Native/ Fluent LSAT issue Forum

[jobegood]

Hi,

I took the LSAT last December and like all of us I'm anxiously waiting for the results. I'm an international student from France, finishing up a bachelor in political science in a UC university with a 3.8 GPA (top 6% of my graduating class). On the LSAT answer sheet there was 1. Are you an English native speaker: Yes/No
2. Are you fluent in English: Yes/ No
I answered no to both questions, although I certainly am what we can call a "fluent speaker" (did fresh, soph, jun and now senior)
The LSAT is already a hard standardized exam but for a non native speaker parts like the Reading comps are a NIGHTMARE.
My questions to you is that, since I'm certain to get a score in btw 145 and 150 (even though I studied seriously for 3 month and took the TM course), will the fact that I'm neither a native (for real) nor fluent (at least on paper) influence my chance of admissions.
In other words, will the admission committees take into consideration that as a non native speaker is it fairly normal that I score less at the LSAT?

It's very confusing because few international student ever pass the LSAT, pre-law advisers at school and online often have no experience with this kind of case.

I think it would be very misleading to judge my admission solely based on a "not so good" LSAT when I have an outstanding GPA and other +'s (like many other Americans and internationals)

Best,

[Nova]

I'm an international student from France, finishing up a bachelor in political science in a UC university with a 3.8 GPA (top 6% of my graduating class).

Congrats. thats great.

I'm an international student from France, finishing up a bachelor in political science in a UC university with a 3.8 GPA (top 6% of my graduating class). My questions to you is that, since I'm certain to get a score in btw 145 and 150 (even though I studied seriously for 3 month and took the TM course), will the fact that I'm neither a native (for real) nor fluent (at least on paper) influence my chance of admissions.
In other words, will the admission committees take into consideration that as a non native speaker is it fairly normal that I score less at the LSAT?

You will be evaluated like anyone else. Law school admissions are driven by numbers. No one gets a pass on the LSAT. There is no bump for not having a good grasp on English.

Do not apply to law school with a sub 150 score. There will be no schools that will put you in position to succeed with that score.

IMO, you really need to focus all your energy into preparing for a June retake. Look at this

http://myLSN.info/a2igvt NONE of the applicants accepted with a sub 150 LSAT got scholarships. None of the schools that accepted people with that LSAT are worth attending without substantial scholarships.

http://myLSN.info/0crmvv Scoring between 155 and 159 would open up the entire second tier, with scholarship opportunities... and also some decent lower tier 1 schools.

http://myLSN.info/di4vdq Scoring between 160 and 165 makes you tier 1 secure, with money. You would have a pretty good shot at many schools ranked between 19 and 50.

I think it would be very misleading to judge my admission solely based on a "not so good" LSAT when I have an outstanding GPA and other +'s (like many other Americans and internationals)

Below 150 is not "not so good", it is very poor. Whether or not it is fair, the LSAT is the most important part of your application. It is the number 1 determinate of where you can get in and what scholarships you will receive.

Obviously you have the potential to do much better, as evidenced by your undergrad success. If you put in the work necessary, Im sure you can greatly improve with time.

[NoodleyOne]

You're aware laws in the US are written in English, right? Not having a good grasp on it could be detrimental to your career as a lawyer.

[dingbat]

I'm not a native English language speaker either. Your comprehension of the English language needs to be at least as good as the average American if you want to have a chance of succeeding in law school.
Stat being said, schools will NOT take it into consideration.

[Goteborg]

Félicitations pour le 3.8!

This is just a shot in the dark but have you seen the Cornell/Sorbonne dual degree (JD/maîtrise) program?
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/intern ... master.cfm
As opposed to the Columbia/Sorbonne program which chooses candidates amongst its admitted 1Ls, the Cornell program lets you apply directly to the dual degree scheme as a 0L. Your specific profile might give you a significant bump up in their eyes and perhaps, to some extent, compensate for a so-so LSAT score.

By the way, don't panic over the issue of your English and being able to work well in Biglaw. The Cornell/Columbia/Sorbonne dual degree program has existed for decades and the French participants, most of whom don't have a 3.8's worth of English from a good American university, almost all get biglaw SAs and subsequent job offers (mostly, NY, DC, Paris, BXL.)

[B90]

Félicitations pour le 3.8!

