UVA or Reapply? Forum

[CrunchyTone]

Stats: 4.0, 170, KJD

Goals: FC -> Biglaw (NY, DC)

I am happy with UVA’s offer of $$ but I am worried about going to law school and having $150k in debt in the middle of a pandemic with classes likely being online. That combined with me being KJD has me considering reapplying next cycle.

Another factor is I missed 9 LG questions on my September LSAT while scoring 170, so I feel like I haven’t capped out.

[crazywafflez]

Never hurts to wait and reapply next cycle. If you feel you can get more points then go for it and retake.
UVA at 150k CoA isn't terrible. I think you'd for sure get Biglaw in NYC if that is your goal. FCs may be harder to come by though. Again though, waiting isn't your worst option by any means.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Agree with crazy. UVA at that price is a perfectly good outcome for your goals but there's a ton of upside to waiting and reapplying if you can eke even 2-3 more points out of the LSAT. 4.0/172 is good enough for HYS or a full ride at CCN, and a 173 or 174 makes that kind of outcome fairly likely. If you missed 9 LG questions then you were within licking distance of the high 170s.

Also, being KJD is worth avoiding if you can.

[Platopus]

Absolutely retake and reapply. -9 on LG and 170 means you basically went -1/-2 on the rest of the test. If you can get LG to -0, which is 100% doable, then you are looking at 175+ and a 4.0 which is $$$$ everywhere. KJD just makes this an even easier decision. Also, this next cycle is probably going to be way easier with COVID effects still lingering. Colleges / Universities everywhere are expecting a decline in enrollment, which means a very easy cycle

[CrunchyTone]

Thanks for the advice, guys.

I'm leaning toward retaking and reapplying but my biggest concern is that I am passing on a solid offer that would be good for my goals. If I don't improve on the LSAT at all, what are the odds I could get the same offer from UVA next cycle? I'm not sure what kind of work experience I could add between now and September/October in this economy.

[Dcc617]

Don't be a K-JD.

[albanach]

Absolutely retake and reapply. -9 on LG and 170 means you basically went -1/-2 on the rest of the test. If you can get LG to -0, which is 100% doable, then you are looking at 175+ and a 4.0 which is $$$$ everywhere. KJD just makes this an even easier decision. Also, this next cycle is probably going to be way easier with COVID effects still lingering. Colleges / Universities everywhere are expecting a decline in enrollment, which means a very easy cycle

Why would law schools expect a decline in enrollment? Class sizes after the 08-09 recession were larger. UVA had 20% higher enrollment and, I think, equally good or better stats. If a lot of smart folk lose their job and there aren't equivalent positions, grad school is an obvious option to wait out the recession.

It's also a bit of a falicy to suggest that because someone hit -0/-1 on three sections that they'll do the same next time. OP, were you consistently testing in the mid-high 170s? Were you expecting significantly higher?

[CrunchyTone]

Absolutely retake and reapply. -9 on LG and 170 means you basically went -1/-2 on the rest of the test. If you can get LG to -0, which is 100% doable, then you are looking at 175+ and a 4.0 which is $$$$ everywhere. KJD just makes this an even easier decision. Also, this next cycle is probably going to be way easier with COVID effects still lingering. Colleges / Universities everywhere are expecting a decline in enrollment, which means a very easy cycle

Why would law schools expect a decline in enrollment? Class sizes after the 08-09 recession were larger. UVA had 20% higher enrollment and, I think, equally good or better stats. If a lot of smart folk lose their job and there aren't equivalent positions, grad school is an obvious option to wait out the recession.

It's also a bit of a falicy to suggest that because someone hit -0/-1 on three sections that they'll do the same next time. OP, were you consistently testing in the mid-high 170s? Were you expecting significantly higher?

I was testing in the low to mid 170s. 172-173 was well within reach but I wasn't necessarily expecting 175+.

