Top Law Schools

So I am just a bit curious about how your LSAT score figures in OCI and legal employment generally. The firm I worked at last year asked for LSAT scores.

Has scores come up during OCI or interviews? Does it matter? Only asking because I was planning on retaking, but I got into my #1 school (a huge happy surprise) with my current score. But if it will affect me down the road, I would certainly take it again. My pracs are much higher than my actual score so I'm pretty sure I could get a few more points.

Thanks in advance TLS!

I cannot say no enough times

The only importance of the LSAT is that it's a predictor of your law school grades. Why would firms want that when they can have your actual law school grades?

do you sort of want to re-take for pride reasons? could a new score put you in the running for scholarship money you wouldn't otherwise get?

i have heard of the occasional oddball interviewer asking, but it's uncommon enough that OCI alone is probably a silly reason to re-take, but if you sorta feel like it anyway, i'd do it. for me, having a good score was a confidence-booster in the darker days of first semester 1L when i started to wonder if i might be legitimately a moron.

IAFG wrote:do you sort of want to re-take for pride reasons? could a new score put you in the running for scholarship money you wouldn't otherwise get?

i have heard of the occasional oddball interviewer asking, but it's uncommon enough that OCI alone is probably a silly reason to re-take, but if you sorta feel like it anyway, i'd do it. for me, having a good score was a confidence-booster in the darker days of first semester 1L when i started to wonder if i might be legitimately a moron.

You hit the nail on the head. Really its more for pride and I am trying to find a more legitimate reason to take it again, and OCI appears not to be one. I know I sound like a dumb asshole, but I don't want to be at the 25% LSAT in my class. Ill be quiet now. Thanks all

sojuteacher wrote:

IAFG wrote:do you sort of want to re-take for pride reasons? could a new score put you in the running for scholarship money you wouldn't otherwise get?

i have heard of the occasional oddball interviewer asking, but it's uncommon enough that OCI alone is probably a silly reason to re-take, but if you sorta feel like it anyway, i'd do it. for me, having a good score was a confidence-booster in the darker days of first semester 1L when i started to wonder if i might be legitimately a moron.

You hit the nail on the head. Really its more for pride and I am trying to find a more legitimate reason to take it again, and OCI appears not to be one. I know I sound like a dumb asshole, but I don't want to be at the 25% LSAT in my class. Ill be quiet now. Thanks all

If it's for pride go for it (although that seems like a silly reason to me). If it's to get some other benefit out of it, then don't. If it's something that you would enjoy doing again, I suppose it can't hurt you. However, you should be aware that (assuming you are above a 151) most test takers do worse on their retake. It's simple mean regression.

birdlaw117 wrote: However, you should be aware that (assuming you are above a 151) most test takers do worse on their retake. It's simple mean regression.

Nope, most people who retake do better. http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... rtable.pdf

You realize that the LSAT is a means to an end right? That is, you don't take the LSAT for the sake of having a high LSAT score to tattoo on your arm or something, but for the sake of getting into law school. If you're in law school already, then why add the stress of preparing for a meaningless second LSAT to the reams of stress that law school already brings?

And no- no one at OCI will ask you what your LSAT score was. Between screeners and callbacks I had over 50 half hour interviews and not a single interviewer asked. If you go out of your way to affirmatively drop your score you will sound like a douche.

When you take the LSAT, don't you have to physically write out and sign a statement saying that you are only taking the test in order to hopefully apply to law school?

It's not like this kind of thing is enforced, but it seems contrary to the spirit of the whole thing.

Understood -- the only reason is pride at this point -- and yes not worth it in case of a lower score, stress, etc. and a bit unethical maybe... Seems clear that it does not matter at OCI.

So LSAT won't be taken again. Thanks for the answers - issue I was debating about the past few days is solved.

Z3RO wrote:When you take the LSAT, don't you have to physically write out and sign a statement saying that you are only taking the test in order to hopefully apply to law school?

It's not like this kind of thing is enforced, but it seems contrary to the spirit of the whole thing.

Seriously? If it's written out that's one thing, but... it's just a test. That you pay a fair amount of money for. Who cares what someone's motivation is?

Z3RO wrote:When you take the LSAT, don't you have to physically write out and sign a statement saying that you are only taking the test in order to hopefully apply to law school?

It's not like this kind of thing is enforced, but it seems contrary to the spirit of the whole thing.

Yeah you do sign a statement saying that you are taking it for the sole purpose of gaining admission to law school (which OP already did). Also, I'll guarantee that even if you retook and did much better, it still wouldn't put you in the running for scholarships, since you're already locked into their class as a 169/3.8. So it's really just down to retaking for OCI (which people seem to think is unnecessary) and retaking for pride (which the hubris of some TLSers supports..surprised?)

I had one TTT firm ask for my LSAT. I really don't think its common at all, and it completely caught me off guard. Since the LSAT predicts 1l success (supposedly) its a bit redundant to ask after 1l is over.

Probably it only gets asked because the interviewer is an aspie and can't think of anything else to talk about. I doubt there are any firms that actually have a policy of requesting LSAT scores.

Cavalier wrote:Probably it only gets asked because the interviewer is an aspie and can't think of anything else to talk about. I doubt there are any firms that actually have a policy of requesting LSAT scores.

In 2027, a Cornell 2L on a callback at dla piper will be nervously wringing her hands in DF's office while he grills her:
DF: LSAT?
2L: 168, sir.
DF: So barely not a retard. I see you majored in English and finished with a 3.8. Seems like any moron should manage a 4.0 in the liberal arts.
2L: I'm sorry, was that a question?
DF: So are you gonna show me your tits or are we done here?

IAFG wrote:

Cavalier wrote:Probably it only gets asked because the interviewer is an aspie and can't think of anything else to talk about. I doubt there are any firms that actually have a policy of requesting LSAT scores.

In 2027, a Cornell 2L on a callback at DLA Piper will be nervously wringing her hands in DF's office while he grills her:
DF: LSAT?
2L: 168, sir.
DF: So barely not a retard. I see you majored in English and finished with a 3.8. Seems like any moron should manage a 4.0 in the liberal arts.
2L: I'm sorry, was that a question?
DF: So are you gonna show me your tits or are we done here?

lmfao

I can actually picture this.

IAFG wrote: 2L: 168, sir.
DF: So barely not a retard.

Well that's a relief.

IAFG wrote:

Cavalier wrote:Probably it only gets asked because the interviewer is an aspie and can't think of anything else to talk about. I doubt there are any firms that actually have a policy of requesting LSAT scores.

In 2027, a Cornell 2L on a callback at DLA Piper will be nervously wringing her hands in DF's office while he grills her:
DF: LSAT?
2L: 168, sir.
DF: So barely not a retard. I see you majored in English and finished with a 3.8. Seems like any moron should manage a 4.0 in the liberal arts.
2L: I'm sorry, was that a question?
DF: So are you gonna show me your tits or are we done here?