This is just a shot in the dark but have you seen the Cornell/Sorbonne dual degree (JD/maîtrise) program?
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/intern ... master.cfm
As opposed to the Columbia/Sorbonne program which chooses candidates amongst its admitted 1Ls, the Cornell program lets you apply directly to the dual degree scheme as a 0L. Your specific profile might give you a significant bump up in their eyes and perhaps, to some extent, compensate for a so-so LSAT score.

By the way, don't panic over the issue of your English and being able to work well in Biglaw. The Cornell/Columbia/Sorbonne dual degree program has existed for decades and the French participants, most of whom don't have a 3.8's worth of English from a good American university, almost all get biglaw SAs and subsequent job offers (mostly, NY, DC, Paris, BXL.)

French spam. 2013 is going to be a VERY good year!

[dingbat]

Félicitations pour le 3.8!

This is just a shot in the dark but have you seen the Cornell/Sorbonne dual degree (JD/maîtrise) program?
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/intern ... master.cfm
As opposed to the Columbia/Sorbonne program which chooses candidates amongst its admitted 1Ls, the Cornell program lets you apply directly to the dual degree scheme as a 0L. Your specific profile might give you a significant bump up in their eyes and perhaps, to some extent, compensate for a so-so LSAT score.

By the way, don't panic over the issue of your English and being able to work well in Biglaw. The Cornell/Columbia/Sorbonne dual degree program has existed for decades and the French participants, most of whom don't have a 3.8's worth of English from a good American university, almost all get biglaw SAs and subsequent job offers (mostly, NY, DC, Paris, BXL.)

Bullshit. You're not getting into Cornell, let alone Columbia, with an LSAT below 160

[Goteborg]

Bullshit. You're not getting into Cornell, let alone Columbia, with an LSAT below 160

Yes, you're almost certainly right. But then again, you're not getting into Cornell at 160 either unless you have amazing softs.

Isn't Cornell one of those schools that only looks at your best LSAT? If so, retaking - with OP's language advantage - would be well worth it.

[dingbat]

Bullshit. You're not getting into Cornell, let alone Columbia, with an LSAT below 160

Yes, you're almost certainly right. But then again, you're not getting into Cornell at 160 either unless you have amazing softs.

Isn't Cornell one of those schools that only looks at your best LSAT? If so, retaking - with OP's language advantage - would be well worth it.

Yeah, you'd need amazing softs to get into Cornell with a 160. I just picked a round number. Retaking is always worth it, because schools typically look at the highest LSAT, even if they claim otherwise.

[suralin]

Bullshit. You're not getting into Cornell, let alone Columbia, with an LSAT below 160

Yes, you're almost certainly right. But then again, you're not getting into Cornell at 160 either unless you have amazing softs.

Isn't Cornell one of those schools that only looks at your best LSAT? If so, retaking - with OP's language advantage - would be well worth it.

Yeah, you'd need amazing softs to get into Cornell with a 160. I just picked a round number. Retaking is always worth it, because schools typically look at the highest LSAT, even if they claim otherwise.

+1. I'd even retake a 173, but that's just me.

[patienunderstanding]

Getting to 160 is doable for a non-native speaker (I'm one so I know and English is my 3rd language so it's even harder... ). What was/is your major?

[dingbat]

Getting to 160 is doable for a non-native speaker (I'm one so I know and English is my 3rd language so it's even harder... ). What was/is your major?

I got significantly higher, and I'm not a native speaker

[patienunderstanding]

Getting to 160 is doable for a non-native speaker (I'm one so I know and English is my 3rd language so it's even harder... ). What was/is your major?

I got significantly higher, and I'm not a native speaker

I didn't say I got exactly 160. I meant in his situation going to 160 is possible. BTW what's your first language?

[LexLeon]

Félicitations pour le 3.8!

This is just a shot in the dark but have you seen the Cornell/Sorbonne dual degree (JD/maîtrise) program?
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/intern ... master.cfm
As opposed to the Columbia/Sorbonne program which chooses candidates amongst its admitted 1Ls, the Cornell program lets you apply directly to the dual degree scheme as a 0L. Your specific profile might give you a significant bump up in their eyes and perhaps, to some extent, compensate for a so-so LSAT score.

By the way, don't panic over the issue of your English and being able to work well in Biglaw. The Cornell/Columbia/Sorbonne dual degree program has existed for decades and the French participants, most of whom don't have a 3.8's worth of English from a good American university, almost all get biglaw SAs and subsequent job offers (mostly, NY, DC, Paris, BXL.)

