Top Law Schools

Hey all. First time poster, long time fan of TLS.

Right now, my acceptances at Iowa and W&L are looking to my best options.

Iowa has given me a full-tuition scholarship (now w/ no stipulations) and W&L has given me 30k per year with a 3.15 stip (Though I've read here that losing a scholly there is practically non-existant).

My career path is almost anything besides Big Law. Government and public interest of some sort. So while I don't want suffocating debt, I'm not looking for a huge payday. (FWIW, social work has been my alternative plan for years).

To start, what are your thoughts in general? Iowa seems to have a slight edge in numbers on LST, but location is a little more questionable to me. I have no significant ties to either region of the country, so this questionability is more gut than anything else.




For non-TL;DRers here, a consideration of possible relevancy that I noticed today:

Debates on here have raged about the correlation between LSAT scores and class rank, but I think however insignificant the correlation is, it's really the only measure we have and should be examined on a case-by-case basis assuming you work your ass off. I don't want this thread to be hijacked into a debate about the predictive factor. Just looking for opinions in my case.

- I got a 165, and I believe I underperformed a bit. My diagnostic was a 160, and a few practice tests surpassed 170. Did about a month of studying.

-- At Iowa I am above the 75th percentile and at W&L, I am at the 75th percentile.

However, at Iowa there is greater variation of scores within the class (158-162-164). At W&L, it is much more clustered with the median (164) being only one point below the 75th.

Iowa amounts to roughly an 8% difference in LSAT percentile scores between the median and the 75th, while W&L amounts to only a 2% difference, meaning competition will be especially keen to be above median there.

Should these percentile/class distribution considerations have any weight in my decision?

No. It is impossible to predict how you will do in law school, so you should not base your decision on that.

I would take Iowa-- better employment stats and scholarship. Visit the schools if you can and see if that gives you any idea of where you'd like to be.

Total COA of each?

I've figured COA around $50k for Iowa and $90k for W&L.

First, ask for more money at W&L until August 15th. This means that you must ask multiple times.

Second, where do you want to practice? If you go to Iowa, you will be limited to Iowa, Minnesota, Chicago, and a little bit of Wisconsin. W&L is the coast.

If you don't want to work in either areas then you will probably graduate without a job and will have to find one after graduation in the area that you want to live. The fact that you went to Iowa or W&L at this point, will mean little unless they have a lot of alumni who can help you.

mb9113 wrote:Should these percentile/class distribution considerations have any weight in my decision?

No.

mb9113 wrote:Debates on here have raged about the correlation between LSAT scores and class rank, but I think however insignificant the correlation is, it's really the only measure we have and should be examined on a case-by-case basis assuming you work your ass off.

No offense but this is terrible logic. If anything, an applicant's GPA is a better indicator of how well he or she will do in law school (although it's still not truly indicative--law school is a much different beast than any UG).

mb9113 wrote: At Iowa I am above the 75th percentile and at W&L, I am at the 75th percentile.

However, at Iowa there is greater variation of scores within the class (158-162-164). At W&L, it is much more clustered with the median (164) being only one point below the 75th.

Iowa amounts to roughly an 8% difference in LSAT percentile scores between the median and the 75th, while W&L amounts to only a 2% difference, meaning competition will be especially keen to be above median there.

Irrelevant

- I got a 165, and I believe I underperformed a bit. My diagnostic was a 160, and a few practice tests surpassed 170. Did about a month of studying.

Retake in June. Obviously you can do better.

mb9113 wrote:I have no significant ties to either region of the country,

In this case, both are bad choices

Thanks all for the help. i appreciate it.

rad lulz wrote:

mb9113 wrote:I have no significant ties to either region of the country,

In this case, both are bad choices

Is this because of networking?


I really have no ties anywhere, save for Utah where I grew up. I already went to Utah for UG, and I don't want to stay

As for where I want to work, I don't know. The political junkie in me wants to work in DC, but I think that would probably be a bad idea for my health.

I need to find a good work/life balance, because I have neglected the latter almost completely up until now, and it hasn't been good. My tendency is to be a workaholic, and I am trying to temper that. Basically, I want to be somewhere where stress is minimized and I can develop some strong social connections.

PRgradBYU wrote: No offense but this is terrible logic. If anything, an applicant's GPA is a better indicator of how well he or she will do in law school (although it's still not truly indicative--law school is a much different beast than any UG).

