Top Law Schools

Hey everyone. I'd really appreciate some help here. I've been awarded a full tuition scholarship at MSU for the part time program with a 2.5 GPA stip. its good for up to 7 years or 88 credits plus it will cover the cost of tuition for study abroad if I choose to participate in it. The economy is awful and so is their ranking in comparison to Colorado so I'm confused. I would have to pay sticker at CU (so far no $ yet, but that could change I hope), but I'm not sure if the difference in rankings constitutes paying that. I want a great job when i graduate and i think CU may provide that moreso than MSU. Also, since MSU is part time and CU is full time im concerned about that as well. Suggestions? Comments? Anything is appreciated. Thanks

CU is Colorado and MSU is Michigan State, right?

Where are you from?

They both sound like whack options....

However, DON'T PAY FULL-PRICE AT ANY LAW SCHOOL UNLESS IT IS YALE/HARVARD and even then I would proceed with caution.

You need to understand that rankings don't mean much. Colorado might be high rank, but they will mostly recruit for jobs in DENVER. Additionally, MSU will recruit Detroit and have tangential opportunities in Chicago (very, very, very small).

HOWEVER, regardless of where you go, if you aren't top 30%, you will have FEW options. Your class rank will be the most important in terms of you finding jobs, whether it is Colorado or MSU. You also have to know that firms don't like hiring part-time students....

You applied to 27 schools? Good Lord.

The first thing you need to do is understand how regional the schools you are considering truly are (see this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=178938). Cost is important but you need to decide where you want to practice after graduating. Do you want to practice in Colorado or Michigan? Where are you from? Do you have any ties in these regions?

Okay, so you're a URM from Dallas. May I ask why you think you've narrowed this down to Michigan State and Colorado of all places?

--LinkRemoved--

Only 150 people (out of 348) in Michigan State's 2010 class are serving as full time attorneys. That's 43.1%.

If you've got 3 years to kill, go for it. But if you're looking to get a job as a practicing attorney in a large law firm (or similar position making $80-90K), you should probably look elsewhere.

--LinkRemoved--

Colorado's 2010 class graduated 151, and according to its website 125 were full time attorneys (83%).

What constitutes a "great job" for you? Your chances of landing ANY job out of either of these schools aren't great, let alone a job with a large/medium size firm. Neither one of these schools placed more than 10% of their 2010 grads in NLJ250 firms, and neither placed more than 6% of their 2011 class. It could have been significantly less than 10% and 6%, too (especially in MSU's case). Not to mention the fact that if you don't have significant ties to either Colorado or Michigan you are pretty much drawing dead to begin with. These are regional schools that are going to place students in their respective markets, and if you don't have significant ties then firms aren't going to take a risk on someone they suspect might jump ship for their home market after a couple years, even if they have stellar grades.

If you actually are from Dallas, did you apply to SMU? If you didn't, then I would HIGHLY recommend foregoing law school for a year and applying to SMU next cycle. Okay actually I just saw your LSN profile, apparently SMU was your dream school haha so you have the right idea. Looks like you have a great background, but your LSAT is holding you back (and possibly even your age). You would be smart to retake the LSAT and try to get your score in the 160-161 range, and you would probably also benefit from being another year older when you apply.

As a general observation (which I've probably made before), if you haven't taken the LSAT 3 times in this economy you are crazy. You have 3 chances to get your score as high as you can, there is absolutely NO reason you wouldn't take it 3 times unless you score like a 175+ your first time. You have to understand how bad the economy is and how important it is to go to a great school for hopefully a cheap price, and then you have to realize how critical every extra point you can get on the LSAT is. As sick as it sounds, 3-4 points on the LSAT can actually be worth MILLIONS in lifetime earnings.

jeeptiger09 wrote:http://www.law.msu.edu/career/placement-rates.html

Only 150 people (out of 348) in Michigan State's 2010 class are serving as full time attorneys. That's 43.1%.

If you've got 3 years to kill, go for it. But if you're looking to get a job as a practicing attorney in a large law firm (or similar position making $80-90K), you should probably look elsewhere.

--LinkRemoved--

Colorado's 2010 class graduated 151, and according to its website 125 were full time attorneys (83%).

Check your math.

