Top Law Schools

took it in June 2010 and scored 159. just took october and bombed the RC section (which is my worst section anyways). i feel confident about my LR and LG being above average.

my dilemma is a little complicated. i took a job offer that requires a two year commitment. how would it look if i didnt cancel and scored lower and then took the test 1 year from now and scored higher (three scores in total)?

im really confused on what to do. help me fellow TLSers!!!!!!

edit: all im looking for is at least a one point increase. please vote and give me your reason for it. TIA

I don't think schools in the 160 range care about how many times you took the test.

Your dilemma feels like a writing sample topic lol. I think the issue comes down to how much time would be required to increase your score sufficiently. (I'm gunna miss that word now that the LSAT's over!) This is obviously a question that only you could answer. Would you be willing to invest 3 months of dedicated prep to bring your score up 1 point? 2 points? 3 points? You get the idea.

anyone else?

I would keep it. You are confident on all your other sections. RC is your worst section so even if you bombed it - doesn't mean you think you did as bad you think.

tazmolover wrote:I would keep it. You are confident on all your other sections. RC is your worst section so even if you bombed it - doesn't mean you think you did as bad you think.

well i had to guess on the 4-5 questions and were unsure about some other ones. RC will be a disaster for me. it has the potential to pull me down hard.

keep it

I thought bombed my second, turned out I got exactly the same score my second time because the curve allowed more mistakes

im confused on what to do. i pretty sure i will take the LSAT again one year from now (possibly june 2011 for entrance into law school for fall 2012). given the fact that i may get a lower score now, should i play it safe and cancel?

sounds like you've already made up your mind... I know I'm going to cancel first thing tomorrow morning

keep the score.. take the job and excell at it. You may like the job and decide not to go to law school. With a year + to prep, you will have sufficient time to prep and dominate the test. Have fun and good luck

I also bombed that RC!!! I don't know what happened...and then it was time!!

I actually disagree with most people. If you can confidently say you'll do better, I don't see why you need to keep the score. If you get a 160 and then 160 and then 172...then I would rather just take the average of 172/160 then the average of all three.

northwood wrote:keep the score.. take the job and excell at it. You may like the job and decide not to go to law school. With a year + to prep, you will have sufficient time to prep and dominate the test. Have fun and good luck

lol the job is a legal assitant at a V10 law firm.

ly2010 wrote:I also bombed that RC!!! I don't know what happened...and then it was time!!

I actually disagree with most people. If you can confidently say you'll do better, I don't see why you need to keep the score. If you get a 160 and then 160 and then 172...then I would rather just take the average of 172/160 then the average of all three.

law schools dont average anymore (with the exception of NYU).

im positive i am going to be taken it again in a year or so. i guess canceling is my safest bet.

plenipotentiary wrote:I don't think schools in the 160 range care about how many times you took the test.

+1. I don't see any downside to keeping the score.

beachbum wrote:

plenipotentiary wrote:I don't think schools in the 160 range care about how many times you took the test.

+1. I don't see any downside to keeping the score.

what if i get a lower score by 2-3 or maybe more (although i think that is highly improbable)?

am060459 wrote:

beachbum wrote:

plenipotentiary wrote:I don't think schools in the 160 range care about how many times you took the test.

+1. I don't see any downside to keeping the score.

what if i get a lower score by 2-3 or maybe more (although i think that is highly improbable)?

Won't affect anything, unless you go crazy and score mid-170's on your retake and start looking at HYS/N. I think you have a lot more to gain by a possible increase in your score than you have to lose (i.e. nothing) by a possible drop in your score. Call me crazy, but this seems pretty open-and-shut.

FWIW, I was also convinced I had bombed a section (LG, in my case) and that my overall score would be a disappointment. I seriously considered canceling but eventually decided to let the score stand. Turns out it was a good call.

beachbum wrote:

am060459 wrote:

beachbum wrote:

plenipotentiary wrote:I don't think schools in the 160 range care about how many times you took the test.

+1. I don't see any downside to keeping the score.

what if i get a lower score by 2-3 or maybe more (although i think that is highly improbable)?

Won't affect anything, unless you go crazy and score mid-170's on your retake and start looking at HYS/N. I think you have a lot more to gain by a possible increase in your score than you have to lose (i.e. nothing) by a possible drop in your score. Call me crazy, but this seems pretty open-and-shut.

FWIW, I was also convinced I had bombed a section (LG, in my case) and that my overall score would be a disappointment. I seriously considered canceling but eventually decided to let the score stand. Turns out it was a good call.

you make a good point. im not looking for a 5 point increase on this retake. i was only looking for a point increase possibly two.

beachbum wrote:

am060459 wrote:

beachbum wrote:

plenipotentiary wrote:I don't think schools in the 160 range care about how many times you took the test.

+1. I don't see any downside to keeping the score.

what if i get a lower score by 2-3 or maybe more (although i think that is highly improbable)?

Won't affect anything, unless you go crazy and score mid-170's on your retake and start looking at HYS/N. I think you have a lot more to gain by a possible increase in your score than you have to lose (i.e. nothing) by a possible drop in your score. Call me crazy, but this seems pretty open-and-shut.

FWIW, I was also convinced I had bombed a section (LG, in my case) and that my overall score would be a disappointment. I seriously considered canceling but eventually decided to let the score stand. Turns out it was a good call.

I thought my retake was not so great and I considered cancelling. I'm thankful I didn't every time I see the high 170s score in my LSAC account. Of course, I at least finished the entire test so it's a bit different.

..

plenipotentiary wrote:I don't think schools in the 160 range care about how many times you took the test.

Cornell? UMich?

where are you guys coming up with the conclusion that schools that take low 160s dont care how many times you take it or if you score lowered on your retake?

am060459 wrote:where are you guys coming up with the conclusion that schools that take low 160s dont care how many times you take it or if you score lowered on your retake?

It's not really a conclusion, it's blatantly stated in most schools admissions criteria. And also, LSN and anecdotal evidence suggests the same.

CastleRock wrote:

am060459 wrote:where are you guys coming up with the conclusion that schools that take low 160s dont care how many times you take it or if you score lowered on your retake?

It's not really a conclusion, it's blatantly stated in most schools admissions criteria. And also, LSN and anecdotal evidence suggests the same.

thank you.

congrats on Duke!

am060459 wrote:

CastleRock wrote:

am060459 wrote:where are you guys coming up with the conclusion that schools that take low 160s dont care how many times you take it or if you score lowered on your retake?

It's not really a conclusion, it's blatantly stated in most schools admissions criteria. And also, LSN and anecdotal evidence suggests the same.

thank you.

congrats on Duke!

Thanks.