Top Law Schools

Hi!

Planning on retaking the LSAT in August (wanted to break 167, but scored lower than my PT's of 167/169)- but wanted to see what my chances are in case 165 is the best I got.

3.65 from NYU, Tier 2-3 softs (senior journalist at 2 major/national publications), non-URM minority (LGBTQ), about 4 years work exp. and highly involved in university.

Dream is GULC and planning on ED-ing there, although I know both uGPA/LSAT are a bit under medians which is frustrating to say the least. I've gone through every calculator so I know where my chances are (27% RD, 36% ED).

Would love if anyone could speak on if softs could help round out the application for lower T14 enough to get in (also applying to UCLA, Cornell, also T20 like USC), or if my ED is better spent at super solidifying a school like GW/ Fordham (not tied to region of school, although prefer northeast)

Follow up, what percent chance is something you guys consider to be target v. reach? I know everyone's percentages fall a little differently so just curious if 36% counts as reach or super reach.

Thank you for helping me as I obsess over everything <3

You need to rewind a bit and focus on maxing out your LSAT score.

• Solidly below both medians makes you a presumptive deny, and ED won't help a lick because it doesn't fix the problem. Sorry to be a downer but you can basically count out the T20 with those numbers. (MyLSN suggests you have a bad-but-real chance at Vanderbilt and USC, and that's it.)

• Softs aren't nothing, but they won't fix the "below both medians non-URM" problem. Softs can help borderline candidates improve their chances from mediocre to good, or good to great.

• ED is almost never worthwhile; all it does is reduce your scholarship-negotiation leverage, and none of the schools you're considering is worth paying full price for.

• Reaches are defined in terms of medians, not percentage chances. You shouldn't really take the percentage from online calculators seriously except in the broadest possible inferences (0% probably means close to 0%; better than 50% means you have a number profile the school wants, etc.).

ze_gamerette wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:03 pm

3.65 from NYU, Tier 2-3 softs (senior journalist at 2 major/national publications), non-URM minority (LGBTQ), about 4 years work exp. and highly involved in university.

Is there a tier list for softs?

laanngo wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 10, 2020 11:41 am

ze_gamerette wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:03 pm

3.65 from NYU, Tier 2-3 softs (senior journalist at 2 major/national publications), non-URM minority (LGBTQ), about 4 years work exp. and highly involved in university.

Is there a tier list for softs?

No.

LSAT Airbender indicated this already, but I think you should focus much more on the one admissions factor you can change for the better---your LSAT score---rather than forming workarounds for its current inadequacy in relation to your goals. Your soft factors are positive, but not so much that your LSAT score doesn't matter. It does, and you should retake until you've scored high enough to get a good deal at a school that fits your goals.

laanngo wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 10, 2020 11:41 am

ze_gamerette wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:03 pm

3.65 from NYU, Tier 2-3 softs (senior journalist at 2 major/national publications), non-URM minority (LGBTQ), about 4 years work exp. and highly involved in university.

Is there a tier list for softs?

Here's the unofficial list that people reference when they say "T4 softs" or whatever: https://www.reddit.com/r/lawschooladmis ... t1_frqkrne

1) I have never seen anyone reference that list before
2) I don’t think it’s nearly as clear cut as they suggest.

Never heard about "tiers" of softs. Looks like somebody said it on Reddit 3 years ago, it got a couple dozen up-votes, and their community has been using it as a shorthand ever since. Overall, it seems like a complicated way of saying "you are probably not that special, and even impressive people only get a boost equivalent to an LSAT point or two."

To the OP's original post, I think the best advice has already been given. It's very unlikely they can break into the T14 with a 3.65/165 as a non-URM candidate, soft factors aren't going to save them, and applying ED is a bad choice in most circumstances.

dvlthndr wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 10, 2020 9:39 pm

Never heard about "tiers" of softs. Looks like somebody said it on Reddit 3 years ago, it got a couple dozen up-votes, and their community has been using it as a shorthand ever since. Overall, it seems like a complicated way of saying "you are probably not that special, and even impressive people only get a boost equivalent to an LSAT point or two."

To the OP's original post, I think the best advice has already been given. It's very unlikely they can break into the T14 with a 3.65/165 as a non-URM candidate, soft factors aren't going to save them, and applying ED is a bad choice in most circumstances.

I agree, that post was kind of silly. I also think the most coveted softs have more to do with industry connections than "success". They're also wrong about whether schools prefer NA or AA URM.
To be honest to OP, I don't think being a journalist is as impressive as a teacher or even a veteran.