Top Law Schools

165 LSAT. Went to undergrad at a respected school in the Midwest

Do you think I can get into any of the top30 schools? Would I be better off taking money somewhere further down in the top100? In terms of location, I'm willing to go to law school - and practice (at least initially) - almost anywhere in the country.

A 165 is a good score but with that GPA I think you should retake to have a better shot at a higher ranked school in the t-20. The higher the ranking the better the chance of employment

Only 19 law schools had a 166+ median LSAT in 2015 (the top 18 and USC), so you should have a shot at most schools below the top 20 or so, even with a low GPA.

The best option is to retake and kick the LSAT's ass.

With those numbers, a full scholarship is better. As you probably had practice scores higher and lower than a 165, you know 5 points here or there isn't indicative of aptitude.

The reason this matters is school 5 and 25 may have a simarly competitive curve, but huge differences in employment statistics. If your goal is to get one of several jobs that 60 percent of a t-14 collectively get, you'll see that only about 30 percent of a t-30 will get that same job.

In most instances, it makes more sense to prioritize debt load when choosing between a 30 and a 100. It makes sense to avoid debt all together but 60 vs 30 percent is more defensible than 30 vs 10, particularly when the aptitude gap between a 30 and a 100 is much larger than between 10 and 30. This argument is based on statistics showing 10 point gaps on the LSAT between students at the same school predict which of the 2 will have better law school grades 80 percent of the time. With 3 point gaps, it's roughly 50/50, meaning it has no predictive value.

For this reason, I think t-30's tend to be a bad deal. The idea that the LSAT is predictive is controversial, and others will disagree. What everyone will agree on is that a 167 or 168 would put you in a much better position. It's easy to jump into the t-14 from where you are, and the school's you'd be paying sticker at now will give you close to a full ride.

You mentioned being willing to practice anywhere, but what kind of law are you interested in practicing?

HonestAdvice wrote:With those numbers, a full scholarship is better. As you probably had practice scores higher and lower than a 165, you know 5 points here or there isn't indicative of aptitude.

The reason this matters is school 5 and 25 may have a simarly competitive curve, but huge differences in employment statistics. If your goal is to get one of several jobs that 60 percent of a t-14 collectively get, you'll see that only about 30 percent of a t-30 will get that same job.

In most instances, it makes more sense to prioritize debt load when choosing between a 30 and a 100. It makes sense to avoid debt all together but 60 vs 30 percent is more defensible than 30 vs 10, particularly when the aptitude gap between a 30 and a 100 is much larger than between 10 and 30. This argument is based on statistics showing 10 point gaps on the LSAT between students at the same school predict which of the 2 will have better law school grades 80 percent of the time. With 3 point gaps, it's roughly 50/50, meaning it has no predictive value.

For this reason, I think t-30's tend to be a bad deal. The idea that the LSAT is predictive is controversial, and others will disagree. What everyone will agree on is that a 167 or 168 would put you in a much better position. It's easy to jump into the t-14 from where you are, and the school's you'd be paying sticker at now will give you close to a full ride.

Thanks for this great response. I have a lot to think about.

What would all of you do if retaking wasn't an option?

cavalier1138 wrote:You mentioned being willing to practice anywhere, but what kind of law are you interested in practicing?

I really can't say exactly what kind of practice I'd ultimately like to establish. If I had to answer that right now as a 0L, I'd say that I'd like to start out in the general corporate department somewhere in mid-biglaw, and develop a specialized practice from there. Private equity and real estate transactional work has always seemed interesting. definitely non-lit.

ready2attend wrote:I really can't say exactly what kind of practice I'd ultimately like to establish. If I had to answer that right now as a 0L, I'd say that I'd like to start out in the general corporate department somewhere in mid-biglaw, and develop a specialized practice from there. Private equity and real estate transactional work has always seemed interesting. definitely non-lit.

You should probably re-take the LSAT given your goals, since it sounds like you would need major-city Biglaw to get substantive corporate/PE work. However, if you can't and you're okay with doing smaller-time real estate type work, you should look into regional schools that dominate their local area. A quick glance at your probably admissions results show 4 schools that jump out at me:

1. WUSTL - you'll probably get in and probably get a big scholarship. I imagine they kill it when placing students in Big/Mid firms in the St. Louis market
2. UW - they dominate the Seattle market
3. Minnesota - same for their region
4. Emory (maybe) - they probably do very well for Atlanta but they have a close competitor in UGA so they're not quite as dominant

I would avoid schools like BU, ND, and GW all of which are great schools but unfortunately compete with major T14s in their primary market.