I shouldn't have used the word only, but I don't think you can say terrible logic or "if anything...GPA" either.

The verdict about the superiority of GPA or LSAT is still out. I subscribe to the LSAT being the best predictor because it is the most controlled measure. (Again, assuming you work hard.)

Nova wrote: Retake in June. Obviously you can do better.

Besides improving chances for the next cycle, could it somehow improve my lot this cycle?

I also have WLs at Vandy, UMN, and GW, but I wrote those off because of the chance I won't get aid even if I get off the WL.

It's really hard to get jobs in secondary markets you're not from even if you went to school there. The market is terrible, network matters, and employers like ties. Srry bro. Don't go to either.

rad lulz wrote:It's really hard to get jobs in secondary markets you're not from even if you went to school there. The market is terrible, network matters, and employers like ties. Srry bro. Don't go to either.

So you would recommend Utah, T14 or don't go at all?

If you only studied for a month and PTed in the 170s the only correct answer is to retake. You owe it to yourself to do better. Throw these offers in the trash and hit the LSAT prep forum.

Assuming I do wait another cycle, I imagine my GPA will take a slight hit from this last semester. (I'm a K-JD, kind of. Took a year off in undergrad.)

Will an increase in my LSAT score compensate for any hit my GPA takes?

mb9113 wrote:

rad lulz wrote:It's really hard to get jobs in secondary markets you're not from even if you went to school there. The market is terrible, network matters, and employers like ties. Srry bro. Don't go to either.

So you would recommend Utah, T14 or don't go at all?

Maybe also UCLA/Vandy/Tex/USC at a discount or BYU, but yeah pretty much

mb9113 wrote:Assuming I do wait another cycle, I imagine my GPA will take a slight hit from this last semester. (I'm a K-JD, kind of. Took a year off in undergrad.)

Will an increase in my LSAT score compensate for any hit my GPA takes?

What's your GPA?

mb9113 wrote:Assuming I do wait another cycle, I imagine my GPA will take a slight hit from this last semester. (I'm a K-JD, kind of. Took a year off in undergrad.)

Will an increase in my LSAT score compensate for any hit my GPA takes?

Obviously it depends on the gpa hit and the LSAT increase. If you can pull off a 170+ with a 3.6 or better, you stand a good chance at a t14 with $$.

Even if you don't want big law, PI budgets are getting cut left and right. Getting a govt. or PI job you actually want will require you to retake. Given your prep, you seem capable.

LSAC GPA is 3.6 mostly because I earned my associates' degree while still in high school with a lot of STEM courses and barely got a 3.5.

Since then, my GPA has been 3.8, though.

I imagine my LSAC GPA will fall into the 3.5 range after this semester. A little senioritis/a lot of hard courses.

mb9113 wrote:LSAC GPA is 3.6 mostly because I earned my associates' degree while still in high school with a lot of STEM courses and barely got a 3.5.

Since then, my GPA has been 3.8, though.

I imagine my LSAC GPA will fall into the 3.5 range after this semester. A little senioritis/a lot of hard courses.

It won't make much of a difference. A five point LSAT increase, on the other hand, will move your applications from the trash bin to the acceptance pile (and scholarship consideration) at some T14's. And you are obviously capable of that increase.

Look at mylsn.info

Good luck!

mb9113 wrote:

rad lulz wrote:It's really hard to get jobs in secondary markets you're not from even if you went to school there. The market is terrible, network matters, and employers like ties. Srry bro. Don't go to either.

So you would recommend Utah, T14 or don't go at all?

I don't think ties to a location is critically important. It's all about spinning the answer.

sparty99 wrote:

mb9113 wrote:

rad lulz wrote:It's really hard to get jobs in secondary markets you're not from even if you went to school there. The market is terrible, network matters, and employers like ties. Srry bro. Don't go to either.

So you would recommend Utah, T14 or don't go at all?

I don't think ties to a location is critically important. It's all about spinning the answer.

When the locations are Iowa and VA, whatever spin you put on it is gonna sound disingenuous, especially since OP is from Utah.

mb9113 wrote:

Nova wrote: Retake in June. Obviously you can do better.

Besides improving chances for the next cycle, could it somehow improve my lot this cycle?

I also have WLs at Vandy, UMN, and GW, but I wrote those off because of the chance I won't get aid even if I get off the WL.

Yes, it could get you off WLs this cycle. And if your numbers become an asset to them (median/above LSAT), its likely they will offer you a scholarship.