

1) I suppose 5 point increase would not pose a problem.

An acquaintance of mine was accepted to Columbia with superior (highest GPA category for internationals) and 171. She took LSAT four times (somehow obtained permission) over three years. Her first score was 160 or 161. No scholarship.

2) If the increase is more than 10 points, it is a different story.

Another friend of mine had 3.6 from Ivy and 157->163->170. She ED'ed to Georgetown but was rejected. She was basically rejected from all T-14 schools she applied and waitlisted at T-15-35 schools. She applied early in Oct, had a master's degree from another top school, etc etc. She now attends one of the T25-30 schools.

Your 4 point increase on the LSAT will help considerably among the Top 6 law schools for which you are above that school's median LSAT score. Having retaken the test should not negatively affect your chances as many posters are sceptical of claims by NYU & Harvard that they still average LSAT scores.

Yale & Stanford are small law schools at which high numbers just qualify one for further review, while high numbers (relative to any particular school's medians) seem to be sufficient for admission to all other law schools.

Yukos wrote:

bernaldiaz wrote:

UtilityMonster wrote:

bernaldiaz wrote:I'm sort of confused. I have similiar, but barely higher, stats than the OP. However, people were much more sanguine about my chances at Harvard than for this OP. Is there really a difference between a 3.99/174 and a cancel/169/174-3.91? I would have told OP he was a slam dunk at Harvard.

The difference between a 3.91 and a 3.99 for applicants to Harvard is huge. At most schools, however, it probably wouldn't make a huge difference. Out of curiosity, did your school have A+'s, or did you just get a single A-?

Two of my primary gripes about the whole law school application process are how little they weight the prestige/difficulty of the undergrad school and how they do not equate A+'s with A's at schools that don't have A+'s.

Yeah, I had no A+s (maybe we go to the same T20?), just a single A- freshman year. The A+ thing really is absurd. WRT your second point, people have said it matters a little bit at the top (like just HY) schools. Look at our numbers on myLSN.info and notice the 10% of people who got waitlisted. Who is to say that those aren't people from really poor undergrads? Obviously this is wishful thinking, but it's a possiblity.

The whole "should a better UG give you an admissions boost" debate has gone back and forth on TLS for years. I say that the average GPA at my public school was lower so our grades were less inflated, you say that's just because we had shittier students, no one wins.

The fact is your prestigious UG did help you -- it offered you better internship options while you were student, gave you a better chance to get an interesting job once you graduated and connected you to people who will be, on average, more successful than my classmates. It's also apparent that HYPS students get a noticeable boost at HYS, and lower ivies and such probably get a marginal advantage. So it's not like your T20 degree is useless.

Personally, I'm glad that how much I studied when I was 16 doesn't have a substantial effect on my admissions chances now that I'm 23.

Well said. However, I think the main argument is that a lot of much lower ranked schools are just easier. I don't think it can truly be argued that getting a near 4.0 at local state U required the same effort and aptitude as being top 1% at my T20. I took a few summer classes at a state school and it was a joke. Somehow GPAs came up, and like more than half the class had 3.9+ too. Not to sound like an elitist, but they were objectively not as smart as the kids at my school. Also, just listening to my friends around the country at joke schools telling me about the amount of work people put in, seeing some of their assignments and such, I am certain that it is no where nearly as rigorous as my school. I'm not saying there is a better solution, but I can see why the OP is frustrated that a 4.0 at local state U is better than his 3.91. I guess the LSAT is the great equalizer.

Also, sorry for rehashing this tired debate.

^My state school 3.94 and oodles of $$$ saved laughs at your bitter, preftige-obsessed ass.

bernaldiaz wrote:Well said. However, I think the main argument is that a lot of much lower ranked schools are just easier. I don't think it can truly be argued that getting a near 4.0 at local state U required the same effort and aptitude as being top 1% at my T20. I took a few summer classes at a state school and it was a joke. Somehow GPAs came up, and like more than half the class had 3.9+ too. Not to sound like an elitist, but they were objectively not as smart as the kids at my school. Also, just listening to my friends around the country at joke schools telling me about the amount of work people put in, seeing some of their assignments and such, I am certain that it is no where nearly as rigorous as my school. I'm not saying there is a better solution, but I can see why the OP is frustrated that a 4.0 at local state U is better than his 3.91. I guess the LSAT is the great equalizer.

Also, sorry for rehashing this tired debate.

Not to sound like an asshole, but you seem like a douche. I hope you get in a car wreck.