Top Law Schools

I have a 171 lsat and a 4.0 from an ivy league school. Really want Harvard or Columbia. Thoughts?

you should be fine.

If was in your position I would retake for the big money at Columbia.

AnMzungu wrote:If was in your position I would retake for the big money at Columbia.

Agreed, a few more points on the LSAT would be huge for you unless you're someone who would take sticker at HY over a full ride at CCN.

hoos89 wrote:

AnMzungu wrote:If was in your position I would retake for the big money at Columbia.

Agreed, a few more points on the LSAT would be huge for you unless you're someone who would take sticker at HY over a full ride at CCN.

If I would be someone to take the former, would it not be worth to retake then?

.

Were you scoring consistently higher on PTs? If so, retake because it can only help. Otherwise enjoy raking in the money with those numbers.

malleus discentium wrote:Were you scoring consistently higher on PTs? If so, retake because it can only help. Otherwise enjoy raking in the money with those numbers.

Where do you think I can get money with those numbers?

You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

JohannDeMann wrote:You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

This

If you must go then retake

UpandDown97 wrote:

Lurker1919 wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

AnMzungu wrote:If was in your position I would retake for the big money at Columbia.

Agreed, a few more points on the LSAT would be huge for you unless you're someone who would take sticker at HY over a full ride at CCN.

If I would be someone to take the former, would it not be worth to retake then?

Having already scored a 171, it is going to be very very difficult to get any higher points. You could save yourself time, effort, money and pain and not retake. Or you could retake, maybe get a higher score, and more surely secure Columbia.

Having been someone who retook a 170 and scored a 173 after two months of studying, I could not disprove more of this guy's attitude. I was working 70 hours a week when I retook, so I don't really have any sympathy for people who don't at least try (albeit, I understand there may be extenuating circumstances for some people). I am not sure where this guy gets off saying a 171 is going to be so difficult for you to improve upon....

If you actually have a 4.0 from a top ivy league school, then it is my opinion that you probably underperformed on the LSAT. Make of that what you will, but I hope it pushes you to study more and try again.

Mack.Hambleton wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

This

If you must go then retake

Also a good point. What was your major in? Seriously most people hate being lawyers even if they're successful.

hoos89 wrote:

Mack.Hambleton wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

This

If you must go then retake

Also a good point. What was your major in? Seriously most people hate being lawyers even if they're successful.

Studied religious studies

.

UpandDown97 wrote:

everton125 wrote:

UpandDown97 wrote:

Lurker1919 wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

AnMzungu wrote:If was in your position I would retake for the big money at Columbia.

Agreed, a few more points on the LSAT would be huge for you unless you're someone who would take sticker at HY over a full ride at CCN.

If I would be someone to take the former, would it not be worth to retake then?

Having already scored a 171, it is going to be very very difficult to get any higher points. You could save yourself time, effort, money and pain and not retake. Or you could retake, maybe get a higher score, and more surely secure Columbia.

Having been someone who retook a 170 and scored a 173 after two months of studying, I could not disprove more of this guy's attitude. I was working 70 hours a week when I retook, so I don't really have any sympathy for people who don't at least try (albeit, I understand there may be extenuating circumstances for some people). I am not sure where this guy gets off saying a 171 is going to be so difficult for you to improve upon....

If you actually have a 4.0 from a top ivy league school, then it is my opinion that you probably underperformed on the LSAT. Make of that what you will, but I hope it pushes you to study more and try again.

Jeez, "my attitude." That's stupid and a low blow. It's been studied and shown that after 167, the returns on retaking are very low. There's even a high likelihood you'll go down.

I never knew this website was so agency focused. "If you try, try, try, you'll succeed. Never mind the limits of imperfect test taking"

He was kinda harsh about it, but it's true. I was a similar case as OP (lower GPA, but a 170 on the first take and from an Ivy), and though I considered not retaking, I did it anyways, and went up 10 points after studying for just 4 more months. I know those are probably not indicative, but considering just 3 points more can put him above the medians for all law schools, I really think that retaking has immense value, and is not impossible.

OP, your scores are stellar, but if you are willing to do so, retaking is a pretty great option too.

JusPassItToWill wrote:

UpandDown97 wrote:

everton125 wrote:

UpandDown97 wrote:

Lurker1919 wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

AnMzungu wrote:If was in your position I would retake for the big money at Columbia.

Agreed, a few more points on the LSAT would be huge for you unless you're someone who would take sticker at HY over a full ride at CCN.

If I would be someone to take the former, would it not be worth to retake then?

Having already scored a 171, it is going to be very very difficult to get any higher points. You could save yourself time, effort, money and pain and not retake. Or you could retake, maybe get a higher score, and more surely secure Columbia.

Having been someone who retook a 170 and scored a 173 after two months of studying, I could not disprove more of this guy's attitude. I was working 70 hours a week when I retook, so I don't really have any sympathy for people who don't at least try (albeit, I understand there may be extenuating circumstances for some people). I am not sure where this guy gets off saying a 171 is going to be so difficult for you to improve upon....

