How did taking the LSAT three times impact your cycle....... Forum

[honestabe84]

at schools that say they take the highest score?

I created this poll after a brief discussion in another thread over whether or not schools penalize applicants that take the LSAT three times. I always thought schools that take the highest score do not care at all.

For instance, which is better?

Applicant A: 165, 166, 167
OR
Applicant B: 165, 166

[BigA]

Yeah, and any anecdotals from people who have done this would be great as well.

[pu_golf88]

I'd like to see the results as well. I don't feel as prepared as I should be going into the June LSAT.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

My results (3.56/163,166,174):

S- Out (Didn't have much of a shot anyway though)
CCN- WL'd
B- Out (didn't have much of a shot anyway though b/c of GPA)
M-WL
V-In with $$
P- Hold-->Rejected (prob had more to do with no "Why Penn?" essay and no follow up LOCI after being put on hold)
Duke- WL
NU- In
Texas- In with $$

All in all, prob acted as a small negative soft. With 1 score or maybe two, I think I would have gotten into NYU. Maybe effected me at M, but maybe not. I would have never had a shot at most of these schools without the 3rd score though, so can't really complain.

If you think you can improve your score by 3+ points, I say go for it.

[jarofsoup]

I really do not think that three scores sperated by 1 point or so will be viewd as a negative. If anything it will be considered a trend.

[20121109]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=100999

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =6&t=56715

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =6&t=90465

FWIW, I took the LSAT 3 times and got into one of HYS. Quite a few people on TLS have also taken the test 3 times and were admitted to top schools. Though 3 scores could be a minor negative, it certainly doesn't prevent admission to top schools. As long as the improvement is apparent and substantial, you'll be fine.

Study hard for the test and good luck!!

[NewtonLied]

You asked the wrong question which makes it difficult to answer. Don't ask if a 165, 166, 167 is better than a 165, 166. Of course it is. Over 2 attempts, they had the same score, and applicant A tried a 3rd time and improved further. The scenarios you should be asking about are if you get a lower score on a later attempt (165, 167, 166) OR if you're against someone with the same score in less tries (166, 167). Will the later lower score hurt you and will you compete evenly with someone who got the same score in less tries. I don't know the answer to those.

[BigA]

If you think you can improve your score by 3+ points, I say go for it.

As long as the improvement is apparent and substantial, you'll be fine

But if the improvement isn't substantial then it can really work against you??

Kids, this is called a contrapositive LOL

[20121109]

If you think you can improve your score by 3+ points, I say go for it.

As long as the improvement is apparent and substantial, you'll be fine

But if the improvement isn't substantial then it can really work against you??

Kids, this is called a contrapositive LOL

Or a weird incorrect negation that misses half of the sufficient condition, lol...

<3

[MrSoOoFLy]

1 cancel 2 of the same exact scores.. in at a reach so it worked out pretty well

[D. H2Oman]

at schools that say they take the highest score?

I created this poll after a brief discussion in another thread over whether or not schools penalize applicants that take the LSAT three times. I always thought schools that take the highest score do not care at all.

For instance, which is better?

Applicant A: 165, 166, 167
OR
Applicant B: 165, 166

A is definitely better, any school that takes LSATS in the 160's doesn't give a fuck about retakes. It amazes that more people don't take all three shots at it.

[mazzini]

I could have never gotten into the schools that I did had I not taken the LSAT the third time. However, I might be somewhat of an anomaly because of this trend: 153, 155, 168.

Also, very few schools actually average and some are even encouraged by the fact that someone would effort so much to improve their chances to get into that school. It shows a certain level of dedication, so in that respect taking the test 3 times might be more beneficial than one would initially assume.

[doinmybest]

I took 3 times. Stanford and Michigan didn't seem to care. UVA, Cornell, Duke, and Emory all seemed bothered by it.

Edit: I'd like to add that retaking a third time was an excellent decision since I scored much higher.

[joeshmo39]

My cycle not at all, my psyche was anhilated.

