Post removed. Forum

[UpandDown97]

I just think that 169, 3.74 NA you have a strong shot at all of the T14 -- Yale, Stanford and Harvard included. However, if debt is a concern, re-taking is the best alternative. Retake, score 170+, and you'll have T6 (Columbia, Chicago, NYU) throwing a lot of money at you.

The published LSAT scores broken down by ethnicities show no scores over 169 for NA's. Your numbers have a very good chance at HS. Yale takes 1 a year at most but typically has only one on campus at a time. They have recently build a Native American Cultural Center and made a big undergraduate push, maybe it will filter into the law school. Harvard and Stanford have great programs as does Cornell. You will not have Chicago throwing money at you as they never have NA's, NYU seldom does. Penn never. Columbia will waitlist you and decide in Feb -April as they always do. Each year the t-14 takes about 10 NA's in total. Mostly at HS Cornell. If you think they are waiting for some unicorn with a 170+ they are not. It can't hurt but that's not the point unless you are Y or no law school at all. Apply early because the schools that care want to get this buttoned down as soon as possible. The facts that apply to other groups do not apply the NA's and anyone who says they do just doesn't know.

Though I can't confirm the more specific predictions, the general sentiment here is spot on. You're going to have your pick of law schools. The re-take crowd here is just an example of how drunk on that advice (and non-thinking) TLS often is.

[Ron Howard]

I just think that 169, 3.74 NA you have a strong shot at all of the T14 -- Yale, Stanford and Harvard included. However, if debt is a concern, re-taking is the best alternative. Retake, score 170+, and you'll have T6 (Columbia, Chicago, NYU) throwing a lot of money at you.

The published LSAT scores broken down by ethnicities show no scores over 169 for NA's. Your numbers have a very good chance at HS. Yale takes 1 a year at most but typically has only one on campus at a time. They have recently build a Native American Cultural Center and made a big undergraduate push, maybe it will filter into the law school. Harvard and Stanford have great programs as does Cornell. You will not have Chicago throwing money at you as they never have NA's, NYU seldom does. Penn never. Columbia will waitlist you and decide in Feb -April as they always do. Each year the t-14 takes about 10 NA's in total. Mostly at HS Cornell. If you think they are waiting for some unicorn with a 170+ they are not. It can't hurt but that's not the point unless you are Y or no law school at all. Apply early because the schools that care want to get this buttoned down as soon as possible. The facts that apply to other groups do not apply the NA's and anyone who says they do just doesn't know.

Though I can't confirm the more specific predictions, the general sentiment here is spot on. You're going to have your pick of law schools. The re-take crowd here is just an example of how drunk on that advice (and non-thinking) TLS often is.

TLS has saved many from the horror that is $200k+ in debt. Have a little respect, 0L (?).

That said, apply early and you will probably do quite well.

[UpandDown97]

I just think that 169, 3.74 NA you have a strong shot at all of the T14 -- Yale, Stanford and Harvard included. However, if debt is a concern, re-taking is the best alternative. Retake, score 170+, and you'll have T6 (Columbia, Chicago, NYU) throwing a lot of money at you.

The published LSAT scores broken down by ethnicities show no scores over 169 for NA's. Your numbers have a very good chance at HS. Yale takes 1 a year at most but typically has only one on campus at a time. They have recently build a Native American Cultural Center and made a big undergraduate push, maybe it will filter into the law school. Harvard and Stanford have great programs as does Cornell. You will not have Chicago throwing money at you as they never have NA's, NYU seldom does. Penn never. Columbia will waitlist you and decide in Feb -April as they always do. Each year the t-14 takes about 10 NA's in total. Mostly at HS Cornell. If you think they are waiting for some unicorn with a 170+ they are not. It can't hurt but that's not the point unless you are Y or no law school at all. Apply early because the schools that care want to get this buttoned down as soon as possible. The facts that apply to other groups do not apply the NA's and anyone who says they do just doesn't know.

Though I can't confirm the more specific predictions, the general sentiment here is spot on. You're going to have your pick of law schools. The re-take crowd here is just an example of how drunk on that advice (and non-thinking) TLS often is.

TLS has saved many from the horror that is $200k+ in debt. Have a little respect, 0L (?).

That said, apply early and you will probably do quite well.

You're scolding me for not respecting TLS? Is that serious?

[cc1012]

Post removed.

