Top Law Schools

I think I need to decide before seeing my score

I have a 3.25 GPA, unique, national-level softs that have gained a fair about of publicity (I think/hope they make it into the "softs that matter" category). Solid GPA explanations, at least in my opinion.

PTs 177-180.

Might throw my name in the hat for Harvard. Would be happy with UChicago. Hoping for good options other than Northwestern.

What should my cutoff be? Thanks!

I'd say if you want Chicago and you're not URM, 174/175 would do the trick with that GPA, anything lower and I don't think it'll happen.

I don't think Yale/Stanford would take that GPA with a 180, I'd say 176/7+ for Harvard with a good soft.

At least this is what conventional wisdom is telling me.

Outta curiosity, whats the GPA explanation? I dunno if anything counts as a legit addendum other than serious illness and difficult financial circumstances, anyone second that?

Either way, 175+ will clearly get you into a good school.

jpSartre wrote:I'd say if you want Chicago and you're not URM, 174/175 would do the trick with that GPA, anything lower and I don't think it'll happen.

I don't think Yale/Stanford would take that GPA with a 180, I'd say 176/7+ for Harvard with a good soft.

At least this is what conventional wisdom is telling me.

Outta curiosity, whats the GPA explanation? I dunno if anything counts as a legit addendum other than serious illness and difficult financial circumstances, anyone second that?

Either way, 175+ will clearly get you into a good school.

I doubt that Harvard will admit a 3.25 without URM status or something extremely exceptional. OP, I'm not saying you should not apply, just don't get your hopes way up.

Good luck.

With your GPA I'd say retake anything below 174.

TheLuckyOne wrote:

jpSartre wrote:I'd say if you want Chicago and you're not URM, 174/175 would do the trick with that GPA, anything lower and I don't think it'll happen.

I don't think Yale/Stanford would take that GPA with a 180, I'd say 176/7+ for Harvard with a good soft.

At least this is what conventional wisdom is telling me.

Outta curiosity, whats the GPA explanation? I dunno if anything counts as a legit addendum other than serious illness and difficult financial circumstances, anyone second that?

Either way, 175+ will clearly get you into a good school.

I doubt that Harvard will admit a 3.25 without URM status or something extremely exceptional. OP, I'm not saying you should not apply, just don't get your hopes way up.

Good luck.

I agree that Harvard is a long-shot, even with a 180. At the very least, my goal is to be one of the most interesting applications they ever rejected

jpSartre wrote:I'd say if you want Chicago and you're not URM, 174/175 would do the trick with that GPA, anything lower and I don't think it'll happen.

I don't think Yale/Stanford would take that GPA with a 180, I'd say 176/7+ for Harvard with a good soft.

At least this is what conventional wisdom is telling me.

Outta curiosity, whats the GPA explanation? I dunno if anything counts as a legit addendum other than serious illness and difficult financial circumstances, anyone second that?

Either way, 175+ will clearly get you into a good school.

Thanks for the very optimistic feedback--I hope you're right.

Illness and loss of a parent. Working 60+ hours per week during two years of college. A couple other more minor contributing factors.

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:

jpSartre wrote:I'd say if you want Chicago and you're not URM, 174/175 would do the trick with that GPA, anything lower and I don't think it'll happen.

I don't think Yale/Stanford would take that GPA with a 180, I'd say 176/7+ for Harvard with a good soft.

At least this is what conventional wisdom is telling me.

Outta curiosity, whats the GPA explanation? I dunno if anything counts as a legit addendum other than serious illness and difficult financial circumstances, anyone second that?

Either way, 175+ will clearly get you into a good school.

Thanks for the very optimistic feedback--I hope you're right.

Illness and loss of a parent. Working 60+ hours per week during two years of college. A couple other more minor contributing factors.

Ouch... these are truly legitimate reasons. Too bad they are unlikely to influence outcome much:(

You should probably retake even if you get a 180, just to show it wasn't a fluke. 360=autoadmit. Just plug that in to LSP if you don't believe me.