Bullshit. You're not getting into Cornell, let alone Columbia, with an LSAT below 160

Oh, that´s interesting; and you speak with such omniscience and authority.

Take a look at Yale's class profile.

You might be so uninteresting that a sub-160 LSAT score would leave you with virtually no chance at admittance to a top school.

Don't tell my brothers and sisters, however, where they're "not getting into."

[dingbat]

Félicitations pour le 3.8!

This is just a shot in the dark but have you seen the Cornell/Sorbonne dual degree (JD/maîtrise) program?
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/intern ... master.cfm
As opposed to the Columbia/Sorbonne program which chooses candidates amongst its admitted 1Ls, the Cornell program lets you apply directly to the dual degree scheme as a 0L. Your specific profile might give you a significant bump up in their eyes and perhaps, to some extent, compensate for a so-so LSAT score.

By the way, don't panic over the issue of your English and being able to work well in Biglaw. The Cornell/Columbia/Sorbonne dual degree program has existed for decades and the French participants, most of whom don't have a 3.8's worth of English from a good American university, almost all get biglaw SAs and subsequent job offers (mostly, NY, DC, Paris, BXL.)

Bullshit. You're not getting into Cornell, let alone Columbia, with an LSAT below 160

Oh, that´s interesting; and you speak with such omniscience and authority.

Take a look at Yale's class profile.

You might be so uninteresting that a sub-160 LSAT score would leave you with virtually no chance at admittance to a top school.

Don't tell my brothers and sisters, however, where they're "not getting into."

Ok, there are some exceptions (I know someone who got into a T30 with a low 15x and 2.x GPA), but unless your name is Bush, you've got an olympic medal, or you won a nobel prize, it's pretty darn unlikely and it's fairly safe to assume that OP doesn't have any of those highly unusual extra-special softs.

[heythatslife]

To the OP: It seems very strange to me that the you did quite well in a reading-intensive major at a respected public university and yet found the RC section so hard that you couldn't even break 150. Maybe there was something wrong with your approach, not only with RC but the test as a whole? I mean, you could just flat out guess the entire RC section, in which case you would statistically get about 5 or 6 questions right, and still get 160 provided you do well enough on the other parts of the test. (By the way, I'm also a non-native speaker so nobody can tell me I don't understand this particular situation.)

I'm going to side with dingbat on the issue of whether a sub-160 can get you into top schools. Of course there are people who achieve just that, but you shouldn't assume that it's going to happen to you also unless you have very good reasons to believe otherwise. And looking at OP's other posts, I'm inclined to believe he doesn't have extraordinary softs compared to the rest of the applicant pool.

[LexLeon]

Félicitations pour le 3.8!

This is just a shot in the dark but have you seen the Cornell/Sorbonne dual degree (JD/maîtrise) program?
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/intern ... master.cfm
As opposed to the Columbia/Sorbonne program which chooses candidates amongst its admitted 1Ls, the Cornell program lets you apply directly to the dual degree scheme as a 0L. Your specific profile might give you a significant bump up in their eyes and perhaps, to some extent, compensate for a so-so LSAT score.

By the way, don't panic over the issue of your English and being able to work well in Biglaw. The Cornell/Columbia/Sorbonne dual degree program has existed for decades and the French participants, most of whom don't have a 3.8's worth of English from a good American university, almost all get biglaw SAs and subsequent job offers (mostly, NY, DC, Paris, BXL.)

Bullshit. You're not getting into Cornell, let alone Columbia, with an LSAT below 160

Oh, that´s interesting; and you speak with such omniscience and authority.

Take a look at Yale's class profile.

You might be so uninteresting that a sub-160 LSAT score would leave you with virtually no chance at admittance to a top school.

Don't tell my brothers and sisters, however, where they're "not getting into."

Ok, there are some exceptions (I know someone who got into a T30 with a low 15x and 2.x GPA), but unless your name is Bush, you've got an olympic medal, or you won a nobel prize, it's pretty darn unlikely and it's fairly safe to assume that OP doesn't have any of those highly unusual extra-special softs.

Thank you, Dingbat, my dear friend, for the qualification.

[jobegood]

Thank you for the prompt and honest responses.