Wow... lots of mixed emotions here. For one, yes I am from Dallas and a URM. I did apply to SMU- I'm still furious with them for the auto reject because I'm fairly certain they never cracked open my application (I had way too many ties to that school and good reasons to be there to just be rejected like that). Yes, my age is probably holding me back, but I refuse to sit out a year or so and be punished for excelling quickly through undergrad and many of my schools are willing to work with me on this... hence the part time program I'm drawn to at MSU. I may only be 20, but that has never once stopped me from doing anything and I see it as a challenge as opposed to an obstacle. On another note, here is where I got into schools and here is how I narrowed down my options

- Penn State (30K scholly)
- Missouri (35K scholly)
- Texas Tech
- MSU ( Full scholly)
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Maine
- Kansas (7,500K scholly)

[Alll scholarships are total, not per year]

AVBucks4239- Okay, here is how I came to my conclusion between MSU and CU--- For one I don't see a point in paying sticker at Maine, CT, Tech, and really KU since they barely gave me anything. So they were out since their rankings werent the best for the money. Second, Penn State didn't offer me enough money to offset the cost of tuition since they do not have instate for years two and three. Missouri just wasnt cutting it with their amount of scholarship money to help me offset the negative aspects associated with their rankings and their employment prospects. Which leaves Colorado and Michigan State--- It would be so nice to come out completely debt free after leaving MSU and also being able to go to school part time would give me more time to study so I could be in the top 10%. (NOTE: I will be in the top 10% if it kills me- ambitious, I know. But I can do it). Colorado has a lot of programs that I am really interested in and I think that they could really take me far. CU has turned out some great lawyers- why can't I be one of them?

Traehekat- As for retaking the LSAT- I'd prefer not to. I'm AWFUL at taking standardized tests. I was scoring 168-172 range on practice tests for months but bombed it during the real thing. Same thing happened with my SAT. I'm just not good with those kinds of things. Just because you CAN take it three times, doesn't mean that you should. As far as I'm concerned a 156 is good enough for me. No sense in digging a deeper hole (*yes I know schools take your highest LSAT but still).

Colorado has been extremely generous in even accepting me to their program in the first place and I feel as though I could really excel in their environment. I have ZERO requests as to the part of the country I want to work in, but Colorado sounds pretty nice to me. I do not need to be in Dallas or even Tx for that matter. So location does not play in as a factor for me. As far as jobs go, I'm not exactly the kind of person that a firm would expect to "jump ship" in comparison to someone who has lived their whole life in Colorado. I'll take a job wherever I can get it. Thats the best I can do.

Sparty 99-- No offense, but not all of us are fortunate enough to not have to pay for our school. I have no debt from undergrad and a large savings account so at any of these schools I choose I'm coming out with very little if any debt. They are not both "whack" options and I have been fortunate to come as far as I have in this whole process. If you have a better idea as to which school I should attend from my list of acceptances please feel free to share your opinion- otherwise don't. I didn't ask "Please degrade my top school choices". Constructive criticism was appreciated. Insults are not.

So let's reform this thread--- Of my 8 acceptances: Which would you choose and why?

Can you please tell us how you choose which schools to apply to? Also, I think that if schools are rejecting you because they think you are too young, they might know more about it than you do. I don't understand what the rush is here, I mean I do understand wanting to get on with your life. I don't understand why you want to rush into your professional career when jobs are so dependent on schools. Your career is probably the rest of your life. If you can wait one year (or even more) and get a better school(or less debt or both) out of it, you are investing in your future, not being held back.

I think you might be used to relying on your own judgement. That is great, but people here have good advice and experience to offer if you are willing to listen with an open mind.

Of the two, I vote for Colorado just because I like Colorado better - I don't think it is worth it though. Can you move to Colorado and work and get a better deal (in-state)on tuition after a couple of years?

.

If they gave me a fee waiver, I applied- hence 27 schools :-/

I applied to so many because I didn't think I would get into a single one with my score. They were all what I thought to be reaches, and that is why I am so excited to have so many options to choose from. I really and truly believed I would have a tough time getting into Texas Tech. Gee was I wrong.

Also, I do not believe rejections have anything to do with my age... I'm fairly certain its my GPA/LSAT combo or that schools just aren't doing a full file review.

