Top 100? Forum

[hennenr]

Hello all,
I'm taking the October LSAT and have been studying 17-20 hours a week since late April because I believe I need to do very well on the LSAT to make up for my less than stellar GPA (2.82). Anyone have any insight to my chances of getting in a top 100 school with a 165+? I also have a year of professional work experience (I've heard that helps on law school applications). Thanks for any help!

[confusedlawyer]

Hello all,
I'm taking the October LSAT and have been studying 17-20 hours a week since late April because I believe I need to do very well on the LSAT to make up for my less than stellar GPA (2.82). Anyone have any insight to my chances of getting in a top 100 school with a 165+? I also have a year of professional work experience (I've heard that helps on law school applications). Thanks for any help!

With a high LSAT (US schools love the LSAT) and an addendum explaining your GPA, it is possible. Not going to lie, that GPA is likely going to hold you back from a majority of schools in the top 100 but definately not all. Just work more on your application and everything other than the GPA, because the GPA is not under your control while everything else is. And it is a good idea you started studying early. You should be more than ready come october

[hennenr]

My goal is a 170 and I think it is pretty much in reach. I have read about putting an addendum in my application considering that my last 2 years of school I had a 3.46 GPA after I changed majors from Political Science to Information Systems. I'm just not sure if that addendum would hold up because I know law school admission boards don't like excuses.

[bk1]

Law schools will see your transcript and make whatever inferences from it they choose. That really isn't addendum-worthy. Addenda are for things out of your control, i.e. trauma, injury, taking care of sick family members, etc.

[Whatisthis]

If you can get a 170+, you'll likely be in at a couple T20 schools (maybe some money at T30). A 165+ should get you in at multiple T50 schools.

[hennenr]

How reliable are law school calculators found on various websites?

[bk1]

I'd say LSN is pretty decent because you get a ton of datapoints and can extrapolate your own idea from that. LSP is okay, I would take it with a grain of salt and compare what LSP says to what LSN shows you. All in all, they are decent but of course take them with a grain of salt as noted.

[StrictlyLiable]

They are pretty reliable from what I've read with the exception of potential splitters like yourself, but of course they don't consider work experience, personal statement, ect.

[MURPH]

I got into UCLA (ranked 15) with a 2.98 and 175. I am waitlisted at half the T14. You can easily get into a T100 school with a score above 165. you should be looking for $$ in fact. Get above 170 and you can probably get a full ride somewhere. No none cares much about PS, work experience, etc.

[confusedlawyer]

I got into UCLA (ranked 15) with a 2.98 and 175. I am waitlisted at half the T14. You can easily get into a T100 school with a score above 165. you should be looking for $$ in fact. Get above 170 and you can probably get a full ride somewhere. No none cares much about PS, work experience, etc.

In the US maybe, but in Canada, law school do care about your soft factors and PS, not so much work experience. But still, it boils down to the numbers

[hennenr]

I'm planning on applying to DePaul (98), Brooklyn Law (67), University of San Francisco (98), University of San Diego (53) and Santa Clara (93). Any inside information on these schools from previous applicants?

[hennenr]

I want to make sure that I give myself as much time to study as possible and I figure another year is worth the wait if I use the time wisely to destroy the LSAT.

[confusedlawyer]

I'm planning on applying to DePaul (98), Brooklyn Law (67), University of San Francisco (98), University of San Diego (53) and Santa Clara (93). Any inside information on these schools from previous applicants?

The search button is your friend

[MURPH]

I want to make sure that I give myself as much time to study as possible and I figure another year is worth the wait if I use the time wisely to destroy the LSAT.

If you are going to spend a year studying then you need to aim higher than 165. Take a Testmasters, Blueprint or Powerscore course. Do every PT test twice. (maybe save four or five for the last two weeks). Form a study group and teach eachother. With a year you can do so much. What school can you get into with a 2.82 and a 177? almost all of them.

[JasonR]

If you can get a 170+, you'll likely be in at a couple T20 schools (maybe some money at T30). A 165+ should get you in at multiple T50 schools.

This is off.

