Top Law Schools

What are my definite safes?
Chances at UT, UCLA, USC, NYU, Northwestern?

Oct '12 - 157
Dec '12 - 163
June '13 - ???

I retook June. Hoping I get a higher score :/

Though I have a bit of a GPA issue (i.e, none), I had a 166 LSAT and was rejected/waitlisted at all of the T14. Other evidence confirms that the MA boost is fractional compared to the AA or even NA boosts.

Apply everywhere, hope someone bites. I wouldn't bother applying to "safeties" as a URM in this era. Either you get into a school worth going to, or don't go.

I wish there was more info on MA stats. Almost everyone who gets a bite from mylsn.info is AA. Very discouraging.

rion91 wrote:I wish there was more info on MA stats. Almost everyone who gets a bite from mylsn.info is AA. Very discouraging.

My thoughts exactly. I have a 3.3X and am aiming for 170+ in October. I wish there was more info on how MA URMs on the wrong side of 170 generally fare.

Search LSN (not mylsn) for races that are "mex" or "MA" and it will pull up all the applicants that listed their race as such. Then just kind of pick the one closest to your stats and see what the future looks like.

twentypercentmore wrote:Though I have a bit of a GPA issue (i.e, none), I had a 166 LSAT and was rejected/waitlisted at all of the T14. Other evidence confirms that the MA boost is fractional compared to the AA or even NA boosts.

Apply everywhere, hope someone bites. I wouldn't bother applying to "safeties" as a URM in this era. Either you get into a school worth going to, or don't go.

I wouldn't bother applying below the USC, UCLA or UT level. Any schools below that level are not worth going to. Even if you were to get in to USC, UCLA or UT, the COA of $200K is beyond ridiculuous and probably not very wise. A median or above median LSAT would allow you to squeeze some money out of those schools. If you are from the state of Texas, you might be able to graduate from UT with about $125K in loans, which wouldn't be the end of the world.

Besides the LSAT and GPA, URM's receive significant bumps for having attended a super elite undergrad like Princeton, Harvard, Yale or Stanford.

rion91 wrote:I wish there was more info on MA stats. Almost everyone who gets a bite from mylsn.info is AA. Very discouraging.

aboutmydaylight wrote:If anyone's curious, for MA's the numbers are as follows:

Mean: 147.79
SD: 8.82
Number = 1853

Mean + 1SD = 156.61 (294-295)
Mean + 1.5SD = 161.02 (124-125)
Mean + 2SD = 165.43 (42-43)
Mean + 2.5SD = 169.84 (11-12)
Mean + 3SD = 174.25 (1-2)

Numbers are smaller because there's less MA's than AA's that apply. All approximations of course. I don't have the data on how many MA enroll/are accepted to the T-14 but iirc about 30 MA's enroll in HYS annually. Assuming everything's correct, that would correspond to an LSAT of 166-167 to be among the top 30 MA's that took the test. I have a (perhaps unfounded) presumption that MA's don't get even close to the pass that AA's get when it comes to GPA though. You'd probably still have to near 3.7 to be competitive with the lower end of those scores.

Anecdote: My good friend's stats were MA/3.0/167 and they got into 2 lower T14s at sticker, $$($) at some T20s, and $$$$ at T30s and below

I always thought there were less AA applicants than MA.


Just out of curiosity, if there are less MA's applying than AA's, why is the boost for AA so much greater? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Dr. Dre wrote: I always thought there were less AA applicants than MA.


Just out of curiosity, if there are less MA's applying than AA's, why is the boost for AA so much greater? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

There are significantly more Hispanic and MA applicants in any given year than AA ones. But MA isn't chosen as a race on LSN as much as just Hispanic/Latino, so the data is more sparse.

Dr. Dre wrote: I always thought there were less AA applicants than MA.


Just out of curiosity, if there are less MA's applying than AA's, why is the boost for AA so much greater? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

because MAs make up a smaller percent of the US population. Its all relative. MAs are about 10% of the population. AAs are about 13%. Plus, MAs on average score higher so they need a higher score to reach the same percentile relative to their race than AAs. Thus their high scores are less rare, Hence less boost.
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/brie ... 0br-04.pdf

MA:
Mean + 1.5SD = 161.02 (124-125)
Mean + 2SD = 165.43 (42-43)
Mean + 2.5SD = 169.84 (11-12)
Mean + 3SD = 174.25 (1-2)

AA:
2SD (159.5): 335.455 (335-336)
At or Above 2.5SD (164): 87.51 (87-88)
At or above 3SD (168): 14.585 (14-15)

bizzybone1313 wrote:

twentypercentmore wrote:Though I have a bit of a GPA issue (i.e, none), I had a 166 LSAT and was rejected/waitlisted at all of the T14. Other evidence confirms that the MA boost is fractional compared to the AA or even NA boosts.

Apply everywhere, hope someone bites. I wouldn't bother applying to "safeties" as a URM in this era. Either you get into a school worth going to, or don't go.

I wouldn't bother applying below the USC, UCLA or UT level. Any schools below that level are not worth going to. Even if you were to get in to USC, UCLA or UT, the COA of $200K is beyond ridiculuous and probably not very wise. A median or above median LSAT would allow you to squeeze some money out of those schools. If you are from the state of Texas, you might be able to graduate from UT with about $125K in loans, which wouldn't be the end of the world.

Besides the LSAT and GPA, URM's receive significant bumps for having attended a super elite undergrad like Princeton, Harvard, Yale or Stanford.

I'm a Texan w/ a job in Austin that just graduated from UT (with state residency).