Lindsey4468 wrote:Wow... lots of mixed emotions here. For one, yes I am from Dallas and a URM. I did apply to SMU- I'm still furious with them for the auto reject because I'm fairly certain they never cracked open my application (I had way too many ties to that school and good reasons to be there to just be rejected like that). Yes, my age is probably holding me back, but I refuse to sit out a year or so and be punished for excelling quickly through undergrad and many of my schools are willing to work with me on this... hence the part time program I'm drawn to at MSU. I may only be 20, but that has never once stopped me from doing anything and I see it as a challenge as opposed to an obstacle. On another note, here is where I got into schools and here is how I narrowed down my options

- Penn State (30K scholly)
- Missouri (35K scholly)
- Texas Tech
- MSU ( Full scholly)
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Maine
- Kansas (7,500K scholly)

[Alll scholarships are total, not per year]

AVBucks4239- Okay, here is how I came to my conclusion between MSU and CU--- For one I don't see a point in paying sticker at Maine, CT, Tech, and really KU since they barely gave me anything. So they were out since their rankings werent the best for the money. Second, Penn State didn't offer me enough money to offset the cost of tuition since they do not have instate for years two and three. Missouri just wasnt cutting it with their amount of scholarship money to help me offset the negative aspects associated with their rankings and their employment prospects. Which leaves Colorado and Michigan State--- It would be so nice to come out completely debt free after leaving MSU and also being able to go to school part time would give me more time to study so I could be in the top 10%. (NOTE: I will be in the top 10% if it kills me- ambitious, I know. But I can do it). Colorado has a lot of programs that I am really interested in and I think that they could really take me far. CU has turned out some great lawyers- why can't I be one of them?

Traehekat- As for retaking the LSAT- I'd prefer not to. I'm AWFUL at taking standardized tests. I was scoring 168-172 range on practice tests for months but bombed it during the real thing. Same thing happened with my SAT. I'm just not good with those kinds of things. Just because you CAN take it three times, doesn't mean that you should. As far as I'm concerned a 156 is good enough for me. No sense in digging a deeper hole (*yes I know schools take your highest LSAT but still).

Colorado has been extremely generous in even accepting me to their program in the first place and I feel as though I could really excel in their environment. I have ZERO requests as to the part of the country I want to work in, but Colorado sounds pretty nice to me. I do not need to be in Dallas or even Tx for that matter. So location does not play in as a factor for me. As far as jobs go, I'm not exactly the kind of person that a firm would expect to "jump ship" in comparison to someone who has lived their whole life in Colorado. I'll take a job wherever I can get it. Thats the best I can do.

Sparty 99-- No offense, but not all of us are fortunate enough to not have to pay for our school. I have no debt from undergrad and a large savings account so at any of these schools I choose I'm coming out with very little if any debt. They are not both "whack" options and I have been fortunate to come as far as I have in this whole process. If you have a better idea as to which school I should attend from my list of acceptances please feel free to share your opinion- otherwise don't. I didn't ask "Please degrade my top school choices". Constructive criticism was appreciated. Insults are not.

So let's reform this thread--- Of my 8 acceptances: Which would you choose and why?

Have you read the posts in this thread and elsewhere on this board about how these schools are regional and rankings, past a certain point, don't really matter? If not, look around.

Also, if you were practicing at 170 you should be able to get at least a 165. As a URM that would put you in a great position. You owe it to yourself to try again.

I am a 3L at a top 6 school, top third of class, still struggling to find work. Where you go to school matters, and it's going to be very tough at any of those schools, so saying that a 156 is good enough for you... I simply do not understand what that means when a 156 means you will be facing terrifying odds. I also went straight from undergrad to law school. It seems pretty clear to me that those classmates who took at least a couple years off have had a much easier time finding a job.

Please take seriously the advice you receive here. I'd hate to see you waste 3 years and any amount of money only to be unemployable as a lawyer and overqualified for a lot of non-law work.

Well, how much did you study for the LSAT? You realize it is a learnable test, right? Not to be patronizing, I read a post today where the UG pre-law advisor had told them that the LSAT score couldn't be improved. I think you might consider retaking.

In the meantime, if you want to leave Texas, you could move to where you want to live long term. If you want to stay in Texas, there must be a job somewhere you can get. You should really consider where you want to live and practice longterm.