Lexaholik wrote:

ready2attend wrote:I really can't say exactly what kind of practice I'd ultimately like to establish. If I had to answer that right now as a 0L, I'd say that I'd like to start out in the general corporate department somewhere in mid-biglaw, and develop a specialized practice from there. Private equity and real estate transactional work has always seemed interesting. definitely non-lit.

You should probably re-take the LSAT given your goals, since it sounds like you would need major-city Biglaw to get substantive corporate/PE work. However, if you can't and you're okay with doing smaller-time real estate type work, you should look into regional schools that dominate their local area. A quick glance at your probably admissions results show 4 schools that jump out at me:

1. WUSTL - you'll probably get in and probably get a big scholarship. I imagine they kill it when placing students in Big/Mid firms in the St. Louis market
2. UW - they dominate the Seattle market
3. Minnesota - same for their region
4. Emory (maybe) - they probably do very well for Atlanta but they have a close competitor in UGA so they're not quite as dominant

I would avoid schools like BU, ND, and GW all of which are great schools but unfortunately compete with major T14s in their primary market.

[url=http://mylsn.info/bx81se]

Thank you, even though that sea of red is rather discouraging lol.
I like all 4 of those schools - particularly Emory. Any idea how that school is received in Florida and the Carolinas?

ready2attend wrote:

Lexaholik wrote:

ready2attend wrote:I really can't say exactly what kind of practice I'd ultimately like to establish. If I had to answer that right now as a 0L, I'd say that I'd like to start out in the general corporate department somewhere in mid-biglaw, and develop a specialized practice from there. Private equity and real estate transactional work has always seemed interesting. definitely non-lit.

You should probably re-take the LSAT given your goals, since it sounds like you would need major-city Biglaw to get substantive corporate/PE work. However, if you can't and you're okay with doing smaller-time real estate type work, you should look into regional schools that dominate their local area. A quick glance at your probably admissions results show 4 schools that jump out at me:

1. WUSTL - you'll probably get in and probably get a big scholarship. I imagine they kill it when placing students in Big/Mid firms in the St. Louis market
2. UW - they dominate the Seattle market
3. Minnesota - same for their region
4. Emory (maybe) - they probably do very well for Atlanta but they have a close competitor in UGA so they're not quite as dominant

I would avoid schools like BU, ND, and GW all of which are great schools but unfortunately compete with major T14s in their primary market.

[url=http://mylsn.info/bx81se]

Thank you, even though that sea of red is rather discouraging lol.
I like all 4 of those schools - particularly Emory. Any idea how that school is received in Florida and the Carolinas?

Your concern shouldn't be on how a school is received. Everyone knows Emory is a good school, but the question is whether they will prefer you over someone similar to you from their alma matter. A big part of why employment outcomes are better at the t-14 is not because of prestige whoring (though this is a big factor). It's also that there are simply more gate keepers at competitive jobs from the t-14 than from elsewhere.

In general though you need to pick a region, and pick a school that will get you that region. Even from Harvard it would be tough to break into Charlotte. Most of the time the reason you see t-14's placing everywhere isn't because they're national. It's because they attract students from throughout the country. Financially, it would be risky to pick an outsider over someone who is stuck in Charlotte even if you're law review, because the work doesn't require you to be that smart. The economics in small markets is such that a bad investment has a bigger effect than in a large market.

ready2attend wrote:I like all 4 of those schools - particularly Emory. Any idea how that school is received in Florida and the Carolinas?

I don't but here's some speculation: Good but not great. Each of those three states has their own flagship state school which probably opens more doors (in part for the reasons described by the poster above me).

I was a 3.1 - 165, I'm at Penn. I retook. Retake.

Lexaholik wrote:

ready2attend wrote:I like all 4 of those schools - particularly Emory. Any idea how that school is received in Florida and the Carolinas?

I don't but here's some speculation: Good but not great. Each of those three states has their own flagship state school which probably opens more doors (in part for the reasons described by the poster above me).

From the impressions I get from talking to people, Florida is a TOUGH market to break into as an outsider. Some people from out-of-state who attended a top (UF/FSU) Florida law school had a difficult time securing employment in Florida... let alone an outsider who attends an out-of-state school.

