Just got my LSAT 140 and 3.08 what can i do? Forum

[mb88]

It doesn't matter where he can/can't get in with a 140.

The simple fact of the matter is that if you can't pull yourself into the 150s, you simply don't have the reading comprehension skills necessary to be a lawyer. For some reason or another, the law as a field seems to hold a special place among professions. Regardless of how near illiteracy somebody is, there are many people who still encourage them to follow their dreams and become a lawyer.

I feel like a damned broken record, but seriously, would you encourage somebody who doesn't know calculus to become an engineer? Would you encourage somebody who can't read a spreadsheet to go into business? Somebody who doesn't understand chemistry to open a meth lab?

The law may be the last great hope for liberal arts majors everywhere (hell, I'm one of them), but that doesn't mean that just anybody can do it. There are certain skills necessary to do it (reading comp and logical reasoning). If you don't possess those skills, it doesn't matter that you don't know what else to do with yourself, you're just not going to succeed at the law.

[jsoell]

OP - you may have already stopped reading, so this post may be simply in response to Lomax and the great shark/bear/something else avatar.

Lomax - you're right that my post would have been easier to swallow in a 152/3.3, but I'm standing behind it nonetheless. As I said before, I didn't answer the OP's question. My answer would be - - s/he has a bunch of factors lined up against them, and it certainly doesn't look good. If they have some sort of legacy or undergrad from one of those schools, or if they know somebody in the right place, it could happen, but they need to just retake the LSAT and get a 148 or a 152. Then they can apply to those schools with a much better hope of getting in (especially Southern).

As for mb88, failing to get into the 150s doesn't mean someone doesn't have the reading comprehension skills that you are linking to being a lawyer. What it means is that someone failed to get into the 150s on the LSAT. I'm not saying the LSAT is worthless, but it is a standardized test, and they are only able to do so much. If I'm not buying the below 150/reading comprehension link, the rest of that line of argument doesn't apply.

That law may be the last great hope for lib arts majors everywhere could be true. And I'm not arguing that reading comprehension and logical reasoning are necessary. Again, just not buying the link you made at the beginning.

I'm not saying the OP would make a good lawyer. But the info we have doesn't mean they will be a bad one, or that it will be impossible for them to become a lawyer.

[Lomax]

It doesn't matter where he can/can't get in with a 140.

The simple fact of the matter is that if you can't pull yourself into the 150s, you simply don't have the reading comprehension skills necessary to be a lawyer. For some reason or another, the law as a field seems to hold a special place among professions. Regardless of how near illiteracy somebody is, there are many people who still encourage them to follow their dreams and become a lawyer.

I feel like a damned broken record, but seriously, would you encourage somebody who doesn't know calculus to become an engineer? Would you encourage somebody who can't read a spreadsheet to go into business? Somebody who doesn't understand chemistry to open a meth lab?

The law may be the last great hope for liberal arts majors everywhere (hell, I'm one of them), but that doesn't mean that just anybody can do it. There are certain skills necessary to do it (reading comp and logical reasoning). If you don't possess those skills, it doesn't matter that you don't know what else to do with yourself, you're just not going to succeed at the law.

Nicely put, but probably unnecessary, given that only a few law schools accept applicants with LSAT scores below 150. It really can stay a matter of where he can/can't get in, unless he/she would be comfortable with, after studying and retaking, Cooley.

Lomax - you're right that my post would have been easier to swallow in a 152/3.3, but I'm standing behind it nonetheless. As I said before, I didn't answer the OP's question. My answer would be - - s/he has a bunch of factors lined up against them, and it certainly doesn't look good. If they have some sort of legacy or undergrad from one of those schools, or if they know somebody in the right place, it could happen, but they need to just retake the LSAT and get a 148 or a 152. Then they can apply to those schools with a much better hope of getting in (especially Southern).

OP has taken several practice tests and has never scored higher than 149, averaging about 144. Assuming that 150 is possible, only a handful of the worst Tier 4s would be possibilities, plus Cooley. Then the question of whether or not law school would be worth it would have to be asked, especially given OP's apparent lack of basic skills.

[jsoell]

Lomax, we're disagreeing but really not on that much. We just see the possibilities a little differently. Considering that the OP has already suggested that a T4 would be ok, the question of it is worth it is up to them. Off to supper...