I think you are being very smart about not getting into debt for school. I wouldn't go to MSU part-time just for that though.

sunynp wrote:Well, how much did you study for the LSAT? You realize it is a learnable test, right? Not to be patronizing, I read a post today where the UG pre-law advisor had told them that the LSAT score couldn't be improved. I think you might consider retaking.

In the meantime, if you want to leave Texas, you could move to where you want to live long term. If you want to stay in Texas, there must be a job somewhere you can get. You should really consider where you want to live and practice longterm.

I think you are being very smart about not getting into debt for school. I wouldn't go to MSU part-time just for that though.

I studied a ridiculous amount for the LSAT. I had one of the best private tutors three days a week, two hours a day for three months. I had 4-5 hours of homework assigned to me every night that was due the next day. Always timed assignments from previous exams. I took one test a week for the first two months, and then in the final month I took two-four a week. I significantly improved but just cracked under the pressure in the actual test. I was probably studing between 30-40 hours a week, plus I took a Kaplan course on top of this but it wasn an epic failure. I understand the LSAT and I understand how to get to the right answer. Usually, when I missed a question I could look back and always figure out why and it was typically a stupid mistake like reading the question too fast. So trust me, my score was not for a lack of effort.

Lindsey4468 wrote:

sunynp wrote:Well, how much did you study for the LSAT? You realize it is a learnable test, right? Not to be patronizing, I read a post today where the UG pre-law advisor had told them that the LSAT score couldn't be improved. I think you might consider retaking.

In the meantime, if you want to leave Texas, you could move to where you want to live long term. If you want to stay in Texas, there must be a job somewhere you can get. You should really consider where you want to live and practice longterm.

I think you are being very smart about not getting into debt for school. I wouldn't go to MSU part-time just for that though.

I studied a ridiculous amount for the LSAT. I had one of the best private tutors three days a week, two hours a day for three months. I had 4-5 hours of homework assigned to me every night that was due the next day. Always timed assignments from previous exams. I took one test a week for the first two months, and then in the final month I took two-four a week. I significantly improved but just cracked under the pressure in the actual test. I was probably studing between 30-40 hours a week, plus I took a Kaplan course on top of this but it wasn an epic failure. I understand the LSAT and I understand how to get to the right answer. Usually, when I missed a question I could look back and always figure out why and it was typically a stupid mistake like reading the question too fast. So trust me, my score was not for a lack of effort.

So you were able to do well on timed practice tests, but couldn't get it done on test day.

1) Why do you assume that you wouldn't be able to get it done on a second test day?
2) Assuming a good answer to (1), what makes you think you'll be able to succeed on law school exams, which are generally the entire grade for the course, are high pressure, and usually have a tight time limit?

Lindsey4468 wrote:

sunynp wrote:Well, how much did you study for the LSAT? You realize it is a learnable test, right? Not to be patronizing, I read a post today where the UG pre-law advisor had told them that the LSAT score couldn't be improved. I think you might consider retaking.

In the meantime, if you want to leave Texas, you could move to where you want to live long term. If you want to stay in Texas, there must be a job somewhere you can get. You should really consider where you want to live and practice longterm.

I think you are being very smart about not getting into debt for school. I wouldn't go to MSU part-time just for that though.

I studied a ridiculous amount for the LSAT. I had one of the best private tutors three days a week, two hours a day for three months. I had 4-5 hours of homework assigned to me every night that was due the next day. Always timed assignments from previous exams. I took one test a week for the first two months, and then in the final month I took two-four a week. I significantly improved but just cracked under the pressure in the actual test. I was probably studing between 30-40 hours a week, plus I took a Kaplan course on top of this but it wasn an epic failure. I understand the LSAT and I understand how to get to the right answer. Usually, when I missed a question I could look back and always figure out why and it was typically a stupid mistake like reading the question too fast. So trust me, my score was not for a lack of effort.

If you just had a bad day, why not try again? I just wish you would give it another chance. A lot of people choke on the actual test because they have put so much pressure on themselves to do well. There are threads here on how to do well and how to deal with pressure.

If you have to do one of these schools, I would go to where you want to live long term.

zanda wrote:

Lindsey4468 wrote:

sunynp wrote:Well, how much did you study for the LSAT? You realize it is a learnable test, right? Not to be patronizing, I read a post today where the UG pre-law advisor had told them that the LSAT score couldn't be improved. I think you might consider retaking.

