Top Law Schools

I've been going back and forth on this since Friday, so I want to organize my thoughts and hopefully get some advice. Any feedback is appreciated.

I got a 173 on the June '10 test, my first time sitting for the LSAT. I studied for a few hours a week from February through April (LG Bible and the such), and then studied for about 4-5 hours a day for the last five weeks. I took around 20 PTs, averaging about a 175 and, for the last eight or so, averaging a 177 and hitting 180 twice. Nearly all of those PTs were in the 40-59 range. On the actual test, I got -1 LR, -1 LG, and -6 RC, and the RC was a shocker because that's generally my best section (I often hit -0 on it in practice). I was rushed on time on some sections; I did the mulch/stones game in the last three minutes, and I'm still shocked that worked out, and I had to rush through the bees passage in RC in 5 minutes because of spending too much time on the last passage, but all of my RC errors were spread out anyway.

My LSDAS GPA is a 3.80. My dream cycle ultimately has me choosing between a good amount of money at CCN (especially Chicago) or a Harvard acceptance, but I'm pretty sure that I'm a couple LSAT points shy of either of those possibilities, especially the latter.

I have two problems with retaking. For one, I'm not really sure what to study (any feedback here is appreciated too). I guess I can do some of the first 40 PTs, but I can't see those being terribly useful. I'll do a bunch of LG drills just to stay sharp, but that wasn't the problem on test day. The other problem is that I'm very worried about doing worse. I'm not ashamed of a 173, and -8 is a pretty small margin of error. It's obviously not inconceivable that I get around a 170 on the October LSAT, and while that probably wouldn't hurt my cycle too much with an addendum, it's not what I want. I don't mind putting in the study time.

The plus side of retaking is the shot at a lot of scholarship money or an acceptance.

Again, any input would help me a lot. I'm happy to explain anything further.

Thanks!

With that score and GPA, you have a very strong shot at Chicago, and an outside shot at Harvard. If you do ED at Chicago, you're in. Getting money might be a different story, but your stats are still better than most people that get into Chicago.

173 & 3.8? And you are asking if you should retake?

Hope you have your hard hat on...

yeah this situation sucks for you. being below harvard's gpa median, the best you could have done for yourself with a high lsat score is a 50/50 shot at harvard. a 173 makes harvard an unrealistic reach for you. a 175 is what someone with your gpa needs in order to have a chance at harvard. if you still have this goal then retake. for chicago you're looking at 45k-90k in scholly money.

shutterbug wrote:173 & 3.8? And you are asking if you should retake?

Hope you have your hard hat on...

I understand the point, but I think my case is worthy of at least some internal debate. I definitely don't want to come off as a braggart or churlish or anything else; I'm just looking for input on the risk/reward ratio of retaking.

At least it's not some "what are my chances?!?" thread.

WhatSarahSaid wrote:

shutterbug wrote:173 & 3.8? And you are asking if you should retake?

Hope you have your hard hat on...

I understand the point, but I think my case is worthy of at least some internal debate. I definitely don't want to come off as a braggart or churlish or anything else; I'm just looking for input on the risk/reward ratio of retaking.

At least it's not some "what are my chances?!?" thread.

Two points:

1) Harvard takes your LSAT average, so even if you get a 177, it'll be considered a 175 to Harvard.

2) Some people on the this forum think you need a 4.0 and 180 to get into Harvard or any other T-14. That's not true. According to law school predictor, your current stats are better than 41% of the people that got into Harvard Law. You're comfortably ahead the 25 percentiles for both GPA and LSAT. Don't let others convince you that you have no shot - you actually do, even if it's under 50.

Anaconda wrote:

WhatSarahSaid wrote:

shutterbug wrote:173 & 3.8? And you are asking if you should retake?

Hope you have your hard hat on...

I understand the point, but I think my case is worthy of at least some internal debate. I definitely don't want to come off as a braggart or churlish or anything else; I'm just looking for input on the risk/reward ratio of retaking.

At least it's not some "what are my chances?!?" thread.

Two points:

1) Harvard takes your LSAT average, so even if you get a 177, it'll be considered a 175 to Harvard.

2) Some people on the this forum think you need a 4.0 and 180 to get into Harvard or any other T-14. That's not true. According to law school predictor, your current stats are better than 41% of the people that got into Harvard Law. You're comfortably ahead the 25 percentiles for both GPA and LSAT. Don't let others convince you that you have no shot - you actually do, even if it's under 50.

it's medians that matter, not 25th percentiles. filter 173, 3.6-3.85 on lawschoolnumbers....no one gets in with those stats.

najumobi wrote:

Anaconda wrote:

WhatSarahSaid wrote:

shutterbug wrote:173 & 3.8? And you are asking if you should retake?

Hope you have your hard hat on...

I understand the point, but I think my case is worthy of at least some internal debate. I definitely don't want to come off as a braggart or churlish or anything else; I'm just looking for input on the risk/reward ratio of retaking.

At least it's not some "what are my chances?!?" thread.

Two points:

1) Harvard takes your LSAT average, so even if you get a 177, it'll be considered a 175 to Harvard.

2) Some people on the this forum think you need a 4.0 and 180 to get into Harvard or any other T-14. That's not true. According to law school predictor, your current stats are better than 41% of the people that got into Harvard Law. You're comfortably ahead the 25 percentiles for both GPA and LSAT. Don't let others convince you that you have no shot - you actually do, even if it's under 50.

it's medians that matter, not 25th percentiles. filter 173, 3.6-3.85 on lawschoolnumbers....no one gets in with those stats.

He is close to the medians and my point was that he is above the 25th percentiles... It's not fair to tell him he has zero chance because he got a 173, it's simply not true.

Anaconda wrote:

najumobi wrote: it's medians that matter, not 25th percentiles. filter 173, 3.6-3.85 on lawschoolnumbers....no one gets in with those stats.

He is close to the medians and my point was that he is above the 25th percentiles... It's not fair to tell him he has zero chance because he got a 173, it's simply not true.

i understand, but 25th percentiles don't matter.

OP is actually at harvard's lsat median (173) but it may be that this past cycle they tried to increase their median b/c they snubbed 173s, sub 3.9s. also i just dont think 3.8 and a 3.9 are close (when talking about law school admission, and at harvard nonetheless). the cutoffs admissions use are pretty evident. either you meet them or you don't.