Top Law Schools

.

Retake. The only school you may get into is unaccredited...

Thanks, but the acceptance calculator on the LSAC website says I have over a 50% shot at a chunk of those schools (without retaking the LSAT's). So, "may" for an unaccredited one does not seem so accurate...but again, thanks.

If 83% of people who are merely considering law school outperform you on the standardized test designed to predict how you do in law school, you should probably start asking yourself the hard questions.

.

With your current stats, you would be unable to get into a school worth attending.

Good luck on the retake. Hope you are able to improve greatly! What are you testing at now?

tm4217 wrote:Thanks, but as everyone knows standardized tests aren't everything. That's why GPA's are largely weighed as well....I did poorly on the SAT's as well, but have achievied over a 3.7 in college in an AACSB accredited program...Thanks for your "help"

I'm sure you feel strongly about that, but law schools and their US News and World Report masters feel otherwise.

tm4217 wrote:Thanks, but as everyone knows standardized tests aren't everything. That's why GPA's are largely weighed as well....I did poorly on the SAT's as well, but have achievied over a 3.7 in college in an AACSB accredited program...Thanks for your "help"

--ImageRemoved--

I'm going through Kaplan again starting in late April until early June (right before the Juse LSAT), which I think will be beneficial because the course will have just ended. I scored 145-147 on 3 tests, but when I took the October LSAT's I hadn't had much of any studying since my class ended in late July and did my worst on the actual test in October that I took for the first time. If you have any tips on studying/taking the test, that would be greatly appreciated as well. Thank you

It's not that I feel strongly, just what the LSAC site says...please continue any helpful information...

does anyone else think this might be BS? He/she said every buzzword that would usually tip TLS off to flames.

You're an extreme splitter...its harder for the law school calculators to predict your cycle. Try lawschoolnumbers.com

overunderachiever wrote:You're an extreme splitter...its harder for the law school calculators to predict your cycle. Try lawschoolnumbers.com

2.5/178 = extreme splitter

Try Cooley FT....w?! It's not really a good option, but I know someone who got in with your LSAT and a 3.6 in econ.

ps. he said he wrote a solid PS to get into this "reach," but Cooley doesn't require a PS, do they?

.

.

tm4217 wrote:I'm looking to do law on the side either way. I've done well enough in school to want to continue a higher education and am interested in law, to the point where I would like to even just have the degree. I went to school for Business because I'm going to be taking over my father's company in the near future, but would like to have the option to do law on the side or as a backup. Thanks for your help.

Don't think about it... Just turn it over!
--ImageRemoved--

DeSimone's posts are all garbage. Get out of the forum.

DeSimone wrote:

tm4217 wrote:I'm looking to do law on the side either way. I've done well enough in school to want to continue a higher education and am interested in law, to the point where I would like to even just have the degree. I went to school for Business because I'm going to be taking over my father's company in the near future, but would like to have the option to do law on the side or as a backup. Thanks for your help.

Don't think about it... Just turn it over!
--ImageRemoved--

No No, he has a point . . . Stop looking at me swan!

Helpful*

tm4217:

What answer are you looking for? You're best option is to retake. Can you get into a law school with a 3.7/142? Sure, but it's not ideal. You most likely will get $0 money, so you'll incur A LOT of debt for a lower ranked school.

Does this mean anything? On a case by case basis, no. There are a lot of attorneys that didn't do well on the LSAT, went to a mediocre law school, but became great in their field. But on average, you're better off from a career perspective going to better ranked law school.

From any perspective, you're better off with less debt.

So I can tell you what you want to hear: The LSAT doesn't mean anything, you'll still do great, standardized test are bs, blah blah blah....

But on average, you're better off studying for the LSAT and retaking. If you're young, take a year or two and focus on learning the basics of formal and informal logic. Try these books:
PS LG Bible
PS LR Bible
ExamKracker for LR
PS RC Bible
Steve Schwartz LSAT BLOGSPOT site (great info on RC/LG)

Go to the Cambridge site and buy the LR sections by question type. Start with Flaw/Necc Assump/Suff Assump/MBT/Most Strongly Supported. Those are the core components of the LR.

Whether you like it or not, the LSAT does test things that you would want an attorney to know. Formal logic, spotting a flaw in an argument, understanding the assumptions in an argument?

Have you ever hired a lawyer? I have. I would not a want an attorney who is shitty at spotting a flawed argument. Who would?

So you a few choices:

1. Change the system. Practice civil disobedience for the next 40 years until the legal community bows to your whims and does away with the LSAT.
2. Go to a lower ranked school and incur A LOT of debt (180k).
3. Study for the LSAT. Study hard. I took 15 months of studying for the lsat, studying 3+ hours per day. I did EVERY PT. I took the real LSAT twice. 162/167. Are there people on this site that would have done WAY better studying as much as I did? Yes. But I'm proud to have gotten to the 95% percentile. Being in the top 5% of all test takers has gotten me into a lot of good schools, and in some cases with $.

HTH.

I appreciate your HELPFUL response. Thanks

Dude, if you don't want to hear the hard truth, why did you make this thread?

I said I appreciate helpful responses, not joking insults from ignorant law students. I specifically asked about the initial schools and my chances and that was ALL. Not the elite schools, because they don't matter to me. Hence me naming the specific schools (low tiered or not) that I would prefer.

tm4217 wrote:I said I appreciate helpful responses, not joking insults from ignorant law students. I specifically asked about the initial schools and my chances and that was ALL. Not the elite schools, because they don't matter to me. Hence me naming the specific schools (low tiered or not) that I would prefer.

Considering that this guy reported the posts ITT, I'm going to say that this isn't a flame.

Dude, listen up, people telling you to retake the LSAT are being helpful. Your score is garbage. Actually, it's worse than garbage. Next to your score, a bag of garbage would look like Mila Kunis. People are trying to save you from throwing a lot of money after a HORRIBLE J.D. by telling you to retake. That's pretty much the definition of helpful.

Just because the truth hurts doesn't mean people who tell you the truth are trying to hurt you. If you can't at least bring your score up to 150-155, it would make a lot of sense to look into other professions.