For CA Law Schools - What LSAT score range should I be in? Forum

[mrhaart]

Assuming I have a 3.74 LSAC GPA (dunno whether they round this to 3.75 but I am guessing they round down to 3.7 or simply take it at face value), what LSAT score range should I feasibly be scoring in? I am shooting for Pepperdine, Hastings, USC, UCLA, and Berkeley but I have no idea how I should be scoring given my relatively decent GPA - I understand the last three schools are probably exponentially harder to get into than the first two, but I was hoping to get your opinions for each school respectively. At least a 170+? At least a 165+?

Thank you.

[Big Dog]

above median is always your first goal; top quartile is even better. use the search function to find the individual schools

http://www.top-law-schools.com/rankings.html

[scoobysnax]

As high as you possibly can. Looks like a 168 will give you an acceptance at UCLA

http://mylsn.info/87sitw/

[malleus discentium]

Assuming I have a 3.74 LSAC GPA (dunno whether they round this to 3.75 but I am guessing they round down to 3.7 or simply take it at face value), what LSAT score range should I feasibly be scoring in? I am shooting for Pepperdine, Hastings, USC, UCLA, and Berkeley but I have no idea how I should be scoring given my relatively decent GPA - I understand the last three schools are probably exponentially harder to get into than the first two, but I was hoping to get your opinions for each school respectively. At least a 170+? At least a 165+?

Thank you.

Don't go to Hastings or Pepperdine.

You need a 171 to have any real shot at B

UCLA drops off almost completely below 168

But USC will go a point lower

USC and UCLA are both good schools. But going anywhere in California except there or S/B is a poor plan. (As a note you chose the worst possible state, because California schools notoriously lurrrve them some high GPAs and yours isn't as strong as you think for California.)

[BigZuck]

If you're just a regular schmo you'll have a hard time snagging Berkeley with anything not in the low to mid 170s.

I would shoot for a 180 and wouldn't go to law school with anything less than a 168 or so (and even if you hit like a 170 out of the gate I would still retake just to see if you could snag Harvard or something).

[mrhaart]

Thanks for the breakdown everyone -- I suppose Pepperdine and Hastings aren't ideal, but I'm unsure as to whether a 170+ is even feasible for me given my current work schedule -- I'm sure I might be able to reach that threshold, but it would probably take me 1-2 full years of studying.

For clarification, do law schools regard lsac gpa exactly as it appears to them (meaning my 3.74 is a 3.74) or do they tend to round up and down?

Again, thank you for all of your input, this really helps put things into perspective

[Nova]

at least median @ USC/UCLA

so 166/167+

[malleus discentium]

Thanks for the breakdown everyone -- I suppose Pepperdine and Hastings aren't ideal, but I'm unsure as to whether a 170+ is even feasible for me given my current work schedule -- I'm sure I might be able to reach that threshold, but it would probably take me 1-2 full years of studying.

For clarification, do law schools regard lsac gpa exactly as it appears to them (meaning my 3.74 is a 3.74) or do they tend to round up and down?

Again, thank you for all of your input, this really helps put things into perspective

GPAs are regarded as what they are. As for your ability to get a 170+, what studying have you done so far? Studying for the LSAT is not an easy thing but it's a lot easier than people think because they do it poorly. There's a lot of guidance here for LSAT studying. Don't discount yourself without putting the effort in first.

[mrhaart]

Thanks for the breakdown everyone -- I suppose Pepperdine and Hastings aren't ideal, but I'm unsure as to whether a 170+ is even feasible for me given my current work schedule -- I'm sure I might be able to reach that threshold, but it would probably take me 1-2 full years of studying.

For clarification, do law schools regard lsac gpa exactly as it appears to them (meaning my 3.74 is a 3.74) or do they tend to round up and down?

Again, thank you for all of your input, this really helps put things into perspective

GPAs are regarded as what they are. As for your ability to get a 170+, what studying have you done so far? Studying for the LSAT is not an easy thing but it's a lot easier than people think because they do it poorly. There's a lot of guidance here for LSAT studying. Don't discount yourself without putting the effort in first.

Are there any guides in particular on tls that you would recommend for beginners? After a quick search, it seems Pithypike and NoodleyOne's guides are highly regarded (the latter geared for re-takers but after skimming it, it offers some useful advice) but I am a bit wary about buying a bunch of materials right off the bat without trying a book or two out...

But assuming I am gearing to take the Sept. exam I suppose it's best to choose a plan and stick with it -- I may need the full 6-7 months of preparation -- actually, I'll most definitely will need to utilize all 6-7 months

Edit: Also, after reviewing the charts you posted above, is there a reason why Cornell, which sits a bit higher than LA + SC seem to have less stringent LSAT averages? Or perhaps they don't? Am I missing something?