Top Law Schools

The conventional knowledge is that it's generally not worth submitting an addendum if you've improved by less than 8 points on a second retake. But what if you've taken the LSAT three times, scoring 165, 166, and 170, in that order? Apparently writing a convincing addendum is one way to avoid having your scores averaged at some of the T14s. Of course, they probably already assume that you've studied more seriously, but surely that's not a valid addendum topic.

Schools don’t average (except maybe yale).

LSAT addenda are unnecessary ever since schools stopped averaging.

Rigo wrote:LSAT addenda are unnecessary ever since schools stopped averaging.

Addenda were unnecessary then too. Schools used to average LSAT scores because they had to report an applicant's LSAT average to USNWR for ranking purposes. It's not like the schools were permitted to submit an applicant's highest score so long as the applicant submitted a really compelling addendum.

Once the policy changed so that schools only had to report an applicant's highest score, the schools stopped caring about retakes and averages. Addenda are no more or less relevant now.

NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

jellyjar wrote:NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

That's not true. NYU may say they do that, but, as the admissions data shows, they don't actually do that.

rpupkin wrote:

jellyjar wrote:NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

That's not true. NYU may say they do that, but, as the admissions data shows, they don't actually do that.

Ok my bad. I was just quoting what I heard from the info session, as someone specifically asked that exact question. Not sure why they would say that, but if they don't, they don't.

jellyjar wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

jellyjar wrote:NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

That's not true. NYU may say they do that, but, as the admissions data shows, they don't actually do that.

Ok my bad. I was just quoting what I heard from the info session, as someone specifically asked that exact question. Not sure why they would say that, but if they don't, they don't.

I am not so sure about this. In fact, I called the law school earlier today. I was basically told that they do use the average in making admissions decisions, and not the highest score, unless you could give them a compelling reason why they should not use the average.

If there is an incentive to lying about considering the average of multiple LSATs, it's not obvious to me.

nufmgaiw wrote:

jellyjar wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

jellyjar wrote:NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

That's not true. NYU may say they do that, but, as the admissions data shows, they don't actually do that.

Ok my bad. I was just quoting what I heard from the info session, as someone specifically asked that exact question. Not sure why they would say that, but if they don't, they don't.

I am not so sure about this. In fact, I called the law school earlier today. I was basically told that they do use the average in making admissions decisions, and not the highest score, unless you could give them a compelling reason why they should not use the average.

If there is an incentive to lying about considering the average of multiple LSATs, it's not obvious to me.

This has been beaten to death over and over on TLS over the past 8 or 9 years: the admissions stats show NYU makes decisions based on the applicant's highest score, not on the average score. As for NYU's motivations for saying otherwise, I'll leave it to others to speculate. I honestly don't know (and I don't think it matters).

nufmgaiw wrote:

jellyjar wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

jellyjar wrote:NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

That's not true. NYU may say they do that, but, as the admissions data shows, they don't actually do that.

Ok my bad. I was just quoting what I heard from the info session, as someone specifically asked that exact question. Not sure why they would say that, but if they don't, they don't.

I am not so sure about this. In fact, I called the law school earlier today. I was basically told that they do use the average in making admissions decisions, and not the highest score, unless you could give them a compelling reason why they should not use the average.

If there is an incentive to lying about considering the average of multiple LSATs, it's not obvious to me.

Adcomms also say that they don't just consider numbers and look at the "whole application."

These people are quite literally paid to lie to your face about their criteria for admission in order to drive their numbers up. Why on earth would you trust them over the raw data?

cavalier1138 wrote:

nufmgaiw wrote:

jellyjar wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

jellyjar wrote:NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

That's not true. NYU may say they do that, but, as the admissions data shows, they don't actually do that.

Ok my bad. I was just quoting what I heard from the info session, as someone specifically asked that exact question. Not sure why they would say that, but if they don't, they don't.

I am not so sure about this. In fact, I called the law school earlier today. I was basically told that they do use the average in making admissions decisions, and not the highest score, unless you could give them a compelling reason why they should not use the average.

If there is an incentive to lying about considering the average of multiple LSATs, it's not obvious to me.

Adcomms also say that they don't just consider numbers and look at the "whole application."

These people are quite literally paid to lie to your face about their criteria for admission in order to drive their numbers up. Why on earth would you trust them over the raw data?

Which raw data?

nufmgaiw wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

nufmgaiw wrote:

jellyjar wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

jellyjar wrote:NYU has said they do average, unless you can make a compelling case for why they shouldn't

That's not true. NYU may say they do that, but, as the admissions data shows, they don't actually do that.

Ok my bad. I was just quoting what I heard from the info session, as someone specifically asked that exact question. Not sure why they would say that, but if they don't, they don't.

I am not so sure about this. In fact, I called the law school earlier today. I was basically told that they do use the average in making admissions decisions, and not the highest score, unless you could give them a compelling reason why they should not use the average.

If there is an incentive to lying about considering the average of multiple LSATs, it's not obvious to me.

Adcomms also say that they don't just consider numbers and look at the "whole application."

These people are quite literally paid to lie to your face about their criteria for admission in order to drive their numbers up. Why on earth would you trust them over the raw data?

Which raw data?

[youtube]GxCAddAiCsA[/youtube]

nufmgaiw wrote: Which raw data?

In addition to rpupkin's extremely thorough answer, you can spend five minutes checking MyLSN to find people with multiple LSAT takes. Or just read any retake story on these forums.