I have to say this comes a little bit as a shock since I thought I would still have a chance to get accepted in some of the schools I applied to.
Here's the full list (hasn't been updated since before I took the LSAT, so I realize some schools are not realistic)
Also, and I'm not fond of saying this, but money will not be an issue, I already knew I wouldn't be able to score a scholarship anyway

The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law
Arizona State University--Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
The Florida State University College of Law
The George Washington University Law School
University of Houston Law Center
Stetson University College of Law
The University of Texas School of Law
University of Florida, Fredric G. Levin College of Law
University of Miami School of Law

Re-taking the LSAT is not an option as it is right now
I would really appreciate if some of you could guide me toward schools I would have a chance to score (even if the chances are slim)

[jobegood]

To the OP: It seems very strange to me that the you did quite well in a reading-intensive major at a respected public university and yet found the RC section so hard that you couldn't even break 150. Maybe there was something wrong with your approach, not only with RC but the test as a whole? I mean, you could just flat out guess the entire RC section, in which case you would statistically get about 5 or 6 questions right, and still get 160 provided you do well enough on the other parts of the test. (By the way, I'm also a non-native speaker so nobody can tell me I don't understand this particular situation.)

I'm going to side with dingbat on the issue of whether a sub-160 can get you into top schools. Of course there are people who achieve just that, but you shouldn't assume that it's going to happen to you also unless you have very good reasons to believe otherwise. And looking at OP's other posts, I'm inclined to believe he doesn't have extraordinary softs compared to the rest of the applicant pool.

My approach was definitely flawed, I had less than 3 months to prepare for it, while taking 4 classes and scoring a 4.0.
For every single sections i could not go further than the 16-18th question and obviously its a major problem.

[dingbat]

Thank you for the prompt and honest responses.

I have to say this comes a little bit as a shock since I thought I would still have a chance to get accepted in some of the schools I applied to.
Here's the full list (hasn't been updated since before I took the LSAT, so I realize some schools are not realistic)
Also, and I'm not fond of saying this, but money will not be an issue, I already knew I wouldn't be able to score a scholarship anyway

The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law
Arizona State University--Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
The Florida State University College of Law
The George Washington University Law School
University of Houston Law Center
Stetson University College of Law
The University of Texas School of Law
University of Florida, Fredric G. Levin College of Law
University of Miami School of Law

Re-taking the LSAT is not an option as it is right now
I would really appreciate if some of you could guide me toward schools I would have a chance to score (even if the chances are slim)

Why these schools? Any chance you could retake in February?

[jobegood]

I'm taking hard classes this winter quarter + I kinda want my social life back
I've studied like a mad man for 3 months ( and I know it's not enough) and never could pass the 16th question on any section
Also the schools I selected are just the ones I'd like to go for their location and some of the programs they offer (my focus is within sustainable dev. and ecology)

[dingbat]

I'm taking hard classes this winter quarter + I kinda want my social life back

then don't go to law school / be a lawyer in this country

I've studied like a mad man for 3 months ( and I know it's not enough) and never could pass the 16th question on any section

cant help here. I spent significantly less time studying

Also the schools I selected are just the ones I'd like to go for their location and some of the programs they offer (my focus is within sustainable dev. and ecology)

do you want to end up living/practicing in those locations? Also, do not choose a school based on programs they offer. Choose it based on employment prospects (unless you don't care)

[Nova]

I'm taking hard classes this winter quarter + I kinda want my social life back

For law school admissions, The LSAT is a lot more importaint than your 4 years of undergrad. You owe it to yourself to put in more time and retake the test in June.

If you follow this guide, you will improve. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &start=150

All those schools are, for the most part, legit if you are willing to have a career in their state except Stetson.

If your cycle shakes out, great. But you should still prepare and take the June LSAT in case it doesnt.

[suralin]

I'm taking hard classes this winter quarter + I kinda want my social life back

For law school admissions, The LSAT is a lot more importaint than your 4 years of undergrad. You owe it to yourself to put in more time and retake the test in June.

If you follow this guide, you will improve. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &start=150

All those schools are, for the most part, legit if you are willing to have a career in their state except Stetson.

If your cycle shakes out, great. But you should still prepare and take the June LSAT in case it doesnt.

This right here. If the LSAT counts for more than your entire undergraduate career, how much more do you think it's worth compared to a few classes? A lot.

Study for the LSAT like somebody's paying you $40+ per hour, because an increase of even a few points is equivalent to hundreds of thousands more in lifetime earnings.