[Ron Howard]

It seems like people are starting to sway the way off foregoing the retake and getting apps in in September.

As a NA, is submitting in mid September with a 169 preferable to submitting in late October with a 170-171 (hypothetical)?

The 170-171 in late October would most certainly be preferable. But you may well do fine with the 169. I think you should go for a retake only if you think you can improve.

[Ron Howard]

I just think that 169, 3.74 NA you have a strong shot at all of the T14 -- Yale, Stanford and Harvard included. However, if debt is a concern, re-taking is the best alternative. Retake, score 170+, and you'll have T6 (Columbia, Chicago, NYU) throwing a lot of money at you.

The published LSAT scores broken down by ethnicities show no scores over 169 for NA's. Your numbers have a very good chance at HS. Yale takes 1 a year at most but typically has only one on campus at a time. They have recently build a Native American Cultural Center and made a big undergraduate push, maybe it will filter into the law school. Harvard and Stanford have great programs as does Cornell. You will not have Chicago throwing money at you as they never have NA's, NYU seldom does. Penn never. Columbia will waitlist you and decide in Feb -April as they always do. Each year the t-14 takes about 10 NA's in total. Mostly at HS Cornell. If you think they are waiting for some unicorn with a 170+ they are not. It can't hurt but that's not the point unless you are Y or no law school at all. Apply early because the schools that care want to get this buttoned down as soon as possible. The facts that apply to other groups do not apply the NA's and anyone who says they do just doesn't know.

Though I can't confirm the more specific predictions, the general sentiment here is spot on. You're going to have your pick of law schools. The re-take crowd here is just an example of how drunk on that advice (and non-thinking) TLS often is.

TLS has saved many from the horror that is $200k+ in debt. Have a little respect, 0L (?).

That said, apply early and you will probably do quite well.

You're scolding me for not respecting TLS? Is that serious?

Yes

[Fiero85]

It seems like people are starting to sway the way off foregoing the retake and getting apps in in September.

As a NA, is submitting in mid September with a 169 preferable to submitting in late October with a 170-171 (hypothetical)?

The 170-171 in late October would most certainly be preferable. But you may well do fine with the 169. I think you should go for a retake only if you think you can improve.

Why not both?

Pretty sure someone already said the best route:

Apply early + retake + update if higher --> profit

P.S. people crapping on the idea of retaking because of the NA aspect seem to be ignoring that the cost of retaking is so low to make it worth it, even if OP might be a shoo-in for lots of good results. Median LSAT score or higher for any school OP is serious about attending is still worth trying for. Full ride to CCN could hinge on it.

[Ron Howard]

It seems like people are starting to sway the way off foregoing the retake and getting apps in in September.

As a NA, is submitting in mid September with a 169 preferable to submitting in late October with a 170-171 (hypothetical)?

The 170-171 in late October would most certainly be preferable. But you may well do fine with the 169. I think you should go for a retake only if you think you can improve.

Why not both?

Pretty sure someone already said the best route:

Apply early + retake + update if higher --> profit

P.S. people crapping on the idea of retaking because of the NA aspect seem to be ignoring that the cost of retaking is so low to make it worth it, even if OP might be a shoo-in for lots of good results. Median LSAT score or higher for any school OP is serious about attending is still worth trying for. Full ride to CCN could hinge on it.

+1

[cc1012]

Post removed.

[Fiero85]

It seems like people are starting to sway the way off foregoing the retake and getting apps in in September.

As a NA, is submitting in mid September with a 169 preferable to submitting in late October with a 170-171 (hypothetical)?

The 170-171 in late October would most certainly be preferable. But you may well do fine with the 169. I think you should go for a retake only if you think you can improve.

Why not both?

Pretty sure someone already said the best route:

Apply early + retake + update if higher --> profit

P.S. people crapping on the idea of retaking because of the NA aspect seem to be ignoring that the cost of retaking is so low to make it worth it, even if OP might be a shoo-in for lots of good results. Median LSAT score or higher for any school OP is serious about attending is still worth trying for. Full ride to CCN could hinge on it.

You are absolutely right about the cost being so low that it is worth it.

I remember reading that, even if I submit in September, if I am taking the October LSAT, schools will hold my application until I submit my LSAT score after the October test. I guess I was asking if the month difference between the two options would make a difference in my results.

Nah, you're good.

