Top Law Schools

I knew that I probably bombed the September 2014 LSAT due to unusual nervousness but I chose not to cancel because I wanted to apply to UCLA Law under their Early Decision Program. Plus, UCLA only takes the higher score. I received my score this morning - an abysmal 156 - and I'm already registered to take the December 2014 LSAT.

Should I apply to UCLA ED assuming there is a chance that I will be waitlisted and then taken off the waitlist once I get a much higher score in December? Or should I wait until I receive my new score in December and apply in the regular admissions pool?

At the moment, I'm leaning toward ED because there seems to be no drawback. If I am waitlisted, I have December to improve my chances to get off the list, and if I am denied under ED, I can apply under the regular pool with a new, higher score.

*Note: I do not mind paying full price at UCLA.

*Other Information: I graduated from UCLA in June 2013, summa cum laude. I believe I have a strong Personal Statement, 2 strong LORs, and decent softs. Not URM.

I am also applying to Pepperdine, Loyola Los Angeles, Chapman, University of San Diego, Southwestern, and USC. I know I can get into all of these schools except for USC (which I will apply to after December).

Retake

Retake & sit out a cycle.

As I said, I am definitely retaking in December. My question is whether to do Early Decision now with the possibility of getting on the WL and then getting off the WL with the new score or waiting for the new December score and applying in the regular admissions pool.

LoriGhaz wrote:As I said, I am definitely retaking in December. My question is whether to do Early Decision now with the possibility of getting on the WL and then getting off the WL with the new score or waiting for the new December score and applying in the regular admissions pool.

Is it possible for you to go up to 169 in December ?

I wouldnt ED UCLA dats real expensive.

Under no circumstances should you attend law school with that LSAT score. Retake.

I don't see the point. UCLA wouldn't consider a 156 even with ED, right? What were your PTs like? If you score above a 165+, you could go to a much better school than UCLA.

LoriGhaz wrote:*Note: I do not mind paying full price at UCLA.

You should. Paying sticker at UCLA would be on the short list of the worst decisions you have ever made in your life.

Retake, multiple times if need be. Don't bother applying anywhere now, no schools that will accept you as is are worth attending.

LoriGhaz wrote: *Note: I do not mind paying full price at UCLA.

Is this because money is not an issue for you or because you think UCLA at sticker is defensible? If the latter, you are mistaken. Study better for the LSAT, apply with 170+ in December/next cycle and enjoy big money at a T14. Do not ED UCLA.

malleus discentium wrote:

LoriGhaz wrote: *Note: I do not mind paying full price at UCLA.

Is this because money is not an issue for you or because you think UCLA at sticker is defensible? If the latter, you are mistaken. Study better for the LSAT, apply with 170+ in December/next cycle and enjoy big money at a T14. Do not ED UCLA.

It is because money is not an issue for me. At all.


The only reason I'm considering ED is because I think it would be better to be waitlisted under ED than waitlisted in the regular admissions pool. Regardless, I'm taking the December LSAT and plan on doing substantially better (no lower than a 165).