[Lomax]

Lomax, we're disagreeing but really not on that much. We just see the possibilities a little differently. Considering that the OP has already suggested that a T4 would be ok, the question of it is worth it is up to them. Off to supper...

True, but the OP doesn't seem to be factoring in the very real possibility, given what his numbers indicate, coupled with the competitive and unforgiving nature of the job market as well as the lack of respect given to T4 graduates in general, that he might not be buying himself any sort of success in the legal profession with his T4 tuition.

[phoenix323]

You can't really resign until you've given it the proper treatment. Obtain as many PT's as possible and START TAKING THEM. Start now, you have a long time til June, and take a PT every 2/3 days. Slow and steady wins the race. If after that you haven't drastically improved your score in PTs, you might want to consider resources that are more instructive (I'm not going to cover that because it's been given adequate treatment in the prep forum). If after that, you're still not seeing any improvement from the 140s, it might be time to consider an alternate path. But don't give up hope until you've really given it effort.

This.

And, I must say that I really don't think it is anyone's place on TLS to tell someone that they have no business attempting to be a lawyer. To me, statements like this are not based in actual concern for the OP, but are simply mean-spirited attempts to dump on someone so that they feel better about themselves. If you plan on attending a T14 or T6 or T3, what does it matter what the OP chooses to do with their life? How does it in any way affect you? Not everyone has BigLaw aspirations and if this person can raise their scores enough to get a substantial amount of money from a lower ranked school, then that's their decision.

I do believe that it is hard to assess the OP's possibilities based on this lackluster score. Who knows what OP is capable of if he/she actually invests the time and effort into properly preparing for the test. If the OP truly wants to become a lawyer, then they will study with focus and determination and get that score up. Whether he/she does or not, however, it's not our place to tell anyone they can't be a lawyer.

[Helmholtz]

You can't really resign until you've given it the proper treatment. Obtain as many PT's as possible and START TAKING THEM. Start now, you have a long time til June, and take a PT every 2/3 days. Slow and steady wins the race. If after that you haven't drastically improved your score in PTs, you might want to consider resources that are more instructive (I'm not going to cover that because it's been given adequate treatment in the prep forum). If after that, you're still not seeing any improvement from the 140s, it might be time to consider an alternate path. But don't give up hope until you've really given it effort.

This.

And, I must say that I really don't think it is anyone's place on TLS to tell someone that they have no business attempting to be a lawyer. To me, statements like this are not based in actual concern for the OP, but are simply mean-spirited attempts to dump on someone so that they feel better about themselves. If you plan on attending a T14 or T6 or T3, what does it matter what the OP chooses to do with their life? How does it in any way affect you? Not everyone has BigLaw aspirations and if this person can raise their scores enough to get a substantial amount of money from a lower ranked school, then that's their decision.

I do believe that it is hard to assess the OP's possibilities based on this lackluster score. Who knows what OP is capable of if he/she actually invests the time and effort into properly preparing for the test. If the OP truly wants to become a lawyer, then they will study with focus and determination and get that score up. Whether he/she does or not, however, it's not our place to tell anyone they can't be a lawyer.

rolling my eyes

[mb88]

As for mb88, failing to get into the 150s doesn't mean someone doesn't have the reading comprehension skills that you are linking to being a lawyer. What it means is that someone failed to get into the 150s on the LSAT. I'm not saying the LSAT is worthless, but it is a standardized test, and they are only able to do so much. If I'm not buying the below 150/reading comprehension link, the rest of that line of argument doesn't apply.

If the OP had merely done poorly on his very first diag, I would agree with you. However, 3 scores below 150, even with light studying, shows a lack of reading skills.

Standardized the LSAT might be, but it's still primarily a reading test. To score in the 140s multiple times in a row, even after becoming vaguely familiar with the test, is a pretty strong indicator that the test taker doesn't have average reading comp skills, let alone the above average ones needed to work in the law.

The "bad at standardized tests" line only goes so far.

[Lomax]

This.

