LSAT not required Forum

[ihenry]

OP is 43 year old guys. There's a reason to look beyond his numbers, especially his GPA.

[Clearly]

OP is 43 year old guys. There's a reason to look beyond his numbers, especially his GPA.

It doesn't matter bro, good schools aren't gonna take a hit on medians because someone is 40.

[ihenry]

OP is 43 year old guys. There's a reason to look beyond his numbers, especially his GPA.

It doesn't matter bro, good schools aren't gonna take a hit on medians because someone is 40.

Yeah but it's medians dude, which means half of the class can be below them, which allows some flexibility. Actually, even for Chinese grad schools where there are cut off marks, grace could be granted for older students with really substantial work experience.

[Traynor Brah]

OP is 43 year old guys. There's a reason to look beyond his numbers, especially his GPA.

It doesn't matter bro, good schools aren't gonna take a hit on medians because someone is 40.

Yeah but it's medians dude, which means half of the class can be below them, which allows some flexibility. Actually, even for Chinese grad schools where there are cut off marks, grace could be granted for older students with really substantial work experience.

Oh. I thought you were being sarcastic with your first comment. Instead, you're just really misinformed, don't have basic data interpretation skills, and/or are a dumb.

[ihenry]

OP is 43 year old guys. There's a reason to look beyond his numbers, especially his GPA.

It doesn't matter bro, good schools aren't gonna take a hit on medians because someone is 40.

Yeah but it's medians dude, which means half of the class can be below them, which allows some flexibility. Actually, even for Chinese grad schools where there are cut off marks, grace could be granted for older students with really substantial work experience.

Oh. I thought you were being sarcastic with your first comment. Instead, you're just really misinformed, don't have basic data interpretation skills, and/or are a dumb.

That's a good point. I would like to see how your data interpretation or smartness plays out.

Eta: this is being sacarstic, in case I'm not clear.

[PoopyPants]

OP is 43 year old guys. There's a reason to look beyond his numbers, especially his GPA.

It doesn't matter bro, good schools aren't gonna take a hit on medians because someone is 40.

Yeah but it's medians dude, which means half of the class can be below them, which allows some flexibility. Actually, even for Chinese grad schools where there are cut off marks, grace could be granted for older students with really substantial work experience.

Oh. I thought you were being sarcastic with your first comment. Instead, you're just really misinformed, don't have basic data interpretation skills, and/or are a dumb.

That's a good point. I would like to see how your data interpretation or smartness plays out.

Eta: this is being sacarstic, in case I'm not clear.

As stated above, schools care about 1) LSAT, 2) GPA, and 3) everything else. Being 43 and the experience that comes with that falls into cat 3. If you are borderline, it might help push you over the edge. You aren't going to outperform poor numbers just because you're over 40.

[Clearly]

OP is 43 year old guys. There's a reason to look beyond his numbers, especially his GPA.

It doesn't matter bro, good schools aren't gonna take a hit on medians because someone is 40.

Yeah but it's medians dude, which means half of the class can be below them, which allows some flexibility. Actually, even for Chinese grad schools where there are cut off marks, grace could be granted for older students with really substantial work experience.

Maybe someday you'll go to law school and you'll realize there are very few non-URMs below both medians. For starters we don't know what this guys UGPA even is, maybe he's in good shape already. People have this really frustrating tendency of arguing without having a point. What are you saying exactly? he should take the LSAT? Me too... Not that he should go to some shithole unaccredited death-trap? Me too.

[Clearly]

More importantly you're talking over this guys goals. He wanted to go to an unaccredited law school at 42 so he could litigate constitutional law and the first amendment. There is literally no reason to believe this guy has done any research at all. Now, there's nothing wrong with that, in fact, I'd argue he posted in the perfect place to get real information about making an educated decision to segue into law. That said, you telling him "oh schools will look beyond your numbers" is a) wrong. and b) really really likely to encourage someone who's looking for confirmation to do something that could ruin their financial lives. The only message he needs to hear is 1) you need to take the LSAT 2) you should tell us your UGPA 3) you should readjust your goals because those jobs don't exist 4) realistic admissions and job data LSN and LST. Not "Hey but you might be the exception to the rule!"