[Btw I have no idea whether the bolded is actually true or not for the record. Might be based on the "what schools should we send your scores to?" form (which I think was a thing when I applied? maybe I'm crazy). You might be able to leave that blank and send updates more manually after seeing your retake score first, if desired. That might avoid the rumored "hold" period]

[michlaw]

Good luck.

[cc1012]

Post removed.

[Fiero85]

Against the 50% chance that you are a real person. Statistically you already barely exist. No natives above 169. Even if you get a 171 on the retake you are still below HYS 50% (H is 3.87 and 173). You will get in because you are NA. This isn't a mystery. HYS don't offer merit money. Columbia has 6 natives, Chicago 0, NYU 3 So if want CCN you are aiming at 3 annual slots.

You think they care if you get 1 or 2 more LSAT points? Why? In the real world 1 point is often the barrier of entry to HS, not so for you (at least until next year when the Supreme Court buries AA... Fisher). You keep harping on it because you have a chance to get higher, maybe. Why aren't you worried they want a higher gpa? Why don't you think you are disqualified by your low gpa? Numbers are numbers and it doesn't matter for US News stats that you went to a ivy undergrad or that you were a science major. You will get money from Cornell, Michigan, Berkeley, Columbia. Maybe a named scholly but that does not hinge on 1 or 2 LSAT points.

Your numbers in and of themselves don't warrant a full ride so stop pretending they do. You really can't have it both ways.

lol wtf

1) there aren't racial quotas...

2) seconded bolded is flat wrong...named schollys do hinge on one or two LSAT points plenty of times...aka being a finalist or not. They have to draw the line somewhere.

3) idk what this even means. 170s LSAT scores (if OP improves) and a 3.75 UGPA as a URM "warrants" a full ride to plenty of places due to URM boosting of stats, and merits full rides to pretty much every school outside the T14 without any URM boost.

Seems like an anti-AA rant, which is fine, but there is a designated thread for that (not this one).

[michlaw]

Never mind.

[shadowfax]

Against the 50% chance that you are a real person. Statistically you already barely exist. No natives above 169. Even if you get a 171 on the retake you are still below HYS 50% (H is 3.87 and 173). You will get in because you are NA. This isn't a mystery. HYS don't offer merit money. Columbia has 6 natives, Chicago 0, NYU 3 So if want CCN you are aiming at 3 annual slots.

You think they care if you get 1 or 2 more LSAT points? Why? In the real world 1 point is often the barrier of entry to HS, not so for you (at least until next year when the Supreme Court buries AA... Fisher). You keep harping on it because you have a chance to get higher, maybe. Why aren't you worried they want a higher gpa? Why don't you think you are disqualified by your low gpa? Numbers are numbers and it doesn't matter for US News stats that you went to a ivy undergrad or that you were a science major. You will get money from Cornell, Michigan, Berkeley, Columbia. Maybe a named scholly but that does not hinge on 1 or 2 LSAT points.

Your numbers in and of themselves don't warrant a full ride so stop pretending they do. You really can't have it both ways.

lol wtf

1) there aren't racial quotas...

2) seconded bolded is flat wrong...named schollys do hinge on one or two LSAT points plenty of times...aka being a finalist or not. They have to draw the line somewhere.

3) idk what this even means. 170s LSAT scores (if OP improves) and a 3.75 UGPA as a URM "warrants" a full ride to plenty of places due to URM boosting of stats, and merits full rides to pretty much every school outside the T14 without any URM boost.

Seems like an anti-AA rant, which is fine, but there is a designated thread for that (not this one).

LOL WTF
If you think it is random that HYS have 35-40% students of color year in year out year after year then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you. Personally I am a huge fan (and beneficiary) of what they do but that doesn't mean I have to stick my head in the sand (or somewhere else) and pretend I don't understand what is happening. I applaud them for what they do. As it relates to natives Harvard Stanford Columbia and Cornell get big props for making NA's a focus. Are there racial quotas, of course not. Are there always about 10 NA admitted to the T14 every year, yeah, and pretty much always to the same schools. Are the classes carefully crafted with an eye towards diversity, well duh.

I am certain that you have no idea what scores a NA needs to get a full ride. Are higher numbers better, sure, but your point about a couple of lsat points for a NA is silly. There are so few with +167 that they are unicorns already. The bigger issue is that most full rides are to buy scores and that 3 of the schools the op wants don't offer merit money. It doesn't matter that the op could get a full ride at a non t14 school because he/she has expressed zero interest in that alternative. It's HYS or full ride T14.