If highly qualified law school officials deem the LSAT score (especially after several tries) to be an accurate indicator of whether or not a prospective student of the law has what it takes, then why shouldn't we? And if people come on this board asking for honest opinions and advice, and we are able to provide them with what they request - potentially to their great benefit - then why shouldn't we?

[mb88]

...what does it matter what the OP chooses to do with their life?

What does it matter to me? Absolutely nothing. However, someday they might have clients who will depend on their ability to read and digest large quantities of complicated text.

To return to my previous, and overused, analogy:

An engineer who can't do math will build unsound buildings, which may collapse and hurt/kill people. A lawyer who can't read well won't be able to represent their client, which may result in loss of money, reputation, freedom, or even life. When you work in the field of law, you're providing a service people rely on for their wellbeing. If you don't possess the skills required to carry out that job, you shouldn't be allowed to have a license to do it. Despite what everyone's mom said, you sometimes can't be whatever you want when you grow up.

[letsdoit1982]

...what does it matter what the OP chooses to do with their life?

What does it matter to me? Absolutely nothing. However, someday they might have clients who will depend on their ability to read and digest large quantities of complicated text.

To return to my previous, and overused, analogy:

An engineer who can't do math will build unsound buildings, which may collapse and hurt/kill people. A lawyer who can't read well won't be able to represent their client, which may result in loss of money, reputation, freedom, or even life. When you work in the field of law, you're providing a service people rely on for their wellbeing. If you don't possess the skills required to carry out that job, you shouldn't be allowed to have a license to do it. Despite what everyone's mom said, you sometimes can't be whatever you want when you grow up.

Ok, so you're legitimately concerned for OP's future clients?

[coolkatz321]

Honestly, I would just forget about law school if I were you.

+1000

[Lighthouse28]

I just recieved my LSAT scores and am pretty upset. I freaked out kind of during the test because of too much caffeine and i knew i did not do well, but back in my head i thought i may have gotten at least a 146. My choices were LSU( Obviously not happening), Loyola, no (Not happening either, and Southern ( Dont think so but could be a possibility). I just dont know what to do . Looks like i may have to wait another year. Any suggestions?

I haven't bothered reading everyone's replies, but I did a search for all of your posts, and you made no mention of your study materials. What are you using to study? The bibles?? If you can afford it, maybe take the Testmasters course. From their website testimonials, it seems it's helped a lot of people. If you truly want to be a lawyer, why not give that a shot, and put your all into it. And if you do score above a 158, then you can write an addendum for your first score and say you were really sick or something..

[JordynAsh]

Ok, so you're legitimately concerned for OP's future clients?

Can't speak for mb of course, but I am. I'm also concerned for OP's debt with poor job prospects coming out of a T3 or T4 lawl school.

[GATORTIM]

This.

If highly qualified law school officials deem the LSAT score (especially after several tries) to be an accurate indicator of whether or not a prospective student of the law has what it takes, then why shouldn't we? And if people come on this board asking for honest opinions and advice, and we are able to provide them with what they request - potentially to their great benefit - then why shouldn't we?

has what it takes for what? I believe schools only "claim" the LSAT is a predictor of 1st year success (whatever the hell that means). Bottom line the LSAT is in place only because there is not a more efficient way to process the number of applications.

[Honeysuckle]

You can't really resign until you've given it the proper treatment. Obtain as many PT's as possible and START TAKING THEM. Start now, you have a long time til June, and take a PT every 2/3 days. Slow and steady wins the race. If after that you haven't drastically improved your score in PTs, you might want to consider resources that are more instructive (I'm not going to cover that because it's been given adequate treatment in the prep forum). If after that, you're still not seeing any improvement from the 140s, it might be time to consider an alternate path. But don't give up hope until you've really given it effort.

TITCR.

The OP obviously went into the LSAT utterly unprepared, and I think it's cruel and disheartening to tell him that he doesn't have the skills to be a lawyer just because of this. I would completely agree with mb88's remarks if the OP did absolutely everything he could to prepare for the exam (devoting at least several hours a day for 3 months, taking dozens of diagnostics) and still ended up in the 140s. But that is not the case.