On a more serious note, you should probably retake any score you think is below your 25th-33rd percentile, roughly speaking. Maybe even 50th percentile if you are feeling aggressive.

In terms of the loss, thanks

As for the job, it was the best experience of my life, and I wouldn't trade it for a 4.0 and a golden ticket to Yale

Woozy wrote:You should probably retake even if you get a 180, just to show it wasn't a fluke. 360=autoadmit. Just plug that in to LSP if you don't believe me.

On a more serious note, you should probably retake any score you think is below your 25th-33rd percentile, roughly speaking. Maybe even 50th percentile if you are feeling aggressive.

So retake anything below 178 based on PTs?

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:

Woozy wrote:You should probably retake even if you get a 180, just to show it wasn't a fluke. 360=autoadmit. Just plug that in to LSP if you don't believe me.

On a more serious note, you should probably retake any score you think is below your 25th-33rd percentile, roughly speaking. Maybe even 50th percentile if you are feeling aggressive.

So retake anything below 178 based on PTs?

I would agree with Ragged here. maybe 175...

As of now, based on responses, I think 177 is the highest score I will retake. Anything above is 75th everywhere I am looking. 177 or below and no reason not to take it in June.

Hey guys,

I have the same question.

I just took the Feb make-up exam, and though I have been scoring well on prep tests (175-180) I didn't come out of the testing feeling too confident.

My goal is be competitive for HYS and my GPA is 3.97. What should my cutoff be for taking another test?

Thanks in advance

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:As of now, based on responses, I think 177 is the highest score I will retake. Anything above is 75th everywhere I am looking. 177 or below and no reason not to take it in June.

Do you know of a school with a 75th percentile of 178, or is there something I'm missing?

I'd say retake 174 or lower. It's normal, even expected, to score a couple points lower than you average on your PTs. If you're PT'ing at 177-180, your expected score should be 175-178.

Just wait to hear what your actual score is and then decide. Even if you ended up consistently scoring 175-180 on PTs, you shouldn't bank on that happening for the real test. I mean, that is such a small margin for error; just one or two more mistakes could be due to anything from misbubbling, anxiety, etc. If you retake a 178, that's pretty ridiculous if you ask me. The 3.25 GPA is going to make Harvard a crapshoot anyway, unless you have some truly impressive softs.

wadeny wrote:Just wait to hear what your actual score is and then decide. Even if you ended up consistently scoring 175-180 on PTs, you shouldn't bank on that happening for the real test. I mean, that is such a small margin for error; just one or two more mistakes could be due to anything from misbubbling, anxiety, etc. If you retake a 178, that's pretty ridiculous if you ask me. The 3.25 GPA is going to make Harvard a crapshoot anyway, unless you have some truly impressive softs.

True enough. I just would like to have a cutoff first since otherwise I will end up doing something really idiotic like retaking a 179

I *think* I have pretty impressive sorts, but I guess a lit of people have that belief about themselves

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:I think I need to decide before seeing my score

I have a 3.25 GPA, unique, national-level softs that have gained a fair about of publicity (I think/hope they make it into the "softs that matter" category). Solid GPA explanations, at least in my opinion.

PTs 177-180.

Might throw my name in the hat for Harvard. Would be happy with UChicago. Hoping for good options other than Northwestern.

What should my cutoff be? Thanks!

For the schools you are considering, a 175 will be the equivalent of a 177+ so there wouldn't be a need to retake anything at the 175 or higher level.

Basically, a 175+ will give you the shot at Chicago/NYU that you are looking for. Even with a 179+ Harvard is probably out of reach. There was not a single acceptance of a <3.4 GPA non-URM at Harvard last year based on LSN and there probably won't be this year either.

I still think 180 gets the attention of Adcoms in a unique way, but I could be wrong. On the other hand, I don't think that a 4 hour test should really open the same doors for me that 4 years of hard academic work did for others. I have absolutely no regrets--especially if I can won that distinction of the most interesting application Harvard ever rejected

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:I still think 180 gets the attention of Adcoms in a unique way, but I could be wrong. On the other hand, I don't think that a 4 hour test should really open the same doors for me that 4 years of hard academic work did for others. I have absolutely no regrets--especially if I can won that distinction of the most interesting application Harvard ever rejected

You aren't getting HLS. But Chi or CLS might bite on 3.25/180.