Nova wrote:

rion91 wrote:I wish there was more info on MA stats. Almost everyone who gets a bite from mylsn.info is AA. Very discouraging.

aboutmydaylight wrote:If anyone's curious, for MA's the numbers are as follows:

Mean: 147.79
SD: 8.82
Number = 1853

Mean + 1SD = 156.61 (294-295)
Mean + 1.5SD = 161.02 (124-125)
Mean + 2SD = 165.43 (42-43)
Mean + 2.5SD = 169.84 (11-12)
Mean + 3SD = 174.25 (1-2)

Numbers are smaller because there's less MA's than AA's that apply. All approximations of course. I don't have the data on how many MA enroll/are accepted to the T-14 but iirc about 30 MA's enroll in HYS annually. Assuming everything's correct, that would correspond to an LSAT of 166-167 to be among the top 30 MA's that took the test. I have a (perhaps unfounded) presumption that MA's don't get even close to the pass that AA's get when it comes to GPA though. You'd probably still have to near 3.7 to be competitive with the lower end of those scores.

So my score is putting me almost 2 SDs away from the median? That's nice to know. I PTed probably with a 166 average before going into this test, and I hit 169 (170 once) a couple of times. I hope my June is on the higher end of this scale...

From the looks of it, if you get 165+, you're pretty good at most T14's.

But your GPA is kinda lacking.


But IDK, this is just an estimate. Nova is the expert on MA's.

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:

Dr. Dre wrote: I always thought there were less AA applicants than MA.


Just out of curiosity, if there are less MA's applying than AA's, why is the boost for AA so much greater? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

There are significantly more Hispanic and MA applicants in any given year than AA ones. But MA isn't chosen as a race on LSN as much as just Hispanic/Latino, so the data is more sparse.

Actually, among LSAT TAKERS (not applicants) AA's and total Hispanics (MA+PR+Other) are almost identical in number (around 10-13k test takers each year). The LSAT no longer has a separate category for MA's on the test, though you can be more specific on the LSAC website. The general consensus though seems to be that Hispanics outside of MA's get little if any boost at all and iirc their numbers as a group have lower LSAT means than just MA Hispanics. The data is harder to analyze however, since if you look at some school profiles, they don't distinguish between the two (some show 0 MA's or 0 HIS), and more current reports don't single out MA's as their own separate category anymore but rather we can assume they are included in the Hispanic group.

If we look at Hispanics as a whole (excluding PR) which is how the groups are categorized on the physical test now (again, you can still be more specific on the website), the numbers are as follows (2009-2010):

N: 9264
Mean: 146.43
SD: 9.65

Mean+1SD = 156.08 (1469/1470)
Mean+1.5SD = 160.905 (618/619)
Mean+2SD = 165.73 (210/211)
Mean+2.5SD = 170.555 (57/58)
Mean+3SD = 175.38 (12/13)

I don't have data on # of HIS/MA in the T14 but for comparison to white applicants, a 173 (median at H) corresponds to the top 1.5% of white test takers. This basically equates to a 167 if you're looking at Hispanics applicants as a whole and basically the same thing for MA's exclusively. For blacks, this is like a 161. Thus the AA boost needs to be significantly larger to obtain the top 1.5% than it needs to be for MAs.

Source: http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/resea ... -10-03.pdf

I made a 156 on my June LSAT. I'm devastated. This was my third test.

My average score was so good.
I practiced under normal test conditions.
I did over 50+ PTs.

I didn't misbubble.
What do I do.

Sorry abt that

I would blanket 7-18 as reaches and 19-30 as targets. Plus lower ranked schools with decent prospects like SMU and UHLC to see if you get an alluring scholly.

Ask everyone for fee waivers. Tell them your stats + urm status

This was my cycle in 2011-2012. I ended up taking the full tuition to Iowa, and I am now doing a 1L SA at a large Minneapolis firm.

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/dportia

Nova,

Do you have any idea about third scores affecting admission rates?

Dportia,
Did you similarly bomb your third test?

rion91 wrote: Dportia,
Did you similarly bomb your third test?

I only took the LSAT once-- I had no burning desire to go to a T-14 and Iowa was always the school I wanted to attend; the full tuition beyond sealed the deal.

DportIA wrote:This was my cycle in 2011-2012. I ended up taking the full tuition to Iowa, and I am now doing a 1L SA at a large Minneapolis firm.

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/dportia

Based on LSN, this past cycle seemed a bit "easier" than 11-12

rion91 wrote:Do you have any idea about third scores affecting admission rates.

It very likely won't affect your cycle at all.

Highest score is all that matters almost everywhere

DportIA wrote:

rion91 wrote: Dportia,
Did you similarly bomb your third test?

I only took the LSAT once-- I had no burning desire to go to a T-14 and Iowa was always the school I wanted to attend; the full tuition beyond sealed the deal.

Check your PMs

Nova wrote:

rion91 wrote:Do you have any idea about third scores affecting admission rates.

It very likely won't affect your cycle at all.

Highest score is all that matters almost everywhere

Do I need an addendum?

rion91 wrote:

Nova wrote:

rion91 wrote:Do you have any idea about third scores affecting admission rates.

It very likely won't affect your cycle at all.

Highest score is all that matters almost everywhere

Do I need an addendum?

If you made a thread about whether to write one, the majority of posters would say no.

Id say no.

There are very few situations where writing an lsat addendum is a good idea.

I wish I had your 163 with early September apps this past cycle.

I still think you can get into Northwestern if you work for a few years.