Duke v. Michigan vs. Retake LSAT Forum

[Duggiiee]

Hi folks! Apologies if this is the wrong board, but hopefully I'm in the right place.

I applied this cycle with a 3.6 GPA and 170 LSAT. I have been admitted to Duke and Michigan (Michigan with a sizeable scholarship) but was hoping for Chicago or Penn (both of which I was waitlisted at).

I'm trying to decide between a few options: 1. Accept admission to Duke or Michigan. 2. Wait on waitlists for Penn or Chicago. 3. Retake LSAT and try again as I planned to defer anyhow (had been consistently scoring 174+ on PTs).

Thank you for your advice/opinions!

[lymenheimer]

Hi folks! Apologies if this is the wrong board, but hopefully I'm in the right place.

I applied this cycle with a 3.6 GPA and 170 LSAT. I have been admitted to Duke and Michigan (Michigan with a sizeable scholarship) but was hoping for Chicago or Penn (both of which I was waitlisted at).

I'm trying to decide between a few options: 1. Accept admission to Duke or Michigan. 2. Wait on waitlists for Penn or Chicago. 3. Retake LSAT and try again as I planned to defer anyhow (had been consistently scoring 174+ on PTs).

Thank you for your advice/opinions!

In order to receive the best feedback in this forum, please provide as much of the following information in your original post as possible:

-The schools you are considering
-The total Cost of Attendance (COA) of each. COA = cost of tuition + fees + books + cost of living (COL) + accumulated interest - scholarships. Here is a helpful calculator.
-How you will be financing your COA, i.e. loans, family, or savings
-Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any)
-Your general career goals
-Your LSAT/GPA numbers
-How many times you have taken the LSAT


You should probably wait to decide until you have your full range of scholarship offers in hand.

[Duggiiee]

Hi folks! Apologies if this is the wrong board, but hopefully I'm in the right place.

I applied this cycle with a 3.6 GPA and 170 LSAT. I have been admitted to Duke and Michigan (Michigan with a sizeable scholarship) but was hoping for Chicago or Penn (both of which I was waitlisted at).

I'm trying to decide between a few options: 1. Accept admission to Duke or Michigan. 2. Wait on waitlists for Penn or Chicago. 3. Retake LSAT and try again as I planned to defer anyhow (had been consistently scoring 174+ on PTs).

Thank you for your advice/opinions!

In order to receive the best feedback in this forum, please provide as much of the following information in your original post as possible:

-The schools you are considering
-The total Cost of Attendance (COA) of each. COA = cost of tuition + fees + books + cost of living (COL) + accumulated interest - scholarships. Here is a helpful calculator.
-How you will be financing your COA, i.e. loans, family, or savings
-Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any)
-Your general career goals
-Your LSAT/GPA numbers
-How many times you have taken the LSAT


You should probably wait to decide until you have your full range of scholarship offers in hand.

Thanks! I'll sit down and put together all of these numbers and weigh them in!

[WheninLaw]

Hi folks! Apologies if this is the wrong board, but hopefully I'm in the right place.

I applied this cycle with a 3.6 GPA and 170 LSAT. I have been admitted to Duke and Michigan (Michigan with a sizeable scholarship) but was hoping for Chicago or Penn (both of which I was waitlisted at).

I'm trying to decide between a few options: 1. Accept admission to Duke or Michigan. 2. Wait on waitlists for Penn or Chicago. 3. Retake LSAT and try again as I planned to defer anyhow (had been consistently scoring 174+ on PTs).

Thank you for your advice/opinions!

Totally depends on scholarship $$. With that GPA, you probably won't get much from Chicago or Penn, even with a few more LSAT points.

[Duggiiee]

Hi folks! Apologies if this is the wrong board, but hopefully I'm in the right place.

I applied this cycle with a 3.6 GPA and 170 LSAT. I have been admitted to Duke and Michigan (Michigan with a sizeable scholarship) but was hoping for Chicago or Penn (both of which I was waitlisted at).

I'm trying to decide between a few options: 1. Accept admission to Duke or Michigan. 2. Wait on waitlists for Penn or Chicago. 3. Retake LSAT and try again as I planned to defer anyhow (had been consistently scoring 174+ on PTs).

Thank you for your advice/opinions!

Totally depends on scholarship $$. With that GPA, you probably won't get much from Chicago or Penn, even with a few more LSAT points.

This is good advice. The only thing I could hope for with a few more LSAT points would be admission but not $$, huh? (Speculative of course)

[WheninLaw]

Hi folks! Apologies if this is the wrong board, but hopefully I'm in the right place.

I applied this cycle with a 3.6 GPA and 170 LSAT. I have been admitted to Duke and Michigan (Michigan with a sizeable scholarship) but was hoping for Chicago or Penn (both of which I was waitlisted at).