To the OP:

To be frank, any schools that would accept you with your numbers as they are are not worth throwing money at. YOU might not care for rankings/prestige, but the fact of the matter is, employers will. They will hire someone at the very bottom of the class at a Tier 1 school over someone at the very top of his/her class at a Tier 4 school in a heartbeat. It's certainly not impossible to have a successful legal career graduating from a Tier 4 law school, but it will close a lot of doors for you. The opportunities (or lack thereof) afforded by Tier 4 schools do not justify their exorbitant price tag. It's a highly risky investment, especially in this economy. In addition, law school will be admittedly stressful wherever you go, but the competition is especially cutthroat and vicious at Tier 4 schools, which tend to have obscenely high attrition rates.

The LSAT is incredibly learn-able, and shouldn't be treated as an IQ test or something that gauges innate abilities. Don't lose hope and let arrogant people on this board bring you down your self-esteem. I scored similarly on my first diagnostics (when I was totally clueless about sufficient and necessary conditions and other basic concepts that are essential to the LSAT). Now I am scoring in the mid-high 160s on PTs, and I still have 3+ months until the exam. Large gains are not easy, but putting forth the effort is totally worth it because higher scores will open up so many doors for you. Most people here agree that the Powerscore "Bibles" are the gold standard, so read those carefully, and after you're done, get your hands on as many PrepTests as possible (they can be ordered through LSAC). Pithypike has a great LSAT self-study guide that's a "sticky" on the LSAT Prep forum. Go over every single wrong answer, figure out why it was incorrect, and what elements led to the correct answer.

By the way, I am in no way affiliated with PowerScore, and do not stand to gain anything from promoting them.

[Helmholtz]

You can't really resign until you've given it the proper treatment. Obtain as many PT's as possible and START TAKING THEM. Start now, you have a long time til June, and take a PT every 2/3 days. Slow and steady wins the race. If after that you haven't drastically improved your score in PTs, you might want to consider resources that are more instructive (I'm not going to cover that because it's been given adequate treatment in the prep forum). If after that, you're still not seeing any improvement from the 140s, it might be time to consider an alternate path. But don't give up hope until you've really given it effort.

TITCR.

The OP obviously went into the LSAT utterly unprepared, and I think it's cruel and disheartening to tell him that he doesn't have the reading skills to be a lawyer just because of this.

It took me about five minutes of Internet research to discover how important the LSAT was and that I should probably take it seriously. Just saying........

[mb88]

Ok, so you're legitimately concerned for OP's future clients?

Did I say I was concerned about them? No. I said what he did didn't concern me. However, it'll certainly concern his/her future clients.

Should we all just ignore the licensing of unfit individuals because it (probably) won't directly effect us?

Electricians who don't understand circuits? Plumbers who don't know how to siphon? Accountants who can't add? All of those professions require a certain skill set, just like the law does, but for some reason people overlook the fact that just because you can read doesn't mean you have what it takes to practice the law.

EDIT: I think it's also important to note that I'm not making this assumption of the OP based on a single LSAT. While it's apparent that the guy/girl didn't give their all to studying, look at their diag scores. I can forgive a terrible first diagnostic, maybe even two. The LSAT is a bitch of a test. But then two more scores in the 140s, and a real score AT 140? I firmly believe that those FOUR scores, regardless of studying, indicate that the OP has poor reading comp skills.

[Bigpoppa88111]

Wow some people get pretty worked up over this. BTW i wont have much debt by the end of school. My friend gave me a couple of KAPLAN books and that is what i used to study. I really think i would enjoy the law field, but i will not die if i do not become a lawyer. Thank you all for your responses even the negative ones. I will post some of my PTs over the next few months and keep you all informed of my progress. Thanks

[Bigpoppa88111]

Also do you think graduating law school at thirty two would substantially harm any progression in the law field?

[Honeysuckle]

You can't really resign until you've given it the proper treatment. Obtain as many PT's as possible and START TAKING THEM. Start now, you have a long time til June, and take a PT every 2/3 days. Slow and steady wins the race. If after that you haven't drastically improved your score in PTs, you might want to consider resources that are more instructive (I'm not going to cover that because it's been given adequate treatment in the prep forum). If after that, you're still not seeing any improvement from the 140s, it might be time to consider an alternate path. But don't give up hope until you've really given it effort.

TITCR.