And you can also use plain old common sense to figure out that current adcomms aren't the most reliable source of information.

cavalier1138 wrote:

nufmgaiw wrote: Which raw data?

In addition to rpupkin's extremely thorough answer, you can spend five minutes checking MyLSN to find people with multiple LSAT takes. Or just read any retake story on these forums.

And you can also use plain old common sense to figure out that current adcomms aren't the most reliable source of information.

I know about MyLSN. Take care to understand the context: I'm asking about the data previously referred to that shows that there is no penalty for three LSAT takes at NYU. If there is such data on MyLSN, I certainly haven't come across it.

nufmgaiw wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

nufmgaiw wrote: Which raw data?

In addition to rpupkin's extremely thorough answer, you can spend five minutes checking MyLSN to find people with multiple LSAT takes. Or just read any retake story on these forums.

And you can also use plain old common sense to figure out that current adcomms aren't the most reliable source of information.

I know about MyLSN. Take care to understand the context: I'm asking about the data previously referred to that shows that there is no penalty for three LSAT takes at NYU. If there is such data on MyLSN, I certainly haven't come across it.

Look at people with three LSAT takes. See if NYU treated them the same way as someone with their highest score or as someone with their average score. This isn't a big leap.

I've been using this page http://search.lawschoolnumbers.com/users , changing the cycle year, and selecting "Only" on Multiple LSAT. I must be doing something that you're not, since for almost every year, there are no users with multiple LSAT scores.

You don't need an addendum. What would it even say? It's clear that you were shooting for a score that you did not achieve on your first two takes and that the difference between your third take and your first two was that you studied more/harder.

And I also think the conventional wisdom is that LSAT addenda are unnecessary. In my view the only time you'd need one is if your first score is 149 or below and your second one is 170 or above.

nufmgaiw wrote:I've been using this page http://search.lawschoolnumbers.com/users , changing the cycle year, and selecting "Only" on Multiple LSAT. I must be doing something that you're not, since for almost every year, there are no users with multiple LSAT scores.

So from this you're drawing the inference that there is a penalty? And that an addendum can overcome it?

Not trying to beat you up here. Taking the LSAT three times takes diligence, and getting a 170 takes smarts. Congrats on both. You should apply as though your other two scores don't exist.

Pneumonia wrote:

nufmgaiw wrote:I've been using this page http://search.lawschoolnumbers.com/users , changing the cycle year, and selecting "Only" on Multiple LSAT. I must be doing something that you're not, since for almost every year, there are no users with multiple LSAT scores.

So from this you're drawing the inference that there is a penalty? And that an addendum can overcome it?

Not trying to beat you up here. Taking the LSAT three times takes diligence, and getting a 170 takes smarts. Congrats on both. You should apply as though your other two scores don't exist.

It's okay. It's not rude and I'm not offended of course.

Everybody here is saying "look at the numbers, it's obvious that there is not a penalty to multiple (three) scores." So naturally, I want to see this data that everybody besides me has for myself, and maybe help others find that data who are in the same position as me.

I am data. 160-166-169. Was treated like any other 169, no school averaged my scores.

/thread mods plz

I didn't even know that particular search existed on LSN, but most people just update their LSAT score rather than include each one. However, if you start pulling random users from NYU admits (such as the aptly named retakeretakeretake), you'll start finding evidence that the highest score is all that matters. Or you could look at all the other examples of people on this thread and in this forum saying that NYU doesn't average. Or you could use common fucking sense.

But when it comes down to it, let's say that we're all lying and that NYU's adcomms were telling you the absolute truth. What does that change for you? You can't get them to view your LSAT differently, and an addendum saying "I scored bad but then I scored good" isn't going to fix the issue. So really, if you truly believe that they average your LSAT score, you shouldn't waste the application fee. If, on the other hand, you think that maybe no one except Yale can really afford to average LSAT scores from multiple takes (because there really aren't that many applicants with these scores), maybe you should stop thinking about it and just submit.

OP, if you remain concerned that NYU won't place sufficient weight on your 170 without an addendum, them go ahead and submit one. The addendum won't hurt you so long as you keep it short and banal. Make sure to avoid grammar and spelling mistakes. Also make sure to avoid explanations that might make it seem like you'll struggle with the routine stresses of law school--e.g., "I scored lower on my first two exams because I'm prone to panic attacks when taking tests."

I'm on the side of those saying that an addendum will make zero difference in your circumstances. But if you feel compelled to submit one for fear that NYU will otherwise deem your application deficient, I think it's fine to provide a fairly generic description of your improvement.

What about Columbia which strongly encourages an addendum for multiple takes? What do I write for a 6-point increase other than "I studied more and the curve was easier"?

rictheruler wrote:What about Columbia which strongly encourages an addendum for multiple takes? What do I write for a 6-point increase other than "I studied more and the curve was easier"?

Everything written in this thread applies to Columbia. They'll use your highest score.

rpupkin wrote:

rictheruler wrote:What about Columbia which strongly encourages an addendum for multiple takes? What do I write for a 6-point increase other than "I studied more and the curve was easier"?

Everything written in this thread applies to Columbia. They'll use your highest score.

I get that, but I was more wondering about what to write for the addendum since they strongly encourage you to write one if you've taken more than once. The consensus seems to be not to write one unless you have a huge score discrepancy and a compelling reason for the difference, and I have neither of those things.