MVPDNC don't care about retakes, so go for 180.

Desert Fox wrote:

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:I still think 180 gets the attention of Adcoms in a unique way, but I could be wrong. On the other hand, I don't think that a 4 hour test should really open the same doors for me that 4 years of hard academic work did for others. I have absolutely no regrets--especially if I can won that distinction of the most interesting application Harvard ever rejected

You aren't getting HLS. But Chi or CLS might bite on 3.25/180.

MVPDNC don't care about retakes, so go for 180.

Doesn't retaking 178/179 raise the "what the hell is wrong with this applicant?" question? If it doesn't cause problems, I have no issue with retaking a high score.

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:I still think 180 gets the attention of Adcoms in a unique way, but I could be wrong. On the other hand, I don't think that a 4 hour test should really open the same doors for me that 4 years of hard academic work did for others. I have absolutely no regrets--especially if I can won that distinction of the most interesting application Harvard ever rejected

You aren't getting HLS. But Chi or CLS might bite on 3.25/180.

MVPDNC don't care about retakes, so go for 180.

Doesn't retaking 178/179 raise the "what the hell is wrong with this applicant?" question? If it doesn't cause problems, I have no issue with retaking a high score.

Eehhh probably does to some extent. But so does a 176.

Continue studying so you can get that 180 on the first try.

Desert Fox wrote:

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:I still think 180 gets the attention of Adcoms in a unique way, but I could be wrong. On the other hand, I don't think that a 4 hour test should really open the same doors for me that 4 years of hard academic work did for others. I have absolutely no regrets--especially if I can won that distinction of the most interesting application Harvard ever rejected

You aren't getting HLS. But Chi or CLS might bite on 3.25/180.

MVPDNC don't care about retakes, so go for 180.

Doesn't retaking 178/179 raise the "what the hell is wrong with this applicant?" question? If it doesn't cause problems, I have no issue with retaking a high score.

Eehhh probably does to some extent. But so does a 176.

Continue studying so you can get that 180 on the first try.

I already took it in February. I got 180s on several PTs and felt well prepared, so I don't think more studying would have helped a whole lot. I'm just concerned because I was a bit hurried on the final reading comprehension questions.

Desert Fox wrote:

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:I still think 180 gets the attention of Adcoms in a unique way, but I could be wrong. On the other hand, I don't think that a 4 hour test should really open the same doors for me that 4 years of hard academic work did for others. I have absolutely no regrets--especially if I can won that distinction of the most interesting application Harvard ever rejected

You aren't getting HLS. But Chi or CLS might bite on 3.25/180.

MVPDNC don't care about retakes, so go for 180.

Other posters are being excessively optimistic. Sub-3.5 is a very tough road at CCN regardless of LSAT, and pretty much a straight-up no-go at YHS. See: http://chicago.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/0809/

In your shoes, I wouldn't retake anything 172 or over. YHSCCN is such a long shot with a 3.2x it's not worth the effort to retake. Maybe a 175+ would get you some money at MVPDNCG? I have no idea why that would be the case though...

I think some adcomms might consider you mentally unbalanced for retaking a 177. I think making 175 your lowest acceptable score could be reasonable, but 178?

ConsideringLawSchool wrote:As of now, based on responses, I think 177 is the highest score I will retake. Anything above is 75th everywhere I am looking. 177 or below and no reason not to take it in June.

Wait, you would retake a 177???

I would say retake a 175 or lower IF you are being honest with yourself on your PTs and truly scoring 177-180s all the time. Have you done PTs in the 40s-50s and had those scores?

Anyway, it's all speculation right now. The day you get your score, go to LSP and LSN (especially LSN) and see what your chances look like. That's the best way to figure out what you should do.