[Platopus]

Why would law schools expect a decline in enrollment? Class sizes after the 08-09 recession were larger. UVA had 20% higher enrollment and, I think, equally good or better stats. If a lot of smart folk lose their job and there aren't equivalent positions, grad school is an obvious option to wait out the recession.

It's also a bit of a falicy to suggest that because someone hit -0/-1 on three sections that they'll do the same next time. OP, were you consistently testing in the mid-high 170s? Were you expecting significantly higher?

From the NYT: "The pandemic is striking during the height of the admissions process,” the letter said. “College and university leaders are fully expecting significant, potentially unparalleled, declines in enrollment, both from students who do not come back, and those who will never start."

[+] Spoiler

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/15/us/c ... sions.html

I think the big difference here is not only the financial impact of the pandemic, but the fact that many students, particularly international students, will have a very, very hard time coming back to the States this fall. While this of course has the greatest impact on the Fall '20 semester, I can definitely see a decline in enrollment this fall having an impact on admissions for the Fall '21. Either way, I'm not willing to die on this hill and I could very well be entirely wrong.

But that wouldn't change my advice. Going -9 on LG can definitely be fixed and I am positive that will more practice OP could get that down to at least a -1/2. Even assuming OP drops a couple more points on LR / RC next time around, OP stands to improve his score by getting LG down. Even a 1-2 point increase on OP's LSAT will open more doors and $$$$. Retaking, getting any kind of W/E and reapplying will almost certainly help OP.

[albanach]

Why would law schools expect a decline in enrollment? Class sizes after the 08-09 recession were larger. UVA had 20% higher enrollment and, I think, equally good or better stats. If a lot of smart folk lose their job and there aren't equivalent positions, grad school is an obvious option to wait out the recession.

It's also a bit of a falicy to suggest that because someone hit -0/-1 on three sections that they'll do the same next time. OP, were you consistently testing in the mid-high 170s? Were you expecting significantly higher?

From the NYT: "The pandemic is striking during the height of the admissions process,” the letter said. “College and university leaders are fully expecting significant, potentially unparalleled, declines in enrollment, both from students who do not come back, and those who will never start."

[+] Spoiler

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/15/us/c ... sions.html

I think the big difference here is not only the financial impact of the pandemic, but the fact that many students, particularly international students, will have a very, very hard time coming back to the States this fall. While this of course has the greatest impact on the Fall '20 semester, I can definitely see a decline in enrollment this fall having an impact on admissions for the Fall '21. Either way, I'm not willing to die on this hill and I could very well be entirely wrong.

But that wouldn't change my advice. Going -9 on LG can definitely be fixed and I am positive that will more practice OP could get that down to at least a -1/2. Even assuming OP drops a couple more points on LR / RC next time around, OP stands to improve his score by getting LG down. Even a 1-2 point increase on OP's LSAT will open more doors and $$$$. Retaking, getting any kind of W/E and reapplying will almost certainly help OP.

Remember that, assuming OP wants to work at a firm and that a firm job is attainable from both UVA and H, there's a cost to waiting. I have no idea what CrunchyTone is making right now, but I'm guessing it's not almost $200k. So graduating a year later means losing the differential on that one year of earnings. Even if all OP did was max out their 401k for a year and nothing else, that's an additional $200k in the pot at retirement (admittedly in future dollars). If we say OP should be able to save an additional $30k in after-tax dollars as a first year biglaw attorney, they now need to retake and score an additional $50k+ in $$$ just to break even with where they are today.

I generally agree with the sentiment that you should max out your LSAT before applying, but at this point OP has a high LSAT and can't retake without missing a cycle.

The one argument I see against the above would be if you believe that career earnings will be higher simply on account of the degree from H. I don't know if there's much published evidence to that effect.

Now if OP want's BigFed with a view to being a federal judge or a similar unicorn-track career like big-PI, then retaking with a goal of HY makes a whole lot more sense.

[QContinuum]

From the NYT: "The pandemic is striking during the height of the admissions process,” the letter said. “College and university leaders are fully expecting significant, potentially unparalleled, declines in enrollment, both from students who do not come back, and those who will never start."

