Top Law Schools

Can a really high LSAT score (173+) cover up a poor resume? By poor, I mean I don't have that much on my resume and there's some gap in between activities, i.e. several months of no work/activities..

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: it's largely (read: almost entirely) a numbers game. There are a few schools that might care (Yale, Berkeley, etc.) but softs really mean very little otherwise. If you've got the LSAT and GPA, and you can put SOMETHING on your resume that seems impressive (and this is easy to do) then you're fine.

kakistocracy wrote:Short answer: yes.

Long answer: it's largely (read: almost entirely) a numbers game. There are a few schools that might care (Yale, Berkeley, etc.) but softs really mean very little otherwise. If you've got the LSAT and GPA, and you can put SOMETHING on your resume that seems impressive (and this is easy to do) then you're fine.

What constitutes impressive? Assuming T14 expectations. I can have a shit resume, right? 4+ years out of undergrad. Work, but not very good work, in between. Great LSAT, 3.25 GPA.

cneu333 wrote:Can a really high LSAT score (173+) cover up a poor resume? By poor, I mean I don't have that much on my resume and there's some gap in between activities, i.e. several months of no work/activities..

At Y/S, probably not. Elsewhere, with a solid GPA, sure. NYU won't even look at your extracurriculars if you've got a 3.8/173

cneu333 wrote:Can a really high LSAT score (173+) cover up a poor resume? By poor, I mean I don't have that much on my resume and there's some gap in between activities, i.e. several months of no work/activities..

yes

With a 3.25 and a 164/Cancel/169 (all in 2009) + a 169 (June 2011), what's the saturation point?

Can I get a 170 and have it still count as a 170 for T14? Or do I need a 171+? I regularly PT'd in the 173-176 range, but went WAY too hard on Adderall and freaked myself out to the point that my scores suffered.

If I were to hit 171+, would it render my prior scores MOSTLY if not entirely irrelevant? Or is it like "Oh, well he took it X amount of times, of course he did better? Or would my impact on medians be sufficient to cancel out the rest?

Assuming a June 2013 re-take and T14 applications as early as allowed.

..

HYSCC and Berkeley definitely look at your ECs. Softs can make a huge difference for scholarship offers as well, which is important given tuitions are now creeping above absurd.

I think it's mostly a numbers game, but work and/or volunteer experience, along with writing strong essays and having good recommendations, is very important.

Look at the threads that still have plenty of people with 3.8/172 who applied to places in the fall and are still waiting around for clues as to whether numbers alone are actually sufficient, as many people say.

You don't need impressive softs, but I think admissions committees want to know they're accepting a functioning human, so if you've worked part-time jobs, volunteered, joined any organizations, basically anything, that'll help.

banjo wrote:Softs can make a huge difference for scholarship offers as well

I've really been wondering about this. How true is this? Is this only for "harder" softs like URM, Military, or does it extend to "softer" softs like WE and Recs?

This cycle, some K-JDs have vastly outperformed their numbers and/or received full-tuition scholarships at schools where people with identical numbers got rejected. Numbers are 70% of the offer package (including scholarships). Maybe close to 90% at NYU. They're not everything.

banjo wrote:This cycle, some K-JDs have vastly outperformed their numbers and/or received full-tuition scholarships at schools where people with identical numbers got rejected. Numbers are 70% of the offer package (including scholarships). Maybe close to 90% at NYU. They're not everything.

That last bit is really good to hear because NYU gave me a big 0.

I wonder how someone with essentially no resume (K-JD, no job experience at all, didn't join any clubs or participate in any activities in UG) would do if they still had good numbers (like say a 3.85/173).

john7234797 wrote:I wonder how someone with essentially no resume (K-JD, no job experience at all, didn't join any clubs or participate in any activities in UG) would do if they still had good numbers (like say a 3.85/173).

Sup. I've even got retakes, T200 public UG, Ws and a year off doing nothing.




I know a shitload about cellphones but can't put that on a resume sadly.

sinfiery wrote:

john7234797 wrote:I wonder how someone with essentially no resume (K-JD, no job experience at all, didn't join any clubs or participate in any activities in UG) would do if they still had good numbers (like say a 3.85/173).

Sup. I've even got retakes, T200 public UG, Ws and a year off doing nothing.




I know a shitload about cellphones but can't put that on a resume sadly.

Looking at your LSN it doesn't seem like you've been hurt too badly. Maybe some schools WL you when you should have been auto-accept but schools like UVA and NYU were glad to toss you money. I wonder if not writing the optional essays hurt you at places like Michigan and Duke more than your lack of softs.

I'd toss HLS to softs/retake
Id toss UChi to the interview
I'd toss CLS to PS and my fit at CLS
Id toss the rest to lack of optional essays/optional interviews


It hurts you at HYS and when in contention for named scholarships

All of this, I think at least. Who really knows.