166-162-166

The last two were taken abroad. I got my 162 score during a weekend in Paris, it was rough; the tortured artists at the Louvre had nothing on me. Still, knowing what I know now I would probably do it all over again. LSAT scores are too important in admissions to not leave it all on the floor. Just my two cents.

[enzo66]

3.99/163, 164, 170

In the top 14 . . .

Accepted: UVA, Duke, and Georgetown. They didn't seem to mind 3 scores.

Rejected: Harvard, Chicago, Berkeley, Michigan

My personal thoughts are that taking it three times probably hurt me where I was rejected (though obviously a few were reaches anyway). However, finally scoring a 170 made all the difference in the world for my cycle's acceptances and scholarship offers. If I had to do it again, I would have scored a 175 the first time and been done. However, for people in my position, I think it makes a lot of sense take the LSAT three times if you have the potential to improve. That's my two cents.

[lawduder]

I really don't see how a higher score would hurt at all. It's probably possible that a school may average your scores when comparing you to someone else but even then a higher score can only help.

my results (3.55/157/161/167):
WUSTL - in $$
Minn - in $$
Emory - in $$
UF - in $
FSU - in $
UMiami - in
Vandy / ND / Cornell / BU - withdrew before decision

Also, to answer your question, I'd rather have three scores at 165/166/167 than two at 165/166.

[thechee]

Cancel/164/170
GPA: 3.64

Chicago: WL
UVA: WL
Penn: IN $
Mich: IN $
Berk: IN
Duke: IN $$
Cornell: IN

[flying_squirrel]

It amazes that more people don't take all three shots at it.

Are you only allowed three shots? ... not implying that I wanted to take it any more than that, just have never heard of a limit.

[CanadianWolf]

My understanding is that one is permitted to take the LSAT three times within a two (2) year time period, including cancelled score sittings. A particular law school, however, may grant an exemption to this restriction if that law school requires or needs a more recent LSAT score than the applicant currently has on file. Hopefully someone else will be able to verify this.

[honestabe84]

I don't understand this. Why would taking it three times hurt anyone that is applying to schools that say they exclusively look at the highest score? Are they deliberately misleading applicants or what?

[tru]

.

[danr2040]

LSAT scores are too important in admissions to not leave it all on the floor. Just my two cents.

QFT, this is the right attitude. I was 3.8ish, 164-> 168 -> 170

Finally hitting 170 in June got me into a T-10 with $$$, after being in at a T-14 with no money after the 2nd retake.

Giving it a third shot was the best decision I ever made. Given the absurd amount of difference that even stastically insignificant improvements on the LSAT make in the admissions process, I advise anyone who gets less than a 175 on the first try to give the test at least two tries (make their second one late in the cycle).

I don't understand this. Why would taking it three times hurt anyone that is applying to schools that say they exclusively look at the highest score? Are they deliberately misleading applicants or what?

I think schools still say they exclusively look at the highest score becuase if they stopped paying lip service to the "we average scores so retakes won't help you" policy, it would call into question the validity of the test as an objective ranking that is accorded such (inordinate?) weight in the admissions process. They have to, at the point that LSAT repeater data shows that most repeaters in the high 160s jumped to a 170 range score http://www.lsac.org/pdfs/RepeaterData.pdf, a difference that is statistically insignificant yet of tremendous importance to one's T-14 chances.

Not only that, but I think it would also raise objections from those who oppose standardized testing on socio-economic grounds (allowing rich kids to take the LSAT 3 times to max their score harms those who don't have the resources to do that, etc).

So the best action for schools is to say one thing and do another. Those who recognize that most are more beholden to the rankings than any abstract notion of fairness are at a huge advantage.

[Shaggier1]

I sat three times: 163, Cancel, 167

Results of my cycle available in my profile.

[fakemoney]

...

[joonhp]

i'm taking it a 4th time in june ...cancel, 153, 159... i wrote a couple of deans asking them to grant me a waiver and I received one from two schools. Very thankful.