In the meantime, if you want to leave Texas, you could move to where you want to live long term. If you want to stay in Texas, there must be a job somewhere you can get. You should really consider where you want to live and practice longterm.

I think you are being very smart about not getting into debt for school. I wouldn't go to MSU part-time just for that though.

I studied a ridiculous amount for the LSAT. I had one of the best private tutors three days a week, two hours a day for three months. I had 4-5 hours of homework assigned to me every night that was due the next day. Always timed assignments from previous exams. I took one test a week for the first two months, and then in the final month I took two-four a week. I significantly improved but just cracked under the pressure in the actual test. I was probably studing between 30-40 hours a week, plus I took a Kaplan course on top of this but it wasn an epic failure. I understand the LSAT and I understand how to get to the right answer. Usually, when I missed a question I could look back and always figure out why and it was typically a stupid mistake like reading the question too fast. So trust me, my score was not for a lack of effort.

So you were able to do well on timed practice tests, but couldn't get it done on test day.

1) Why do you assume that you wouldn't be able to get it done on a second test day?
2) Assuming a good answer to (1), what makes you think you'll be able to succeed on law school exams, which are generally the entire grade for the course, are high pressure, and usually have a tight time limit?

1) As stated previously, it's just something about a standardized test. LSAT in particular.
2) I do very well on exams. Exams I'm not concerned with. Its just the standardized ones, in particular the LSAT that I struggle with. I do not know why.


I'm quite pleased with my choices. I'm just a bit mixed up about which one to pick. I don't think I can take the pressure of another LSAT again to get such dismal results.

Lindsey4468 wrote:
1) As stated previously, it's just something about a standardized test. LSAT in particular.
2) I do very well on exams. Exams I'm not concerned with. Its just the standardized ones, in particular the LSAT that I struggle with. I do not know why.


I'm quite pleased with my choices. I'm just a bit mixed up about which one to pick. I don't think I can take the pressure of another LSAT again to get such dismal results.

I guess I don't understand why, if you're just not good at standardized tests, and LSAT in particular (which you've taken only once), your practice tests would be so much better than your test score. I just feel like I'm missing something.

As far as being quite pleased with your choices, have you read the posts in this thread and in this board generally that detail just how poor your odds will be of acquiring decent employment?

I'm really not trying to be a jerk. I just feel like you're about to make a terrible decision and if I can prevent you from doing that I'd like to try.

Lindsey4468 wrote:Wow... lots of mixed emotions here. For one, yes I am from Dallas and a URM. I did apply to SMU- I'm still furious with them for the auto reject because I'm fairly certain they never cracked open my application (I had way too many ties to that school and good reasons to be there to just be rejected like that).

SMU has a median LSAT of 165 and GPA of 3.72. You're not even close to those numbers.

With that said, I have some sympathy for you here. Ohio State was my dream school. I went there for undergrad (third generation), had all sorts of ties, etc. BUT, I at least had the stomach to take the LSAT three times and sit out a year to give myself the best chance of getting in. Did I get in? No. Do I think it was a waste of time? No, because I got scholarship money from other schools (see below). All that said, you will never hear me complain about not getting into Ohio State because I know I just didn't have the numbers (and I was closer than you were to SMU).

Seriously, you only go as far as your numbers (LSAT and GPA) will take you. The sooner you accept that, the better. Wait until you're in law school and GPA and class rank are literally all that matters.

Lindsey4468 wrote:Yes, my age is probably holding me back, but I refuse to sit out a year or so and be punished for excelling quickly through undergrad and many of my schools are willing to work with me on this... hence the part time program I'm drawn to at MSU. I may only be 20, but that has never once stopped me from doing anything and I see it as a challenge as opposed to an obstacle.

I don't think you can possibly imagine how much people won't give a shit that you're only 20. Nobody is going to say, "Wow, that girl graduated undergrad already?" Seriously, no one will care.

It's not "being punished for excelling quickly." It's making a smart, calculated decision that could save you tons of money and get you into better schools (I'll get to this in a bit).