I'm trying to decide between a few options: 1. Accept admission to Duke or Michigan. 2. Wait on waitlists for Penn or Chicago. 3. Retake LSAT and try again as I planned to defer anyhow (had been consistently scoring 174+ on PTs).

Thank you for your advice/opinions!

Totally depends on scholarship $$. With that GPA, you probably won't get much from Chicago or Penn, even with a few more LSAT points.

This is good advice. The only thing I could hope for with a few more LSAT points would be admission but not $$, huh? (Speculative of course)

I think you could expect higher scholarship amounts as you improved, but it would be minimal. The fact that you're stuck (way) below the LSAT median really hurts.

It's likely that your large Michigan scholarship will dictate $$ more than any LSAT improvement. I'd expect you to get at least half from UoC (maybe Penn as well?), but who can know.

[dabigchina]

Hi folks! Apologies if this is the wrong board, but hopefully I'm in the right place.

I applied this cycle with a 3.6 GPA and 170 LSAT. I have been admitted to Duke and Michigan (Michigan with a sizeable scholarship) but was hoping for Chicago or Penn (both of which I was waitlisted at).

I'm trying to decide between a few options: 1. Accept admission to Duke or Michigan. 2. Wait on waitlists for Penn or Chicago. 3. Retake LSAT and try again as I planned to defer anyhow (had been consistently scoring 174+ on PTs).

Thank you for your advice/opinions!

Not sure what "sizable" means. Penn and Chicago are 2 of the most GPA sensitive schools so I don't know if a few points on the LSAT are going to help you too much. You might get more money from other schools, however.

[krads153]

Like the others have said, largely depends on $$. If you were to get into Chicago/Penn at sticker, I wouldn't go to those.

Might as well retake for more $$ though. No harm in retaking.

[Duggiiee]

I think I'm going to retake, if only to get more money from Duke or Michigan. Thank you for the perspective, folks! I really appreciate it.

Related to this - If I wanted to work in DC/NY, I'm guessing that Duke would better position me there than would Michigan? Or is it more complicated than that?

Edit: "Sizeable" might be a better thing to define. Michigan offered me about 2/3 tuition.

[krads153]

For NYC/DC, I'd say Duke and Michigan are pretty even in terms of firm recruitment. Students at different T-14s may apply to different markets geographically, but in terms of actual recruitment, outside of HYSCN, I'd say the T-14 are pretty even for recruitment at most NYC firms (except for maybe Berkeley, which generally has fewer NYC offices recruiting there).

You're going to need to be top of the class at Chi/Penn/Michigan/Duke to get DC biglaw, so I wouldn't bet on DC from any non-HYS T-14.

[Duggiiee]

For NYC/DC, I'd say Duke and Michigan are pretty even in terms of firm recruitment. Students at different T-14s may apply to different markets geographically, but in terms of actual recruitment, outside of HYSCN, I'd say the T-14 are pretty even for recruitment at most NYC firms (except for maybe Berkeley, which generally has fewer NYC offices recruiting there).

You're going to need to be top of the class at Chi/Penn/Michigan/Duke to get DC biglaw, so I wouldn't bet on DC from any non-HYS T-14.

Out of curiosity, is that just because of the prestige of DC firms? Or the small number relative to NY?

[krads153]

For NYC/DC, I'd say Duke and Michigan are pretty even in terms of firm recruitment. Students at different T-14s may apply to different markets geographically, but in terms of actual recruitment, outside of HYSCN, I'd say the T-14 are pretty even for recruitment at most NYC firms (except for maybe Berkeley, which generally has fewer NYC offices recruiting there).

You're going to need to be top of the class at Chi/Penn/Michigan/Duke to get DC biglaw, so I wouldn't bet on DC from any non-HYS T-14.

Out of curiosity, is that just because of the prestige of DC firms? Or the small number relative to NY?

I think big reason is that there's WAY fewer associates.

ALso they do more appellate litigation than NYC, which may attract more order of the coif types.

[Biglaw1990]

.

[Duggiiee]

If the $ is comparable, go to Duke. Much better employment stats and a lot more prestigious.

Universally prestigious or in my target markets? I have been (anecdotally) hearing horror stories about Michigan's employment stats dropping but I wasn't sure what to believe. I'm definitely leaning towards Duke. Would it even be worth it at slightly less money than Michigan? I also know that COL may be cheaper in Durham than Ann Arbor.

[krads153]

If the $ is comparable, go to Duke. Much better employment stats and a lot more prestigious.

Maybe in the South....

I work at a NYC firm - there are little to no Duke grads. There are a ton of NYU and Columbia grads and then for the rest of the schools generally equally represented, although very few Duke/Cornell for some reason. Outside of NYU/Columbia/Harvard/Yale, I'd say my firm doesn't differentiate that greatly among the rest of the T-14 (in terms of callback-hiring ratios).

HOw about it leave to the lawyers to give advice?

