The Retake and Reapply Trap Forum

[drummerboy]

In the wake of the New York Times expose about law school merit scholarships, the notion of retake and reapply takes on a new meaning. Yes youre likely to get into a higher ranked school and yes you may not have to pay sticker ,but youre still at great risk of either ending up at a lower ranked school or a higher ranked school with potentially vanishing scholarship money. Thus, most people that retake and reapply to maximize ranking and avoid huge debt, will likely be facing a dire predicament by the second or third year. Unfortunately, it would appear as if only those that can stomach huge debt or have alternate methods of funding their education(eg, trust fund, family assistance) will survive. This is very sad. Students that apply to law school with good intentions are getting screwed in this unscrupulous game. What are your thoughts. I for one am outraged.

[Knock]

In the wake of the New York Times expose about law school merit scholarships, the notion of retake and reapply takes on a new meaning. Yes youre likely to get into a higher ranked school and yes you may not have to pay sticker ,but youre still at great risk of either ending up at a lower ranked school or a higher ranked school with potentially vanishing scholarship money. Thus, most people that retake and reapply to maximize ranking and avoid huge debt, will likely be facing a dire predicament by the second or third year. Unfortunately, it would appear as if only those that can stomach huge debt or have alternate methods of funding their education(eg, trust fund, family assistance) will survive. This is very sad. Students that apply to law school with good intentions are getting screwed in this unscrupulous game. What are your thoughts. I for one am outraged.

No. Retaking and reapply is solid advice most of the time. A lot of merit scholarships don't have stips, especially among the higher ranked schools. A few point LSAT increase often is enough to be awarded a significant scholarship or earn an acceptance to a higher tier of schools.

[Calla Lily]

This sounds like an Identify the Flaw LSAT question...

[drummerboy]

Have you read the recent article? Moreover, in the course of my presence on tls, most people seem to report $$$ with significant stipulations that schools are unwilling to change. Somehow, better school or not, the slightly below average student is going to get screwed

[Knock]

Have you read the recent article? Moreover, in the course of my presence on tls, most people seem to report $$$ with significant stipulations that schools are unwilling to change. Somehow, better school or not, the slightly below average student is going to get screwed

Yes, I have read the article. There are plenty of merit scholarships that don't have stips, particularly among the higher ranked schools. So far from being a retake and reapply "trap," it makes a lot of sense to put in the effort to retake and reapply.

[Grizz]

Retake, reapply, and get into a school that doesn't have stips on your $. There you go.

[Ty Webb]

Have you read the recent article? Moreover, in the course of my presence on tls, most people seem to report $$$ with significant stipulations that schools are unwilling to change. Somehow, better school or not, the slightly below average student is going to get screwed

Yes, I have read the article. There are plenty of merit scholarships that don't have stips, particularly among the higher ranked schools. So far from being a retake and reapply "trap," it makes a lot of sense to put in the effort to retake and reapply.

Also, not all stipulations are created equally. a Top 33% stipulation, for instance, is quite different from a top 70% stipulation. I think that schools offering a top 70% stipulation are doing students a favor. If you lose your scholarship under those circumstances, you might need to seriously consider cutting your losses. This is dependent upon how good your school is, of course.

[upfish]

This sounds like an Identify the Flaw LSAT question...

[aliarrow]

In the wake of the New York Times expose about law school merit scholarships, the notion of retake and reapply takes on a new meaning. Yes youre likely to get into a higher ranked school and yes you may not have to pay sticker ,but youre still at great risk of either ending up at a lower ranked school or a higher ranked school with potentially vanishing scholarship money. Thus, most people that retake and reapply to maximize ranking and avoid huge debt, will likely be facing a dire predicament by the second or third year. Unfortunately, it would appear as if only those that can stomach huge debt or have alternate methods of funding their education(eg, trust fund, family assistance) will survive. This is very sad. Students that apply to law school with good intentions are getting screwed in this unscrupulous game. What are your thoughts. I for one am outraged.

The internet needs new memes, everything that applies is just so played out.

That said, no. Retaking and scoring higher will still put you in a better position. At least if you lose your scholarship, you'll be in huge debt but from a better school.

[rundoxierun]

All the schools I applied to offered scholarships with a "good standing" stipulation (i.e. if you dont keep your scholarship you are failing out anyway so it doesnt matter). At those schools, even the last ranked person in the class is still in good standing usually.

[vamedic03]

In the wake of the New York Times expose about law school merit scholarships, the notion of retake and reapply takes on a new meaning. Yes youre likely to get into a higher ranked school and yes you may not have to pay sticker ,but youre still at great risk of either ending up at a lower ranked school or a higher ranked school with potentially vanishing scholarship money. Thus, most people that retake and reapply to maximize ranking and avoid huge debt, will likely be facing a dire predicament by the second or third year. Unfortunately, it would appear as if only those that can stomach huge debt or have alternate methods of funding their education(eg, trust fund, family assistance) will survive. This is very sad. Students that apply to law school with good intentions are getting screwed in this unscrupulous game. What are your thoughts. I for one am outraged.

This is logically incoherent.

[aliarrow]

In the wake of the New York Times expose about law school merit scholarships, the notion of retake and reapply takes on a new meaning. Yes youre likely to get into a higher ranked school and yes you may not have to pay sticker ,but youre still at great risk of either ending up at a lower ranked school or a higher ranked school with potentially vanishing scholarship money. Thus, most people that retake and reapply to maximize ranking and avoid huge debt, will likely be facing a dire predicament by the second or third year. Unfortunately, it would appear as if only those that can stomach huge debt or have alternate methods of funding their education(eg, trust fund, family assistance) will survive. This is very sad. Students that apply to law school with good intentions are getting screwed in this unscrupulous game. What are your thoughts. I for one am outraged.