OP should you return, I'd like to give you an early piece of advice. I believe that you attempted to research what it takes to get into law school, and that you think you found something that supports that they look at all sorts of things. I highly believe that you got that information from law schools own admissions pages. Pro Tip: don't believe a WORD you read or hear from admissions people at schools. They have goals, and those goals aren't helping people make good decisions. All schools talk this great story about holistic review life experience etc. However, they don't tell you that among the many factors that law schools are ranked on (and admissions peoples jobs are to keep or improve those rankings) is the acceptance rate. Which is the number of people admitted divided by the number that applied. Naturally there are two ways of making your schools appear more selective (which is good for them). You can either admit less people, which leads to a smaller class, which means not enough tuition coming in, or you can encourage more people to apply, so you can deny them. Schools will outright lie to your face if they think it'll make you apply. Then when you get dinged you've done nothing more than give them one more in the denominator of that equation.

[ihenry]

You'll need data specifically regarding the stats of older applicants to make a reasonable judgment. If you are talking about myLSN, your starting point is LSAT/GPA which offers at best sketchy information in this case. What does a 2/10 (non URM) acceptance rate for your numbers at a certain school tells you? Being 43 he could well be among the two, needless to say LSN data are self reported, and older people are less likely to be involved in these techy stuff. Few such students in a class could mean that there are few such applicants in the first place.

I agree that this is all speculation and reasoning in vacuum. And indeed, we don't know sufficient details of OP as an applicant to make any prediction. I agree that OP should never go to an unaccredited school, but that's exactly why I'm saying he should aim higher. He is probably gonna perform better than KJD political science majors with identical stats in his cycle.

Eta: just saw your follow-up. I don't understand how I say he might outperform his numbers have the potential the financially ruin him. At worst schools could say no, which means he will not be paying his tuition and opportunity cost anywhere.

[BigZuck]

I'm super old by law school standards. Happy to answer questions on what law school admissions is like for olds.

[JonTheMandamus]

You'll need data specifically regarding the stats of older applicants to make a reasonable judgment. If you are talking about myLSN, your starting point is LSAT/GPA which offers at best sketchy information in this case. What does a 2/10 (non URM) acceptance rate for your numbers at a certain school tells you? Being 43 he could well be among the two, needless to say LSN data are self reported, and older people are less likely to be involved in these techy stuff. Few such students in a class could mean that there are few such applicants in the first place.

I agree that this is all speculation and reasoning in vacuum. And indeed, we don't know sufficient details of OP as an applicant to make any prediction. I agree that OP should never go to an unaccredited school, but that's exactly why I'm saying he should aim higher. He is probably gonna perform better than KJD political science majors with identical stats in his cycle.

Eta: just saw your follow-up. I don't understand how I say he might outperform his numbers have the potential the financially ruin him. At worst schools could say no, which means he will not be paying his tuition and opportunity cost anywhere.

The other posters are not saying that he cannot outperform applicants with the same stats based on his experience. They are merely stating repeatedly that stats come first.

[deant286]

He is probably gonna perform better than KJD political science majors with identical stats in his cycle.

If it comes down to OP v KJD with identical stats then sure, OP may have the upper hand in that scenario. But he still will only be realistically competitive at a range of schools dependent completely on his LSAT and GPA combination and you have not presented any reason to believe otherwise.

Don't give this guy, or future viewers of the thread, false hope. People come here looking for arguments like these in order to justify not retaking or whatever and then they end up $200k in debt with no realistic chance of paying it off, or at some TTTT school because thats the only one that let them in with a 3.0/155 combination, because you wanted to prove the other posters wrong.

[ihenry]

I'm definitely not saying he could get into Harvard with 3.0/155; but I don't think that he says his age and life experience (and possibly, the fact that GPA has been hugely inflated over these 25 years) could give him a leg up is completely wrong either. Regardless, we need more info about OP to give suggestions that make real sense.