Sure, I can see a lower than expected/planned for matriculation rate for rising 1Ls starting fall 2020, but the effect on the applicant pool or matriculation rate for rising 1Ls starting fall 2021 is completely unknown at this time. Historically, during economic contractions, applicant pools have grown, making law school admissions more competitive, not less. But, of course, 1) we don't know whether the economy will snap back by the end of summer 2020, or if it'll go into recession or even depression, and 2) we don't know what'll happen with the pandemic by the end of summer 2020; if the pandemic remains a major consideration through the 2020-21 cycle, we don't have any modern precedents to help us predict what that'd do to the applicant pool.

But that wouldn't change my advice. Going -9 on LG can definitely be fixed and I am positive that will more practice OP could get that down to at least a -1/2. Even assuming OP drops a couple more points on LR / RC next time around, OP stands to improve his score by getting LG down. Even a 1-2 point increase on OP's LSAT will open more doors and $$$$. Retaking, getting any kind of W/E and reapplying will almost certainly help OP.

This I 100% agree with. Even if the applicant pool expands in the 2020-21 cycle, I don't think LSAT medians will rise by 5+ points. A 1-2 point rise is more plausible. If OP retakes, improves their LG performance, and reapplies, they'll most likely be in a better position next cycle than they are now.

[HooDat]

Either choice is reasonable. You retake and you give yourself a strong chance of an improved cycle. You matriculate and you get that big law salary a year earlier. Either is defensible. I think the tiebreak should be based on how you want to spend the next year. Online courses would be a huge turn-off for me, especially 1L where the camaraderie is what got me through. But I also wouldn't want to dedicate an entire year of my twenties to "hung out at home, studied for the LSAT, repeat."

UVA is killer for clerkships. If you're willing to live in the middle of nowhere, and if you're patient enough to clerk 2-3 after graduation, then even at median, you'd be competitive for a district court.

[QContinuum]

But I also wouldn't want to dedicate an entire year of my twenties to "hung out at home, studied for the LSAT, repeat."

Ideally no one would "hang out at home, study for the LSAT, repeat" for an entire year. At a minimum, there are still plenty of law-related remote-work pro bono opportunities out there for the taking.

[Sackboy]

Don't be a K-JD.

Being a K-JD is fine.

Being a K-JD after passing up on an obvious opportunity to improve your LSAT and consequently $$$ is not fine.

Retake and reapply. Why go to UVA now with $150k+ of debt when you could go to UVA next year with a Dillard?

[Dcc617]

Don't be a K-JD.

Being a K-JD is fine.

Being a K-JD after passing up on an obvious opportunity to improve your LSAT and consequently $$$ is not fine.

Retake and reapply. Why go to UVA now with $150k+ of debt when you could go to UVA next year with a Dillard?

Also, being a K-JD is dumb. You're dedicating 3 years of your life, etc. to a career field despite having no real work experience or experience living as an actual grownup.

Take some time off, save some money, live your early twenties some. Law school will wait.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Agree with dcc. Being a KJD is a perfectly survivable mistake, but it's still almost always a mistake.

It can make sense due to exogenous circumstances: international students who have no other path to a visa, people with certain kinds of financial support (outside scholarships, UMC parents, etc.) that might not be around in a few years. Those are the exceptions—situations where getting to law school now has intrinsic value comparable to tens of thousands of dollars—that prove the rule.

[Sackboy]

Also, being a K-JD is dumb.

Yeah, well, ya know, that's just like, uhh, your opinion, man.

[plurilingue]

The June LSAT registration is still open. I would enroll in it, take it, and see is you get your desired score. If you get a 172+, inform the schools that waitlisted or even denied you and see what they say. I’ve heard of immediate admits off of waitlists and even reversals of admissions denials in these circumstances. I bet there will be a lot of WL movement anyway this year with the pandemic.