[fredfred]

Don't retake. It's a waste. Enjoy new haven. You will be the 1 NA above 168 in this cycle if the stats are predictive. That means with your already high-ish GPA, you are the top NA candidate in this class. Apply the day apps come in to all schools, write a great Yale 250 essay. If Yale is gonna admit a NA this year, which they will, it will not hinge on a 169 or a 172. If you feel like you could get 176+ then yeah retake. Otherwise apply first day apps come out and profit.

[shadowfax]

Don't retake. It's a waste. Enjoy new haven. You will be the 1 NA above 168 in this cycle if the stats are predictive. That means with your already high-ish GPA, you are the top NA candidate in this class. Apply the day apps come in to all schools, write a great Yale 250 essay. If Yale is gonna admit a NA this year, which they will, it will not hinge on a 169 or a 172. If you feel like you could get 176+ then yeah retake. Otherwise apply first day apps come out and profit.

At last someone who understands. Impressive. Funny though, Yale is the only school that has a true rolling admission so early there doesn't matter as much. They will ask you to apply and will send you sample Yale 250's to help you craft yours (I got my invitation in January). They really really care about the 250. For HS apply as early as you can. Don't do generic apps for the other schools. Carefully read the apps and answer any specific questions they ask.

[cc1012]

Post removed.

[UpandDown97]

I just think that 169, 3.74 NA you have a strong shot at all of the T14 -- Yale, Stanford and Harvard included. However, if debt is a concern, re-taking is the best alternative. Retake, score 170+, and you'll have T6 (Columbia, Chicago, NYU) throwing a lot of money at you.

The published LSAT scores broken down by ethnicities show no scores over 169 for NA's. Your numbers have a very good chance at HS. Yale takes 1 a year at most but typically has only one on campus at a time. They have recently build a Native American Cultural Center and made a big undergraduate push, maybe it will filter into the law school. Harvard and Stanford have great programs as does Cornell. You will not have Chicago throwing money at you as they never have NA's, NYU seldom does. Penn never. Columbia will waitlist you and decide in Feb -April as they always do. Each year the t-14 takes about 10 NA's in total. Mostly at HS Cornell. If you think they are waiting for some unicorn with a 170+ they are not. It can't hurt but that's not the point unless you are Y or no law school at all. Apply early because the schools that care want to get this buttoned down as soon as possible. The facts that apply to other groups do not apply the NA's and anyone who says they do just doesn't know.

Though I can't confirm the more specific predictions, the general sentiment here is spot on. You're going to have your pick of law schools. The re-take crowd here is just an example of how drunk on that advice (and non-thinking) TLS often is.

TLS has saved many from the horror that is $200k+ in debt. Have a little respect, 0L (?).

That said, apply early and you will probably do quite well.

You're scolding me for not respecting TLS? Is that serious?

Yes

That wasn't your original post.

[Ron Howard]

I just think that 169, 3.74 NA you have a strong shot at all of the T14 -- Yale, Stanford and Harvard included. However, if debt is a concern, re-taking is the best alternative. Retake, score 170+, and you'll have T6 (Columbia, Chicago, NYU) throwing a lot of money at you.

The published LSAT scores broken down by ethnicities show no scores over 169 for NA's. Your numbers have a very good chance at HS. Yale takes 1 a year at most but typically has only one on campus at a time. They have recently build a Native American Cultural Center and made a big undergraduate push, maybe it will filter into the law school. Harvard and Stanford have great programs as does Cornell. You will not have Chicago throwing money at you as they never have NA's, NYU seldom does. Penn never. Columbia will waitlist you and decide in Feb -April as they always do. Each year the t-14 takes about 10 NA's in total. Mostly at HS Cornell. If you think they are waiting for some unicorn with a 170+ they are not. It can't hurt but that's not the point unless you are Y or no law school at all. Apply early because the schools that care want to get this buttoned down as soon as possible. The facts that apply to other groups do not apply the NA's and anyone who says they do just doesn't know.

Though I can't confirm the more specific predictions, the general sentiment here is spot on. You're going to have your pick of law schools. The re-take crowd here is just an example of how drunk on that advice (and non-thinking) TLS often is.

TLS has saved many from the horror that is $200k+ in debt. Have a little respect, 0L (?).

That said, apply early and you will probably do quite well.

You're scolding me for not respecting TLS? Is that serious?

