Top Law Schools

For context, I took a makeup of the September exam because it was delayed at my testing site and the real October test.

I know that the prevailing view on these forums is that schools won't consider both scores; all that matters is your top score.

I tend to subscribe to that view and wasn't concerned about having a 167 as my first take until I read the following on Michigan's website "although we give the most weight to the highest score, we also consider the average score." And this makes sense. Even if admissions officers don't technically consider the lower test score for admission, it's not like they forget its existence. This must have some impact on admissions.

Anyway, I could try to explain that the 167 is an anomaly, which it is - I'd scored between 170 and 172 on 8 PTs since August with one below and two above that range. Or I could just stop fretting.

I'm almost not as interested with advice (I almost definitely won't submit an addendum) as I am about hearing people's views on the effect multiple scores have on the admission process. Like I said, it's hard to imagine that the lower score plays absolutely no role in an admission decision.

Except that is the case, because the USNWR rankings only count the highest score, so that’s what schools care about. Possible exception is Yale because faculty play a big role in reading files and have idiosyncratic takes in what matters.

Going from a 167 to 172 is also fine and not a big deal.

nixy wrote:Except that is the case, because the USNWR rankings only count the highest score, so that’s what schools care about. Possible exception is Yale because faculty play a big role in reading files and have idiosyncratic takes in what matters.

Going from a 167 to 172 is also fine and not a big deal.

Bingo, and if it takes an anecdotal story, I had a double digit increase from a bad score to a good score. My admissions closely tracked to my good score, and I even got a surprise "reach" acceptance at the top of the T13. A 167 is a good score and schools won't look down on you for it just because you went from good to better.

Wubbles wrote:

nixy wrote:Except that is the case, because the USNWR rankings only count the highest score, so that’s what schools care about. Possible exception is Yale because faculty play a big role in reading files and have idiosyncratic takes in what matters.

Going from a 167 to 172 is also fine and not a big deal.

Bingo, and if it takes an anecdotal story, I had a double digit increase from a bad score to a good score. My admissions closely tracked to my good score, and I even got a surprise "reach" acceptance at the top of the T13. A 167 is a good score and schools won't look down on you for it just because you went from good to better.

Thirding this. An LSAT addendum might - might - be called for if, say, your first score was in the 14x range, and there were extenuating and unforeseeable circumstances, like, say, a fellow test-taker needing to be taken to the hospital in the middle of the test, which shocked and horrified you and completely disrupted your focus.

A five-point increase, from a good score to a great score, will not raise any eyebrows and absolutely does not call for an addendum. Moreover, the explanation OP offers, i.e., that "the 167 is an anomaly, because I scored between 170 and 172 on 8 PTs since August", is an explanation I would never recommend basing any addendum on, anyway.