[Clearly]

You'll need data specifically regarding the stats of older applicants to make a reasonable judgment. If you are talking about myLSN, your starting point is LSAT/GPA which offers at best sketchy information in this case. What does a 2/10 (non URM) acceptance rate for your numbers at a certain school tells you? Being 43 he could well be among the two, needless to say LSN data are self reported, and older people are less likely to be involved in these techy stuff. Few such students in a class could mean that there are few such applicants in the first place.

I agree that this is all speculation and reasoning in vacuum. And indeed, we don't know sufficient details of OP as an applicant to make any prediction. I agree that OP should never go to an unaccredited school, but that's exactly why I'm saying he should aim higher. He is probably gonna perform better than KJD political science majors with identical stats in his cycle.

Eta: just saw your follow-up. I don't understand how I say he might outperform his numbers have the potential the financially ruin him. At worst schools could say no, which means he will not be paying his tuition and opportunity cost anywhere.

I'm not talking about LSN. I'm talking real data, real interactions with adcomms, and real discussions about how these things work. You also haven't been on this site long enough to watch whole cycles of people latch on to the tiniest thing that inspires them to proceed, like the assertion that they'll out-preform, and follow that as far as it will take them, which is usually the veil of tears, or a drop-out thread.

Walk the halls at a good law school and tell me how many 40+ people you see. Then realize that they are there because they crushed the LSAT, not because they have experience. I'm down with softs, but softs of ANY CALIBER will not substitute for NUMBERS. The thing isn't some configuration of gpa, softs, and lsat. its GPA+LSAT then sort by softs.

dont quote.

[Traynor Brah]

jesus christ kid

[A. Nony Mouse]

Also super old. Performed pretty much exactly as my numbers predicted.

Having more things to talk about (like running your own business/other interesting work experience etc.) rather than fewer is always helpful. And I've seen some anecdotal evidence that an older student who is a splitter (high LSAT, low GPA) will get cut a little slack on the GPA when it's really old. But splitters are always unpredictable, and probably the best example of people for whom things like softs/PS/LORs etc make more of a difference (if both your numbers are high/low for a school, your likely outcome is clearer). If the OP doesn't end up a splitter, stats will be the overwhelmingly primary factor (and I don't know that it works the other way around, since there isn't a lot of incentive to weigh a 15-year-old GPA over a more recent LSAT).

[ihenry]

Also super old. Performed pretty much exactly as my numbers predicted.

Having more things to talk about (like running your own business/other interesting work experience etc.) rather than fewer is always helpful. And I've seen some anecdotal evidence that an older student who is a splitter (high LSAT, low GPA) will get cut a little slack on the GPA when it's really old. But splitters are always unpredictable, and probably the best example of people for whom things like softs/PS/LORs etc make more of a difference (if both your numbers are high/low for a school, your likely outcome is clearer). If the OP doesn't end up a splitter, stats will be the overwhelmingly primary factor (and I don't know that it works the other way around, since there isn't a lot of incentive to weigh a 15-year-old GPA over a more recent LSAT).

Well, but still, if your are talking about LSN, when it says 3 out of 11 applicants with your numbers (excluding URM, etc.) at a given school were admitted, do you take it as your numbers predict you are in or out?

The fact that I observed that this "uncertainty" exists is part of the evidence that makes me believe there is some elasticity in the admissions. It is not purely that I am naively guided by what schools say on their websites (I don't really read them, in fact).

[heythatslife]

Also super old. Performed pretty much exactly as my numbers predicted.

Having more things to talk about (like running your own business/other interesting work experience etc.) rather than fewer is always helpful. And I've seen some anecdotal evidence that an older student who is a splitter (high LSAT, low GPA) will get cut a little slack on the GPA when it's really old. But splitters are always unpredictable, and probably the best example of people for whom things like softs/PS/LORs etc make more of a difference (if both your numbers are high/low for a school, your likely outcome is clearer). If the OP doesn't end up a splitter, stats will be the overwhelmingly primary factor (and I don't know that it works the other way around, since there isn't a lot of incentive to weigh a 15-year-old GPA over a more recent LSAT).