Dude retaking is always an option. It's not just oh this is ranked here and that ones not far behind. At my school you pretty much fall down and land in job offers, meanwhile I have a friend at Emory who is mass mailing his ass off and not finding success anywhere right now (with good grades and speaking 3 languages), my heart breaks for him. He had a better ugpa than me. The only difference is a few points on a fucking multiple choice test. Don't be an idiot.

ready2attend wrote:What would all of you do if retaking wasn't an option?

+100000000

bmathers wrote:

Lexaholik wrote:

ready2attend wrote:I like all 4 of those schools - particularly Emory. Any idea how that school is received in Florida and the Carolinas?

I don't but here's some speculation: Good but not great. Each of those three states has their own flagship state school which probably opens more doors (in part for the reasons described by the poster above me).

From the impressions I get from talking to people, Florida is a TOUGH market to break into as an outsider. Some people from out-of-state who attended a top (UF/FSU) Florida law school had a difficult time securing employment in Florida... let alone an outsider who attends an out-of-state school.

This is true, but that's because people here are close-knit, and networking is key in this state.

bmathers wrote:

Lexaholik wrote:

ready2attend wrote:I like all 4 of those schools - particularly Emory. Any idea how that school is received in Florida and the Carolinas?

I don't but here's some speculation: Good but not great. Each of those three states has their own flagship state school which probably opens more doors (in part for the reasons described by the poster above me).

From the impressions I get from talking to people, Florida is a TOUGH market to break into as an outsider. Some people from out-of-state who attended a top (UF/FSU) Florida law school had a difficult time securing employment in Florida... let alone an outsider who attends an out-of-state school.

I'm not an outsider, im from Florida. I want to go to a school that places fairly well regionally (as opposed to just state the state in which the school is location. I figured Emory would be fit the bill for most of the south. Obviously t14 is the answer, but it's not in the cards for me

ready2attend wrote:

bmathers wrote:

Lexaholik wrote:

ready2attend wrote:I like all 4 of those schools - particularly Emory. Any idea how that school is received in Florida and the Carolinas?

I don't but here's some speculation: Good but not great. Each of those three states has their own flagship state school which probably opens more doors (in part for the reasons described by the poster above me).

From the impressions I get from talking to people, Florida is a TOUGH market to break into as an outsider. Some people from out-of-state who attended a top (UF/FSU) Florida law school had a difficult time securing employment in Florida... let alone an outsider who attends an out-of-state school.

I'm not an outsider, im from Florida. I want to go to a school that places fairly well regionally (as opposed to just state the state in which the school is location. I figured Emory would be fit the bill for most of the south. Obviously t14 is the answer, but it's not in the cards for me

I'm from Florida too. Are you considering UF/FSU? And from reading the 509s, it seems that Vandy actually placed several students back in Florida, if this answers your question in a sense. But being from Florida, are you interested in practicing here?

Yea thats cool ignore the posts about retaking.

Clearly wrote:Yea thats cool ignore the posts about retaking.

retaking isnt an option for me.

ready2attend wrote:

Clearly wrote:Yea thats cool ignore the posts about retaking.

retaking isnt an option for me.

Please explain. I've yet to hear a great reason why retaking isn't an option. Look man, I'm trying to look out for you here, as someone who sat out a year and retook, went to a good school and got a good job, while my friends (with better numbers than you) didn't, went outside the t14 and are literally striking out before my eyes. It's easy to say oh but that won't happen to me, but it does, to most of the class! I'm not telling you to climb Everest, I'm saying hit the books till December and try to do better. Applying with the Dec score isn't even late anymore, and every point is worth more.

You can't stick with a 165 and realistically hope for geographic flexibility and a decent shot at big law. Something is going to have to give here.

You'll probably never get the geographic flexibility that you're hoping for, that's just not how legal hiring works. If you want big law, you'll likely have to retake. If you want to stick with a 165, you'll likely have to readjust your goals.

ready2attend wrote:

Clearly wrote:Yea thats cool ignore the posts about retaking.

retaking isnt an option for me.

I retook from a 165 and had a double digit improvement in my score. I didn't want to retake. I dreaded the thought of studying for the test. But I did because it was the right thing to do.

So law school admissions are stupid. There are crazy disparate outcomes for small differences in score. Like +/- of 3 points is a totally normal range of scores a person can get on a given day, but there is giant difference in outcomes for a 168 vs a 165. So, unless you're 100% sure that you've maxed out your score to your full potential, even with good luck, then you need to retake. You're throwing away a bunch of opportunities that you could have.