Lindsey4468 wrote:On another note, here is where I got into schools and here is how I narrowed down my options

- Penn State (30K scholly)
- Missouri (35K scholly)
- Texas Tech
- MSU ( Full scholly)
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Maine
- Kansas (7,500K scholly)

[Alll scholarships are total, not per year]
AVBucks4239- Okay, here is how I came to my conclusion between MSU and CU--- For one I don't see a point in paying sticker at Maine, CT, Tech, and really KU since they barely gave me anything. So they were out since their rankings werent the best for the money. Second, Penn State didn't offer me enough money to offset the cost of tuition since they do not have instate for years two and three. Missouri just wasnt cutting it with their amount of scholarship money to help me offset the negative aspects associated with their rankings and their employment prospects. Which leaves Colorado and Michigan State--- It would be so nice to come out completely debt free after leaving MSU and also being able to go to school part time would give me more time to study so I could be in the top 10%.Colorado has a lot of programs that I am really interested in and I think that they could really take me far. CU has turned out some great lawyers- why can't I be one of them?

There is a hell of a lot more to picking a law school than how much scholarship money you can get. Yes, it's a huge factor, but with these types of schools, you need to ask yourself, "Can I see myself going there for three years and practicing for another 5 after graduating?" These schools are NOT a short term commitment to these regions.

You were so indecisive early in the cycle, it's no surprise you're very indecisive now between such dissimilar schools. At the very least, taking a year off will allow you to appreciate the mechanics of the application cycle. You now know a lot about a lot of schools and you could really use this to your advantage.

ALSO--you could call them and ask them to hold your acceptance for next year. Something to think about.

Lindsey4468 wrote:(NOTE: I will be in the top 10% if it kills me- ambitious, I know. But I can do it).

I hate to break it to you, but usually part time students get their own class rankings and they aren't taken as seriously as the full time students. Just a fact of life.

More importantly, it's an absolutely terrible idea to assume you're going to get top 10% from working hard. At the start of law school, 95% of students think they will top 10%. Obviously only top 10% will make that cut.

And, since you admittedly aren't good at standardized tests, this is not a good assumption to make.

Lindsey4468 wrote:Traehekat- As for retaking the LSAT- I'd prefer not to. I'm AWFUL at taking standardized tests. I was scoring 168-172 range on practice tests for months but bombed it during the real thing. Same thing happened with my SAT. I'm just not good with those kinds of things. Just because you CAN take it three times, doesn't mean that you should. As far as I'm concerned a 156 is good enough for me. No sense in digging a deeper hole (*yes I know schools take your highest LSAT but still).

This is so misguided. If you can get in the 162-165 range as a URM, you can open so many doors it's ridiculous. Seriously, we are talking full rides at T1's instead of all these regional schools you're considering. Why not give it a chance, especially when you're so young?

For example, I decided to take a year off to try and get into Ohio State. I ended up improving my LSAT score six points. I didn't get into Ohio State, but I did get a $12k/year scholarship at the school I'm now attending. I also saved about $10k from working a blue-collar job and living at home. That means I saved roughly $46k just for taking a year off. That doesn't sound like "being punished for excelling" to me.

Colorado has been extremely generous in even accepting me to their program in the first place and I feel as though I could really excel in their environment. I have ZERO requests as to the part of the country I want to work in, but Colorado sounds pretty nice to me. I do not need to be in Dallas or even Tx for that matter. So location does not play in as a factor for me. As far as jobs go, I'm not exactly the kind of person that a firm would expect to "jump ship" in comparison to someone who has lived their whole life in Colorado. I'll take a job wherever I can get it. Thats the best I can do.

It's not so much that location matters, it's the fact that you have no ties in these regions. It's going to be difficult to get a job in Denver when you're interviewing against people from Colorado who went to undergrad in Colorado who are now attending law school in Colorado. Hi, I'm from Dallas, and "Colorado sounded pretty nice to me" won't cut it. You really need to figure out why you want to be there (or Michigan State for that matter) before you go there, not at 2L OCI.

Lindsey4468 wrote:Sparty 99-- No offense, but not all of us are fortunate enough to not have to pay for our school. I have no debt from undergrad and a large savings account so at any of these schools I choose I'm coming out with very little if any debt. They are not both "whack" options and I have been fortunate to come as far as I have in this whole process. If you have a better idea as to which school I should attend from my list of acceptances please feel free to share your opinion- otherwise don't. I didn't ask "Please degrade my top school choices". Constructive criticism was appreciated. Insults are not.

He's probably just trying to help.