Well, but still, if your are talking about LSN, when it says 3 out of 11 applicants with your numbers (excluding URM, etc.) at a given school were admitted, do you take it as your numbers predict you are in or out?

The fact that I observed that this "uncertainty" exists is part of the evidence that makes me believe there is some elasticity in the admissions. It is not purely that I am naively guided by what schools say on their websites (I don't really read them, in fact).

There is elasticity/uncertainty but only at the margins. That's the whole point of what everyone has been saying. Your softs might be able to place you in a school 5 spots higher up in the USWNR than your stats might suggest, but you would not suddenly be getting admissions from schools that are substantially different than what you would have otherwise gotten.

[Traynor Brah]

And, newsflash, if you're on the margins, you're in a shit position. If you're a borderline admit, you aren't getting much or any money, and if you aren't getting much or any money, there probably isn't a single school that's close to worth its price, especially if one is going into debt.

So, if you're a borderline candidate somewhere, the answer isn't to read tea leaves and hope your softs get you admitted, it's to raise your lsat score and/or look at more affordable schools that still have reasonable placement in preferred market and preferred job, or explore other career path.

[ihenry]

And, newsflash, if you're on the margins, you're in a shit position. If you're a borderline admit, you aren't getting much or any money, and if you aren't getting much or any money, there probably isn't a single school that's close to worth its price, especially if one is going into debt.

So, if you're a borderline candidate somewhere, the answer isn't to read tea leaves and hope your softs get you admitted, it's to raise your lsat score and/or look at more affordable schools that still have reasonable placement in preferred market and preferred job, or explore other career path.

That's still KJD mindset without due consideration of a person's life and financial situation as a 43 year old. OP never mentioned he will take out debts to fund the education (let alone cost of living). I assume there's decent chance that he could pay it off from his savings; even more, having progressed so far on the business route, his opportunity cost for going to law school may well exceed what schools can maximally offer (50K/yr, perhaps?). It depends of his choices, obviously, and the information he gave in this thread is less than sufficient.

// edited to delete

[Traynor Brah]

jesus christ kid

[Clearly]

jesus christ kid

[lawat43]

I'm really happy I came here and posted because you have all given me a lot to think about. MY UG GPA averages to a little over 3.5, and my GPA for my MBA was 3.6. So if I get a really good score on the LSAT then, from what I have been reading here, I should have a pretty good shot at a good school.
I will reiterate that I am not going to a non-ABA school. Thank you for steering me clear of that idea. I have some money saved from my business ventures and hope, with added scholarships, that I wont have to take on too much debt. Also, I am interested in focusing on Public Interest law which I know does not pay as well, but that is where my passion would lie.

[Clearly]

I'm really happy I came here and posted because you have all given me a lot to think about. MY UG GPA averages to a little over 3.5, and my GPA for my MBA was 3.6. So if I get a really good score on the LSAT then, from what I have been reading here, I should have a pretty good shot at a good school.
I will reiterate that I am not going to a non-ABA school. Thank you for steering me clear of that idea. I have some money saved from my business ventures and hope, with added scholarships, that I wont have to take on too much debt. Also, I am interested in focusing on Public Interest law which I know does not pay as well, but that is where my passion would lie.

Great! Take your time with the lsat, it's very much possible to improve drastically, if you can get that lsat high, your gpa isn't terrible but it's not good, between the experience and a high lsat you would have respectable options.

[mrdanoesq]

I'm really happy I came here and posted because you have all given me a lot to think about. MY UG GPA averages to a little over 3.5, and my GPA for my MBA was 3.6. So if I get a really good score on the LSAT then, from what I have been reading here, I should have a pretty good shot at a good school.
I will reiterate that I am not going to a non-ABA school. Thank you for steering me clear of that idea. I have some money saved from my business ventures and hope, with added scholarships, that I wont have to take on too much debt. Also, I am interested in focusing on Public Interest law which I know does not pay as well, but that is where my passion would lie.

I think the discussion of ls acceptance/attendance has drowned out the equally important discussion of employment prospects coming out of school. OP should check out Law School Transparency's employment stats when weighing which schools to apply to/attend.