A 165 most assuredly will not get you admission to "multiple" T50 schools. You'll need at least a 168. And you're much more likely to get into zero T20 schools with a 170 than you to get into a couple of them. You'll probably need at least a 173 to have better than even odds of cracking the T20.

[myq]

A 168+ will get you a good chance at Wash U. A 172+ will get you a good chance at Northwestern.

[CanadianWolf]

You can increase your chances of admission to Top 100 law schools by gaining a year or two of work experience & maturity in order to soften the 2.82 GPA. Currently, without more favorable factors such as URM status, you probably need about a 168 LSAT score according to lawschoolpredictor.com.

[JasonR]

A 168+ will get you a good chance at Wash U. A 172+ will get you a good chance at Northwestern.

Uh, no.

These sorts of numbers occasionally result in admission to these schools, but only occasionally. It seems plenty of people mistake these outlier results as representative of the norm.

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

OP, you should consider getting 3 or 4 years of work experience first to blunt the effects of that GPA a bit. Admissions might be a little less competitive then, too.

[bk1]

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

2008-2009 admit cycle is considered pre-recession?

[romothesavior]

A 168+ will get you a good chance at Wash U. A 172+ will get you a good chance at Northwestern.

Uh, no.

These sorts of numbers occasionally result in admission to these schools, but only occasionally. It seems plenty of people mistake these outlier results as representative of the norm.

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

OP, you should consider getting 3 or 4 years of work experience first to blunt the effects of that GPA a bit. Admissions might be a little less competitive then, too.

Go away. You have no idea WTF you are talking about.

This year, not a SINGLE REJECTION has been given out to anyone with a 167 or up at Wash U, and only a few have been waitlisted. A 168 (regardless of the sub-3.0 GPA) would be a near auto-admit at WUSTL.

A 172+ would be difficult for Northwestern straight from undergrad, but not impossible. 2 years off and an ED would be a virtual lock at NW, however. NW will forgive a low GPA if you have 2 years WE and a 172+ and there are quite a few examples of this on TLS.

Also, a 165+ will get you into a number Top 50 schools, even with a sub-3.0 GPA. Indiana, Washington and Lee, Arizona State, etc. would all likely accept him and many more. And admissions are not going to get less competitive... they have gotten more competitive every year, so I don't know where you are getting that idea from.

Stop using LSP for splitters, and stop speaking with such authority on things you don't know anything about. I can't stand when people talk down to people in a pompous tone when they are flat out wrong.

[JasonR]

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

2008-2009 admit cycle is considered pre-recession?

No, not strictly speaking. But it wasn't until Nov or Dec of 2008 that the NBER made it official that the recession had begun in Dec 2007. Not many thought things were great economically throughout 2008, but the magnitude of the financial crisis and the weakness of the economy weren't readily apparent to most until late 2008, once the stock market collapsed. A little late for the panic to have a huge effect on 2008-09 numbers. The effects of the recession on the number of LSAT takers and applicants really showed up in the 2009-10 data.

A less lazy way of putting it might be, "Those numbers are based on admissions data not yet strongly influenced by the financial crisis and recession..."

[JasonR]

A 168+ will get you a good chance at Wash U. A 172+ will get you a good chance at Northwestern.

Uh, no.

These sorts of numbers occasionally result in admission to these schools, but only occasionally. It seems plenty of people mistake these outlier results as representative of the norm.

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

OP, you should consider getting 3 or 4 years of work experience first to blunt the effects of that GPA a bit. Admissions might be a little less competitive then, too.

Go away. You have no idea WTF you are talking about.

This year, not a SINGLE REJECTION has been given out to anyone with a 167 or up at Wash U, and only a few have been waitlisted. A 168 (regardless of the sub-3.0 GPA) would be a near auto-admit at WUSTL.

A 172+ would be difficult for Northwestern straight from undergrad, but not impossible. 2 years off and an ED would be a virtual lock at NW, however. NW will forgive a low GPA if you have 2 years WE and a 172+ and there are quite a few examples of this on TLS.

Also, a 165+ will get you into a number Top 50 schools, even with a sub-3.0 GPA. Indiana, Washington and Lee, Arizona State, etc. would all likely accept him and many more. And admissions are not going to get less competitive... they have gotten more competitive every year, so I don't know where you are getting that idea from.