And given what I've seen in this profession now, my general advice is - if you have to pay over $100k law school, don't go at all. And for some, that might not even be worth it. Don't listen to some guy who ED'd and is going to pay sticker at Penn....unless parents are paying, GL with that.

[Duggiiee]

If the $ is comparable, go to Duke. Much better employment stats and a lot more prestigious.

Maybe in the South....

I work at a NYC firm - there are little to no Duke grads. There are a ton of NYU and Columbia grads and then for the rest of the schools generally equally represented, although very few Duke/Cornell for some reason. Outside of NYU/Columbia/Harvard/Yale, I'd say my firm doesn't differentiate that greatly among the rest of the T-14 (in terms of callback-hiring ratios).

HOw about it leave to the lawyers to give advice?

And given what I've seen in this profession now, my general advice is - if you have to pay over $100k law school, don't go at all. And for some, that might not even be worth it. Don't listen to some guy who ED'd and is going to pay sticker at Penn....unless parents are paying, GL with that.

This is helpful advice. Thank you! All hypothetical of course, but do you think Duke/Michigan are worth it if I'm paying under $100k? From your experience.

[krads153]

This is helpful advice. Thank you! All hypothetical of course, but do you think Duke/Michigan are worth it if I'm paying under $100k? From your experience.

Well, I can bet that you most likely (like 90% chance) you won't like working in biglaw, but if you end up with under 100k total debt, it's perfectly doable to pay that off quickly and lateral to another job if you want to, so yeah I think that's fine.

[Biglaw1990]

.

[CFC1524]

This is helpful advice. Thank you! All hypothetical of course, but do you think Duke/Michigan are worth it if I'm paying under $100k? From your experience.

Well, I can bet that you most likely (like 90% chance) you won't like working in biglaw, but if you end up with under 100k total debt, it's perfectly doable to pay that off quickly and lateral to another job if you want to, so yeah I think that's fine.

I generally agree with this sentiment - and I realize you weren't doing any formal calculations or anything - but it's worth mentioning that keeping total debt under 100,000 is harder than it sounds. Counting interest and cost of living, most students need at least 3/4 tuition (probably more) to even get close to that figure.

Apply to Cornell OP? I think retaking is the answer, but if you want NYC biglaw, then Cornell (or Duke) is probably going to be a better option than Michigan. Biglaw + fedclerk is 74% for Cornell, 70% for Duke, and 54% for Michigan. Might be easiest to swing big money at Cornell, but any t-14 under 100k debt is a good deal. Best advice is to retake, apply broadly, and negotiate with everyone to get the highest offers possible.

[Mullens]

If you haven't applied to the entire lower T14, you should. It will help you negotiate scholarships between schools. You're probably better offer trying to negotiate scholarships offers than retake since you're already over the LSAT median for a good chunk of the T14. Based on your GPA, your best offer even with a retake will probably be in the lower T14 and I don't think there's a reason to choose Penn or Chicago over a lower T14 school unless the scholarship offers are pretty close.

[Duggiiee]

I haven't shot apps out to a lot of the lower T14 like UVA or Cornell. Though I don't really have much connection to either. However, it sounds like I should, even if only to use them as bargaining power.

[Clemenceau]

I haven't shot apps out to a lot of the lower T14 like UVA or Cornell. Though I don't really have much connection to either. However, it sounds like I should, even if only to use them as bargaining power.

Not applying to cornell is a big mistake. Generous with $ and good employment stats. Your "connection" to a school should be a very minor consideration.

[urbanist11]

I haven't shot apps out to a lot of the lower T14 like UVA or Cornell. Though I don't really have much connection to either. However, it sounds like I should, even if only to use them as bargaining power.

You should be blanketing t14

[Duggiiee]

I haven't shot apps out to a lot of the lower T14 like UVA or Cornell. Though I don't really have much connection to either. However, it sounds like I should, even if only to use them as bargaining power.

You should be blanketing t14

I've decided to defer until 2017. So maybe I'll just blanket the T14 next cycle. Is there any risk to temporarily turning down Mich/Duke, retaking, and then reapplying next year? Or should I put a seat deposit to hold one of those offers, then drop it if I have a high jump in LSAT?

Once again - thanks for the opinions, all!

[urbanist11]

I haven't shot apps out to a lot of the lower T14 like UVA or Cornell. Though I don't really have much connection to either. However, it sounds like I should, even if only to use them as bargaining power.

You should be blanketing t14

I've decided to defer until 2017. So maybe I'll just blanket the T14 next cycle. Is there any risk to temporarily turning down Mich/Duke, retaking, and then reapplying next year? Or should I put a seat deposit to hold one of those offers, then drop it if I have a high jump in LSAT?

Once again - thanks for the opinions, all!

If you aren't set on going this cycle I see no risk in retaking. With a several point in increase you'll likely have more options and $. Mich and Duke won't hold it against you if you reapply.