This is logically incoherent.

[drummerboy]

youre both existentially incoherent.

[Sandro]

Retake, re apply, get into a school that doesnt scam its students ? None of the large scholarship offers I recieved due to my retake had worthwhile stipulations. prvvvvbbbbbbb

[drummerboy]

exactly my point. maybe a list of schools without stipulations etc. should be put together as yet another variable in this process. bottomline, you now have to find not only the right region, ranking, & scholarship received, but which one of those schools wont swindle you .

[aliarrow]

exactly my point. maybe a list of schools without stipulations etc. should be put together as yet another variable in this process. bottomline, you now have to find not only the right region, ranking, & scholarship received, but which one of those schools wont swindle you .

What does any of this have to do with retaking and reapplying?

[drummerboy]

because sometimes the retaking and reapplying promises to get you either more money from a lower ranked school ,and or admission to a higher ranked school with minimal or no scholly. most people will inevitably say only a few higher ranked schools are worth ticket . so if you dont get a scholly from the higher ranked school, you probably wont attend, youll get into a lower ranked school with a huge scholly and a curve that extinguishes multiple schollys by year 1 and2

[Sandro]

You might have a point if someone was retaking with the goal of trying to get a full ride at Iowa and they give out top 33% stips, but by large most "top" schools do not play too many stipulation games.

You are describing a scenario that deals with a super small minority of retakers in reality.

Retake reapply IS UNFLAPPABLE.

[Sandro]

and guess what sometimes they will not get a job at graduation, so nobody should go to law school really

[drummerboy]

which group would you say, T30? top schools with a conscience

[fundamentallybroken]

This sounds like an Identify the Flaw LSAT question...

Assumes that, because a condition applies to some, it must apply to all.

[crumpetsandtea]

because sometimes the retaking and reapplying promises to get you either more money from a lower ranked school ,and or admission to a higher ranked school with minimal or no scholly. most people will inevitably say only a few higher ranked schools are worth ticket . so if you dont get a scholly from the higher ranked school, you probably wont attend, youll get into a lower ranked school with a huge scholly and a curve that extinguishes multiple schollys by year 1 and2

First-- your posts are really hard to read. I'm not sure if it's the lack of capitalization or the logic fail, but...yeah.

Second-- 'retake and reapply' doesn't 'promise' anything. It's a suggestion that is brought up when posters believe that someone can do better. For example -- if an applicant has a high GPA and a low LSAT, assuming they haven't already increased their cold diagnostic score by a large amount, if they study and retake they can break into a much higher level of school. Does this mean they WILL? No, not necessarily. But spending the time on upping your stats gives you a chance to break into a higher level--and chances are, if you re-take, do better, and re-apply, you're not going to get denied by the schools you would have gotten into without the re-take. There's nothing to lose in the situation--the worst case scenario is that you end up with the same acceptances you had before.

Third-- regarding the cost of law schools...retaking and reapplying offers 0Ls a chance to take a break before LS to a) reassess their decision to go (always important to think it through before taking on so much debt in a crowded job market) and b) save up money by finding a job, any job, in the meantime.

As for this quote:

Yes youre likely to get into a higher ranked school and yes you may not have to pay sticker ,but youre still at great risk of either ending up at a lower ranked school or a higher ranked school with potentially vanishing scholarship money.

Think this through for a second...you are in EVEN MORE of a great risk of ending up at a lower ranked school or having a scholly stip if you DO NOT have a higher LSAT/WE. So, yes, though there is the potential for getting screwed after a re-take/re-apply, that same risk exists before retaking/reapplying. And moreover, the difference is that there is MORE potential to get screwed if you DO NOT do better on your re-take and re-apply then. Your 'outrage' makes absolutely no sense, and is completely misplaced.

[geoduck]

Have you read the recent article? Moreover, in the course of my presence on tls, most people seem to report $$$ with significant stipulations that schools are unwilling to change. Somehow, better school or not, the slightly below average student is going to get screwed

Yes, I have read the article. There are plenty of merit scholarships that don't have stips, particularly among the higher ranked schools. So far from being a retake and reapply "trap," it makes a lot of sense to put in the effort to retake and reapply.

Also, not all stipulations are created equally. a Top 33% stipulation, for instance, is quite different from a top 70% stipulation. I think that schools offering a top 70% stipulation are doing students a favor. If you lose your scholarship under those circumstances, you might need to seriously consider cutting your losses. This is dependent upon how good your school is, of course.

This. If you get a big scholarship from a low T1-high T2 with a harsh stipulation the first time and improve on the retake, you can most likely get a scholarship from a T30 that is much harder to lose. For example, I have a full scholarship at a T20 which requires me to maintain above a 2.5 GPA. The fourth quartile for the past few years as been everyone from 3.0-3.2 and below. Last year, 75% of students got above a 3.0 and many of the remaining 25% got above a 2.5. That's way better than going to a Tier 2-3-4 with a 3.0 stipulation and a curve that puts the 50% mark at 3.0.

[drummerboy]

Im always fascinated by the responses one gets after tossing in a logically incoherent statement daring to question the validity of Retake and reapply. Its like bait for Pirhannas

[Knock]

Im always fascinated by the responses one gets after tossing in a logically incoherent statement daring to question the validity of Retake and reapply. Its like bait for Pirhannas

. IBTL/B.