Yes

That wasn't your original post.

True. But so what?

[Mack.Hambleton]

Checking in for Ron Howard thread


Also I'm not sure how well NA applicants do, I've seen some underperform vs AA/MAs, I'd ask in the URM forum about how much of a boost you'll get.

[Ron Howard]

Thank you for checking in on me, Mack.

To the original poster: You could probably also post to the former T14 admissions dean thread. I think the fact that Native American applicants are so rare makes this an especially difficult question. Best of luck, though, and congratulations on the LSAT score!

[shadowfax]

Checking in for Ron Howard thread


Also I'm not sure how well NA applicants do, I've seen some underperform vs AA/MAs, I'd ask in the URM forum about how much of a boost you'll get.

In the right situation I would say it is equal to AA however fewer schools make it a priority. Some top schools have no NA's. Not sure you could find any that don't have representatives of all the other URM groups. Last remaining group you are allowed to freely discriminate against... the Washington Whats (substitute any other racial slur and the country would be up in arms). Many top schools have no Native Law courses and no Native Professors. Very few law firms have Native practices. Very much a specialty.

[cc1012]

Post removed.

[Fiero85]

Against the 50% chance that you are a real person. Statistically you already barely exist. No natives above 169. Even if you get a 171 on the retake you are still below HYS 50% (H is 3.87 and 173). You will get in because you are NA. This isn't a mystery. HYS don't offer merit money. Columbia has 6 natives, Chicago 0, NYU 3 So if want CCN you are aiming at 3 annual slots.

You think they care if you get 1 or 2 more LSAT points? Why? In the real world 1 point is often the barrier of entry to HS, not so for you (at least until next year when the Supreme Court buries AA... Fisher). You keep harping on it because you have a chance to get higher, maybe. Why aren't you worried they want a higher gpa? Why don't you think you are disqualified by your low gpa? Numbers are numbers and it doesn't matter for US News stats that you went to a ivy undergrad or that you were a science major. You will get money from Cornell, Michigan, Berkeley, Columbia. Maybe a named scholly but that does not hinge on 1 or 2 LSAT points.

Your numbers in and of themselves don't warrant a full ride so stop pretending they do. You really can't have it both ways.

lol wtf

1) there aren't racial quotas...

2) seconded bolded is flat wrong...named schollys do hinge on one or two LSAT points plenty of times...aka being a finalist or not. They have to draw the line somewhere.

3) idk what this even means. 170s LSAT scores (if OP improves) and a 3.75 UGPA as a URM "warrants" a full ride to plenty of places due to URM boosting of stats, and merits full rides to pretty much every school outside the T14 without any URM boost.

Seems like an anti-AA rant, which is fine, but there is a designated thread for that (not this one).

LOL WTF
If you think it is random that HYS have 35-40% students of color year in year out year after year then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you. Personally I am a huge fan (and beneficiary) of what they do but that doesn't mean I have to stick my head in the sand (or somewhere else) and pretend I don't understand what is happening. I applaud them for what they do. As it relates to natives Harvard Stanford Columbia and Cornell get big props for making NA's a focus. Are there racial quotas, of course not. Are there always about 10 NA admitted to the T14 every year, yeah, and pretty much always to the same schools. Are the classes carefully crafted with an eye towards diversity, well duh.

I am certain that you have no idea what scores a NA needs to get a full ride. Are higher numbers better, sure, but your point about a couple of lsat points for a NA is silly. There are so few with +167 that they are unicorns already. The bigger issue is that most full rides are to buy scores and that 3 of the schools the op wants don't offer merit money. It doesn't matter that the op could get a full ride at a non t14 school because he/she has expressed zero interest in that alternative. It's HYS or full ride T14.

I was actually referring to the poster I replied to saying "3 annual slots" at CCN schools, as if there were an exact number. Maybe I used the wrong term for modern day admissions but old time racial quotas acted as caps too in some cases ("one Jew for this tennis club" or the like), and all I was getting at is that saying there are 3 slots for those three schools is misleading in both directions.

Anyway, I respect what you're saying and totally admit to having limited URM admissions knowledge. But I'll stand by my suggestion of boosting LSAT, even if just in case. The cost of time, money, and applying slightly later is so small. Couldn't hurt to get some "insurance runs" for HSCCN and maybe make a better case for Y.

Good luck, OP. I think we all agree that you'll have some great options.