Lindsey4468 wrote:So let's reform this thread--- Of my 8 acceptances: Which would you choose and why?

Seriously, I don't think I've ever seen a more clear-cut case where somebody should retake and reapply. It would be the best decision you ever made. Then you can make a thread next year and say, "Should I go to SMU, Texas, or Virginia?" That's ambitious, but if you get close to those practice test scores, you will have no problem getting into great schools--with money.

Go make the following poll:

I am 20 years old.
I am a URM.
I practice test in the 168-172 range.
I have taken the LSAT once, and I got a 156.
I really want to go to SMU but didn't get in.
I have narrowed it down to Colorado and Michigan State, I have no ties there.

So what should I do-- Option 1: Retake and reapply next cycle; Option 2: go to Colorado; Option 3: go to Michigan State.

The poll will be so lobsided you wouldn't believe it.

zanda wrote:

Lindsey4468 wrote:
1) As stated previously, it's just something about a standardized test. LSAT in particular.
2) I do very well on exams. Exams I'm not concerned with. Its just the standardized ones, in particular the LSAT that I struggle with. I do not know why.


I'm quite pleased with my choices. I'm just a bit mixed up about which one to pick. I don't think I can take the pressure of another LSAT again to get such dismal results.

I guess I don't understand why, if you're just not good at standardized tests, and LSAT in particular (which you've taken only once), your practice tests would be so much better than your test score. I just feel like I'm missing something.

As far as being quite pleased with your choices, have you read the posts in this thread and in this board generally that detail just how poor your odds will be of acquiring decent employment?

I'm really not trying to be a jerk. I just feel like you're about to make a terrible decision and if I can prevent you from doing that I'd like to try.

I do understand your opinion, but I've taken the LSAT twice... June 151 and October 156 (my original practice test starting score was a 149- I took it at 17 years old). And trust me when I say I would LOVE to know why my practice tests were so much higher than my actual tests... I did everything timed and as accurate to represent testing conditions as well as possible, but somehow it did not work. The same thing happened with my SAT. I graduated 2nd from highschool in a class of 900 over a full year early and still bombed the SAT--- yes, two times. Go figure.

I've beaten the odds countless times in my life. The odds will probably never be in favor of the 20 year old law student from Texas in another state. But given some time, I'll be able to prove everyone wrong just as I always have. Odds are statistics--- But not everyone is a statistic. Every once in a while, someone defies those odds.

AVBucks4239- its LOPSIDED not lobsided... just FYI. And I did not take the LSAT once.

Did you apply to SMU FT or PT?

156 is an auto-reject for FT, even wih URM status.

Lindsey4468 wrote: (NOTE: I will be in the top 10% if it kills me- ambitious, I know. But I can do it).

You won't be the only ambitious one. Law school isn't like undergrad where people go just to have a good time and develop as a person. Every single person will be working their ass off to be in the top 10%. But 90% fail.

Lindsey4468 wrote: Traehekat- As for retaking the LSAT- I'd prefer not to. I'm AWFUL at taking standardized tests. I was scoring 168-172 range on practice tests for months but bombed it during the real thing. Same thing happened with my SAT. I'm just not good with those kinds of things.

If you think like that, of course you're going to bomb the test. Have faith. If you were PT'ing higher, then a 168+ is within your reach. But you'll need a positive attitude.

Lindsey4468 wrote:
As far as jobs go, I'm not exactly the kind of person that a firm would expect to "jump ship" in comparison to someone who has lived their whole life in Colorado. I'll take a job wherever I can get it. Thats the best I can do.

How would a firm know you're not the type to jump ship? I mean, you're leaving Dallas, that shows a history of being willing to leave. And you're only 20, it's not like you've held a job at the same place for 10 years and can show a history of being loyal to your employer. Besides, taking a job wherever you can get it is exactly the kind of attitude they're trying to avoid. If you're willing to take anything, why won't you go off to New York when something better comes along?

cinephile wrote:

Lindsey4468 wrote: (NOTE: I will be in the top 10% if it kills me- ambitious, I know. But I can do it).

You won't be the only ambitious one. Law school isn't like undergrad where people go just to have a good time and develop as a person. Every single person will be working their ass off to be in the top 10%. But 90% fail.