If you actually have a 4.0 from a top ivy league school, then it is my opinion that you probably underperformed on the LSAT. Make of that what you will, but I hope it pushes you to study more and try again.

Jeez, "my attitude." That's stupid and a low blow. It's been studied and shown that after 167, the returns on retaking are very low. There's even a high likelihood you'll go down.

I never knew this website was so agency focused. "If you try, try, try, you'll succeed. Never mind the limits of imperfect test taking"

He was kinda harsh about it, but it's true. I was a similar case as OP (lower GPA, but a 170 on the first take and from an Ivy), and though I considered not retaking, I did it anyways, and went up 10 points after studying for just 4 more months. I know those are probably not indicative, but considering just 3 points more can put him above the medians for all law schools, I really think that retaking has immense value, and is not impossible.

OP, your scores are stellar, but if you are willing to do so, retaking is a pretty great option too.

It's awesome that you went up, and for my argument, even more awesome you recognize that your experience is probably not indicative.

As I mentioned, yeah, OP might go up. OP might not. It's a risk, and the downside is a lot of lost time, effort, money, etc. If that downside is too great for the marginally possible increase in score, then he's' not making a foolish decision since he's sitting pretty at a 170.

I think malleus' question about PTs is key here. Someone PTing 175-189 who gets a 171 may reasonably consider retaking. Someone who was PTing 167-169 after really thorough and dedicated study may reasonably choose not to, especially depending on their goals. Lost time/effort/money completely depends on the person; retaking isn't automatically some kind of horrific torture to no end.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I think malleus' question about PTs is key here. Someone PTing 175-189 who gets a 171 may reasonably consider retaking. Someone who was PTing 167-169 after really thorough and dedicated study may reasonably choose not to, especially depending on their goals. Lost time/effort/money completely depends on the person; retaking isn't automatically some kind of horrific torture to no end.

I wish I were PTing at 189

JusPassItToWill wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I think malleus' question about PTs is key here. Someone PTing 175-189 who gets a 171 may reasonably consider retaking. Someone who was PTing 167-169 after really thorough and dedicated study may reasonably choose not to, especially depending on their goals. Lost time/effort/money completely depends on the person; retaking isn't automatically some kind of horrific torture to no end.

I wish I were PTing at 189

Ha! Oops. Phone posting.

Lurker1919 wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Mack.Hambleton wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

This

If you must go then retake

Also a good point. What was your major in? Seriously most people hate being lawyers even if they're successful.

Studied religious studies

You aren't considering graduate school? Wow

PrezRand wrote:

Lurker1919 wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Mack.Hambleton wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

This

If you must go then retake

Also a good point. What was your major in? Seriously most people hate being lawyers even if they're successful.

Studied religious studies

You aren't considering graduate school? Wow

I mean, people crap all over law school and the legal market, but it's still wayyyyyyyy better than the academic job market, especially in religious studies.

I had the exact same number as OP, right down to the unmarketable Ivy League humanities degree. I re-took to maximize chances at HYS and increase potential merit aid from CCN. Went from 171 to 173 on retake. It wasn't as big an increase as I had hoped, but I'd say it was still worth the effort. I ended up with offers from H + S and a half-tuition scholarship from Chicago.

And Anony is right about the job market for newly-minted humanities PhDs. My original career plan had been to become an academic, but I changed my mind after my thesis advisor told me how tough it was to even break into academia with a full-time job. Sure, everyone talks about how draining biglaw is, but I'd rather be employed than jobless.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

PrezRand wrote:

Lurker1919 wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Mack.Hambleton wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

This

If you must go then retake

Also a good point. What was your major in? Seriously most people hate being lawyers even if they're successful.

Studied religious studies

You aren't considering graduate school? Wow

I mean, people crap all over law school and the legal market, but it's still wayyyyyyyy better than the academic job market, especially in religious studies.

I know that, but if he went to a top 5 or 10 grad school, his chances for a job would be good.

PrezRand wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

PrezRand wrote:

Lurker1919 wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Mack.Hambleton wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:You have a 4.0 from an Ivy League school and want to go into law? Wtf. Get a job now. You don't need to go to law school.

This

If you must go then retake

Also a good point. What was your major in? Seriously most people hate being lawyers even if they're successful.

Studied religious studies

You aren't considering graduate school? Wow

I mean, people crap all over law school and the legal market, but it's still wayyyyyyyy better than the academic job market, especially in religious studies.

I know that, but if he went to a top 5 or 10 grad school, his chances for a job would be good.

It's not really that simple.

The most recent stats show that people with a 171 who repeated increased their score by an average of 1.4 points. The standard deviation was four points, which translates to around a 20% chance of getting a 175 or better. Since every point of increase in this situation would result in far better offers, and since a lower score doesn't hurt applicants . . .