The OP obviously went into the LSAT utterly unprepared, and I think it's cruel and disheartening to tell him that he doesn't have the reading skills to be a lawyer just because of this.

It took me about five minutes of Internet research to discover how important the LSAT was and that I should probably take it seriously. Just saying........

Yeah, he definitely made a monumental mistake in that regard. Thankfully, it's not the norm for law schools to average multiple scores. If he puts his whole heart into preparing for the LSAT, who knows, he could end up scoring in the 160s or even 170s by October. Like I said before, it's a very learn-able exam and big gains are possible, provided that you're willing to expend considerable effort. It's cruel to tell someone that they are incapable of becoming a lawyer based on the fact that he scored in the 140s with negligible preparation. I'm sure that if I posted my first diagnostic score (mid-140s), people here would simply brush me off and say that I don't "have what it takes", and yet now I'm scoring ~20 points above that on my PTs because of my hard work, and I still have 3+ months to go.

[Lomax]

Bunnyspeak

I really want to tear into you here, but your rabbit avatar prevents me from doing so. I would say something along the lines of, "change avatars at your peril," but even then, I wouldn't really be able to attack someone called "Honeysuckle".

[Honeysuckle]

Bunnyspeak

I really want to tear into you here, but your rabbit avatar prevents me from doing so. I would say something along the lines of, "change avatars at your peril," but even then, I wouldn't really be able to attack someone called "Honeysuckle".

Haha, what does my having a cutesy avatar and user-name have to do with my point? Anyone who's studied even as little as the OP has for the LSAT could point out that blatant ad hominem attack.

[Helmholtz]

You can't really resign until you've given it the proper treatment. Obtain as many PT's as possible and START TAKING THEM. Start now, you have a long time til June, and take a PT every 2/3 days. Slow and steady wins the race. If after that you haven't drastically improved your score in PTs, you might want to consider resources that are more instructive (I'm not going to cover that because it's been given adequate treatment in the prep forum). If after that, you're still not seeing any improvement from the 140s, it might be time to consider an alternate path. But don't give up hope until you've really given it effort.

TITCR.

The OP obviously went into the LSAT utterly unprepared, and I think it's cruel and disheartening to tell him that he doesn't have the reading skills to be a lawyer just because of this.

It took me about five minutes of Internet research to discover how important the LSAT was and that I should probably take it seriously. Just saying........

Yeah, he definitely made a monumental mistake in that regard. Thankfully, it's not the norm for law schools to average multiple scores. If he puts his whole heart into preparing for the LSAT, who knows, he could end up scoring in the 160s or even 170s by October. Like I said before, it's a very learn-able exam and big gains are possible, provided that you're willing to expend considerable effort. It's cruel to tell someone that they are incapable of becoming a lawyer based on the fact that he scored in the 140s with negligible preparation. I'm sure that if I posted my first diagnostic score (mid-140s), people here would simply brush me off and say that I don't "have what it takes", and yet now I'm scoring ~20 points above that on my PTs because of my hard work, and I still have 3+ months to go.

I'm just really curious about how proactive somebody can be who didn't even take the time in the first place to do some extremely rudimentary research. Your first diagnostic was low, but OP's score came after "a month of study" (I'm sure he and the rest of us have very divergent views on what constitutes "study") and he saw at last a few PTs before taking the real thing, i.e. he knew what to expect and he knew what ballpark to expect his score to be in, and he should have known what it would take to get into a decent law school or at least money at a lower tier school. I'm not saying that he can't drastically improve his score, but seriously, this is more than just "my diagnostic was low."

[Lomax]

Bunnyspeak

I really want to tear into you here, but your rabbit avatar prevents me from doing so. I would say something along the lines of, "change avatars at your peril," but even then, I wouldn't really be able to attack someone called "Honeysuckle".

Haha, what does my having a cutesy avatar and user-name have to do with my point? Anyone who's studied even as little as the OP has for the LSAT could point out that blatant ad hominem attack.

In response to the bolded: Anyone with the logical reasoning ability sufficient to do as well on the LSAT as OP would be able to examine my post in the context of this thread and this board and conclude that it was, in fact, to be taken at face value, rather than to be construed as a veiled ad hominem attack.

As for your point - Helmholtz addressed that fairly well.