Top Law Schools

El Principe wrote:I mean, could an average letter really really be that bad to keep you out of those schools with those numbers? You sure a LOR writer didn't sabotage you or something?

jbagelboy wrote:Jesus. Yea this isn't right. As a comparison, last year I had 172/3.7x, and was admitted w/ $$ to every school on your list that I applied to except a WL at Stanford.

I think if NYU came through with $75K+, that could be your cycle. Otherwise, getting off the WL at Chicago w/ $$ (which happens a lot) would also be a good option here. After tanking your JS1 H seems unlikely.

I don't even see retaking as the dispositive feature here.. A 172 can already do wonders (see above). You need to rebrand. Get better LoRs, more work experience, develop a more compelling narrative.

hichvichwoh wrote:

jbagelboy wrote:Jesus. Yea this isn't right. As a comparison, last year I had 172/3.7x, and was admitted w/ $$ to every school on your list that I applied to except a WL at Stanford.

I think if NYU came through with $75K+, that could be your cycle. Otherwise, getting off the WL at Chicago w/ $$ (which happens a lot) would also be a good option here. After tanking your JS1 H seems unlikely.

I don't even see retaking as the dispositive feature here.. A 172 can already do wonders (see above). You need to rebrand. Get better LoRs, more work experience, develop a more compelling narrative.

can this be done in a year?

cotiger wrote:

hichvichwoh wrote:

jbagelboy wrote:Jesus. Yea this isn't right. As a comparison, last year I had 172/3.7x, and was admitted w/ $$ to every school on your list that I applied to except a WL at Stanford.

I think if NYU came through with $75K+, that could be your cycle. Otherwise, getting off the WL at Chicago w/ $$ (which happens a lot) would also be a good option here. After tanking your JS1 H seems unlikely.

I don't even see retaking as the dispositive feature here.. A 172 can already do wonders (see above). You need to rebrand. Get better LoRs, more work experience, develop a more compelling narrative.

can this be done in a year?

His major advisor was MIA, he'll get WE as a matter of course, and hopefully OP has more than one way to explain who he is and what drives him. So yeah, pretty certainly.

jimbeam21 wrote:Do you have other options next year? A job offer you can fall back on? I'd say take a year or two off, do something INTERESTING, and reapply in a couple of years. And by interesting, I don't mean taking a crappy paralegal job or another 9-5 that has little to no relevance to law school. Go do peace corps or tfa or work for a labor union or something. Or join a start up or get a consulting gig and build some useful and unique skills. W/O some sort of cool work experience next year, I can't see how your application would be any more compelling next cycle.

During this time, study for the LSAT and Good luck! Follow your dreams!. If you consistently study for 6 months I can't see any reason why you can't get a 175+. With your GPA, 172 is borderline for Harvard/Chicago/Columbia. With a 175+ they'll have a harder time rejecting you and it will open you up to getting $$.

And it seems like it was your interviewing skills that sank you. If you got interviews at Harvard Chicago and Columbia, your interview should have simply sealed things, not gotten you waitlisted. I'm guessing you don't have a lot of experience interviewing coming straight from undergrad. I think going through the job search process will help immensely- I know it did for me.

jimbeam21 wrote:I'm guessing you don't have a lot of experience interviewing coming straight from undergrad. I think going through the job search process will help immensely- I know it did for me.

jimbeam21 wrote:Do you have other options next year? A job offer you can fall back on? I'd say take a year or two off, do something INTERESTING, and reapply in a couple of years. And by interesting, I don't mean taking a crappy paralegal job or another 9-5 that has little to no relevance to law school. Go do peace corps or tfa or work for a labor union or something. Or join a start up or get a consulting gig and build some useful and unique skills. W/O some sort of cool work experience next year, I can't see how your application would be any more compelling next cycle.

During this time, study for the LSAT and Good luck! Follow your dreams!. If you consistently study for 6 months I can't see any reason why you can't get a 175+. With your GPA, 172 is borderline for Harvard/Chicago/Columbia. With a 175+ they'll have a harder time rejecting you and it will open you up to getting $$.

And it seems like it was your interviewing skills that sank you. If you got interviews at Harvard Chicago and Columbia, your interview should have simply sealed things, not gotten you waitlisted. I'm guessing you don't have a lot of experience interviewing coming straight from undergrad. I think going through the job search process will help immensely- I know it did for me.

lawschool22 wrote:You need a 4th option, which is get WE and don't worry about re-taking, unless you are consistently scoring 180 on PT's. Getting higher than a 172 starts to become a crapshoot. I mean, you can re-take if you want, but this isn't the typical "you should definitely Good luck! Follow your dreams!" situation. The issue here is something else. I think that something is WE, and *maybe* sub-par LORS. But I don't think weak LORs would be enough to derail a cycle like this.

You definitely had a sub-optimal cycle given your numbers. It might not be a horrible idea to hire Spivey, since I'm wondering if there isn't something else off in your PS, resume, etc. At least post your PS and have some other people read it, so we can see if it was way off base.

But most important would be getting some WE imho.

jjking wrote:Just another thought, and I say this with the best intentions - is it possible you could use more interview practice? You got waitlisted at Harvard, Chi and Columbia, all schools that were interested enough to offer you an interview which is usually a pretty good sign. Not saying everything else - LORs, K-JD, etc. didn't play a part, but just something to keep in mind if you're re-applying.

Tuxedo wrote: And it's not just a question of doing well on your H interviews—it's about doing well at OCI and all of the other kinds of formal and informal ways that professors, peers, and potential employers will evaluate you. There are questions in every interview that get at what you've learned from your experience and how that process has made you a more viable candidate. Going into any kind of professional school without honest (i.e. non-bullshit) answers to these questions seems really risky to me, having been out of school for a while.

jimbeam21 wrote:

Tuxedo wrote: And it's not just a question of doing well on your H interviews—it's about doing well at OCI and all of the other kinds of formal and informal ways that professors, peers, and potential employers will evaluate you. There are questions in every interview that get at what you've learned from your experience and how that process has made you a more viable candidate. Going into any kind of professional school without honest (i.e. non-bullshit) answers to these questions seems really risky to me, having been out of school for a while.

Agreed wholeheartedly. For reference, I was dead-set on going KJD a couple of years ago. I sat the June LSAT my junior year, crapped my pants b/c of one bad RC section, and cancelled. In hindsight, after the test was released, I would have scored a 175+, but honestly, cancelling was the best thing to have happened to me.

As a result, I ended up looking for jobs and got a pretty cool consulting gig. Going through the interview process and really thinking about myself, my goals, and what motivates me helped me tremendously when I eventually decided to Good luck! Follow your dreams! and apply to law school. I grew tremendously over the last two years, and I think that was reflected in my apps and my interviews this year. Out of the schools I interviewed with, I was accepted at H, Ruby from CHI, and Hamilton from Columbia. With some work experience and a few extra points on the LSAT, I don't see why your cycle can't turn out similarly. Good luck!