Stop using LSP for splitters, and stop speaking with such authority on things you don't know anything about. I can't stand when people talk down to people in a pompous tone when they are flat out wrong.

LOL

--ImageRemoved--

[sluguy14]

A 168+ will get you a good chance at Wash U. A 172+ will get you a good chance at Northwestern.

Uh, no.

These sorts of numbers occasionally result in admission to these schools, but only occasionally. It seems plenty of people mistake these outlier results as representative of the norm.

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

OP, you should consider getting 3 or 4 years of work experience first to blunt the effects of that GPA a bit. Admissions might be a little less competitive then, too.

Go away. You have no idea WTF you are talking about.

This year, not a SINGLE REJECTION has been given out to anyone with a 167 or up at Wash U, and only a few have been waitlisted. A 168 (regardless of the sub-3.0 GPA) would be a near auto-admit at WUSTL.

A 172+ would be difficult for Northwestern straight from undergrad, but not impossible. 2 years off and an ED would be a virtual lock at NW, however. NW will forgive a low GPA if you have 2 years WE and a 172+ and there are quite a few examples of this on TLS.

Also, a 165+ will get you into a number Top 50 schools, even with a sub-3.0 GPA. Indiana, Washington and Lee, Arizona State, etc. would all likely accept him and many more. And admissions are not going to get less competitive... they have gotten more competitive every year, so I don't know where you are getting that idea from.

Stop using LSP for splitters, and stop speaking with such authority on things you don't know anything about. I can't stand when people talk down to people in a pompous tone when they are flat out wrong.

BAM. Great post.

[bk1]

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

2008-2009 admit cycle is considered pre-recession?

No, not strictly speaking. But it wasn't until Nov or Dec of 2008 that the NBER made it official that the recession had begun in Dec 2007. Not many thought things were great economically throughout 2008, but the magnitude of the financial crisis and the weakness of the economy weren't readily apparent to most until late 2008, once the stock market collapsed. A little late for the panic to have a huge effect on 2008-09 numbers. The effects of the recession on the number of LSAT takers and applicants really showed up in the 2009-10 data.

A less lazy way of putting it might be, "Those numbers are based on admissions data not yet strongly influenced by the financial crisis and recession..."

I mean I understood your intention, I guess I just felt that 2008-2009 had been influenced strongly by the recession but I hadn't really thought it through and just assumed that 2008-2009 was the first to be strongly influenced.

[09042014]

A 168+ will get you a good chance at Wash U. A 172+ will get you a good chance at Northwestern.

Uh, no.

These sorts of numbers occasionally result in admission to these schools, but only occasionally. It seems plenty of people mistake these outlier results as representative of the norm.

According to LSP, a 168 will put the OP at or above 31% of admitted applicants for Wash U and at or above just 14% of admitted applicants for NU. And those numbers are based on pre-recession admissions data, so the odds with those numbers are currently even longer.

OP, you should consider getting 3 or 4 years of work experience first to blunt the effects of that GPA a bit. Admissions might be a little less competitive then, too.

Go away. You have no idea WTF you are talking about.

This year, not a SINGLE REJECTION has been given out to anyone with a 167 or up at Wash U, and only a few have been waitlisted. A 168 (regardless of the sub-3.0 GPA) would be a near auto-admit at WUSTL.

A 172+ would be difficult for Northwestern straight from undergrad, but not impossible. 2 years off and an ED would be a virtual lock at NW, however. NW will forgive a low GPA if you have 2 years WE and a 172+ and there are quite a few examples of this on TLS.

Also, a 165+ will get you into a number Top 50 schools, even with a sub-3.0 GPA. Indiana, Washington and Lee, Arizona State, etc. would all likely accept him and many more. And admissions are not going to get less competitive... they have gotten more competitive every year, so I don't know where you are getting that idea from.

Stop using LSP for splitters, and stop speaking with such authority on things you don't know anything about. I can't stand when people talk down to people in a pompous tone when they are flat out wrong.

LOL

Dude, he's fucking right. Shut up.