Lindsey4468 wrote: Traehekat- As for retaking the LSAT- I'd prefer not to. I'm AWFUL at taking standardized tests. I was scoring 168-172 range on practice tests for months but bombed it during the real thing. Same thing happened with my SAT. I'm just not good with those kinds of things.

If you think like that, of course you're going to bomb the test. Have faith. If you were PT'ing higher, then a 168+ is within your reach. But you'll need a positive attitude.

Lindsey4468 wrote:
As far as jobs go, I'm not exactly the kind of person that a firm would expect to "jump ship" in comparison to someone who has lived their whole life in Colorado. I'll take a job wherever I can get it. Thats the best I can do.

How would a firm know you're not the type to jump ship? I mean, you're leaving Dallas, that shows a history of being willing to leave. And you're only 20, it's not like you've held a job at the same place for 10 years and can show a history of being loyal to your employer. Besides, taking a job wherever you can get it is exactly the kind of attitude they're trying to avoid. If you're willing to take anything, why won't you go off to New York when something better comes along?

I've lived in Dallas my whole life. Never left. I went to college right outside of Dallas. I've held down the same job for four years, and my other job for three years simultaneously. I have a good work history of staying in the same job and my employers will vouch for that. And no, I haven't been working at like a Burger King or something. I've worked for a huge private school in Dallas as a Tennis Pro Shop Manager for over four years now plus my other job while going to school. It sounds stupid on a forum like this but just because I am willing to leave Texas does not mean I am the jump ship type.


And I applied to both PT and FT at SMU but showed preference to the PT program in my personal statement.

Lindsey4468 wrote:I do understand your opinion, but I've taken the LSAT twice... June 151 and October 156 (my original practice test starting score was a 149- I took it at 17 years old). And trust me when I say I would LOVE to know why my practice tests were so much higher than my actual tests... I did everything timed and as accurate to represent testing conditions as well as possible, but somehow it did not work. The same thing happened with my SAT. I graduated 2nd from highschool in a class of 900 over a full year early and still bombed the SAT--- yes, two times. Go figure.

I've beaten the odds countless times in my life. The odds will probably never be in favor of the 20 year old law student from Texas in another state. But given some time, I'll be able to prove everyone wrong just as I always have. Odds are statistics--- But not everyone is a statistic. Every once in a while, someone defies those odds.

AVBucks4239- its LOPSIDED not lobsided... just FYI. And I did not take the LSAT once.

You asked for advice and people gave it to you. You aren't hearing what you want to hear so now you're trying to justify the incredibly irrational decision you're about to make. Good job.

PS: seriously, cut the shit about your age. Nobody gives a shit that you took the LSAT when you were 17. Nobody gives a shit that you're 20. Nobody gives a shit that you will start law school at 20/21. The sooner you get that through your head, the better.

PPS: you come off as really entitled. That is not a trait you want to have during your interviews. And I'm not not just basing that from all the stupid references you keep making to your age (and you correcting my typo), but based on a limited review of previous posts you've made in other threads:

Lindsey4468 wrote:Dear SMU,

I have put my heart and soul into supporting your stupid school since I was 5 years old. Attending every basketball and football game religiously all those years really developed a bond between us. I am a legacy two times over and had a stellar application that has gotten me into ten schools so far, many with large scholarships. How dare you reject me! You will be so sorry when you find out who my grandfather is within your school. Big mistake. There goes a benefactor....

Sincerely,

pissed off applicant

Lindsey4468 wrote:Texas Tech is apparently not offering me a scholly. Absolutely ridiculous that they'd expect me to pay full price considering I have been offered a full ride at another school, and have gotten into far better schools. Ps- they do not negotiate. period. So I will be kindly withdrawing.

I'd work on that before interviewing.

PPS: Assuming you're going to make top 10% from working hard is not smart. Especially when you admit that you suck at taking standardized tests. Law school is essentially six semesters of standardized tests.

PPPS: Go ahead and make that poll if you don't believe us.

PPPPS: Seriously, we are all trying to help. We see classmates who made the same decision as you scratching and clawing for jobs that aren't there. My roommate at Ohio State graded onto Law Review and still doesn't have a job as a 3L. My friend's brother-in-law was president of law review at his TTT and he spent 18 months as a clerk making $8.75/hour before getting a $40k/year job. We are trying to persuade you from not following their path. That is all.