Top Law Schools

Just wondering in case I dont get the score I want. I have a pretty low GPA and am really shooting for a 170, so I can ED places and actually have a shot. Im also only looking at top 50 schools, cus really lets face it, the job market isnt that great. If I didnt score the 170 this past Saturday, would it be bad to take another year off and try again in June (3rd time)? I graduated in May btw. Any advice would help

bumpady bump bump bump

I graduated in May as well, wrote the June lsat for a 160 and again in October. If I get less than 164 I will write in December because the curve is so much nicer ann you will be one of only a few who wont have final exams around the date of the test.

So is it bad to take a third time, I don't know how it is in the U.S, but in Canada they take your highest. Any more than 3 and your finished though. If you write a 3rd time, make sure you nail it.

I'd rather apply with a 120/120/170 than a 160, hope that clears it up for you.

Also, T50 is a meaningless distinction. Many schools in the T1 aren't any better than schools below them and have crappy prospects.

Definitely take a year off and retake for 170+.

EDIT: It's also not necessary to bump after 30 minutes...

bk187 wrote:I'd rather apply with a 120/120/170 than a 160, hope that clears it up for you.

Also, T50 is a meaningless distinction. Many schools in the T1 aren't any better than schools below them and have crappy prospects.

Definitely take a year off and retake for 170+.

EDIT: It's also not necessary to bump after 30 minutes...

I agree with the above poster on everything. Including the bump.

So is it bad to take a third time, I don't know how it is in the U.S, but in Canada they take your highest.

...I wish I were Canadian. The USA is mixed between snob "the LSAT need only be taken once" Harvard and more understanding "if you do worse than your practice tests, and you take it again with a higher score, and we will focus on your higher score" Chicago.

Right, because the LSAT is such a standardized test with such a high level of reliability and validity, law schools respect someone who gets a 120 then a 170 because not only such a jump is unprecedented but it shows your potential. Taking the LSAT under LSAT conditions can make people who score 180 on PT's score a 160. So there is much to be said of the motto aim for the stars.

kkklick wrote:So is it bad to take a third time, I don't know how it is in the U.S, but in Canada they take your highest. Any more than 3 and your finished though. If you write a 3rd time, make sure you nail it.

Few schools in the US average or even consider all scores. Pretty much just the T6 (and even then they are starting to shy away from it, like UChi) and less than a handful of others (someone noted UT averages) so I wouldn't even worry about it.

niederbomb wrote:

So is it bad to take a third time, I don't know how it is in the U.S, but in Canada they take your highest.

...I wish I were Canadian. The USA is mixed between snob "the LSAT need only be taken once" Harvard and more understanding "if you do worse than your practice tests, and you take it again with a higher score, and we will focus on your higher score" Chicago.

Right, if they averaged here I would have cancelled in June. I was actually surprised to see the top 3 schools in Canada clearly state that ONLY your highest will be considered for admission. Which is awesome. But I do understand the logic behind schools saying the LSAT need only be taken once. By writing it the second time I felt like I had a huge advantage over the people writing their first time.

I got 2 167's and really wanted to go to UVA. Admissions there told me to take it a third time. I got a 171 and got in. (My three tests were in a row: Sep/Oct, Dec, Feb. It was miserable but worth it.)

Do it.

bk187 wrote:I'd rather apply with a 120/120/170 than a 160, hope that clears it up for you.

Also, T50 is a meaningless distinction. Many schools in the T1 aren't any better than schools below them and have crappy prospects.

Definitely take a year off and retake for 170+.

EDIT: It's also not necessary to bump after 30 minutes...

Ahh sorry, but I am a product of the "instant" generation. My bad

So should I make my list only include top 20? I have a 2.99 in case that changes anything. Does saying my LSAC GPA out me to much?

Oh and thank you for all the advice guys

blah... wrote:

bk187 wrote:I'd rather apply with a 120/120/170 than a 160, hope that clears it up for you.

Also, T50 is a meaningless distinction. Many schools in the T1 aren't any better than schools below them and have crappy prospects.

Definitely take a year off and retake for 170+.

EDIT: It's also not necessary to bump after 30 minutes...

Ahh sorry, but I am a product of the "instant" generation. My bad

So should I make my list only include top 20? I have a 2.99 in case that changes anything. Does saying my LSAC GPA out me to much?

2.99 LSAC GPA? No chance at top 20 schools even with a 170, unless its mid/high 170 and you have a good explanation as far as your GPA. Not trying to be harsh, just honest.

kkklick wrote:

blah... wrote:

bk187 wrote:I'd rather apply with a 120/120/170 than a 160, hope that clears it up for you.

Also, T50 is a meaningless distinction. Many schools in the T1 aren't any better than schools below them and have crappy prospects.

Definitely take a year off and retake for 170+.

EDIT: It's also not necessary to bump after 30 minutes...

Ahh sorry, but I am a product of the "instant" generation. My bad

So should I make my list only include top 20? I have a 2.99 in case that changes anything. Does saying my LSAC GPA out me to much?

2.99 LSAC GPA? No chance at top 20 schools even with a 170, unless its mid/high 170 and you have a good explanation as far as your GPA. Not trying to be harsh, just honest.

low 170s plus his GPA will def. give him a shot at some top 20s.

kkklick wrote:

blah... wrote:So should I make my list only include top 20? I have a 2.99 in case that changes anything. Does saying my LSAC GPA out me to much?

2.99 LSAC GPA? No chance at top 20 schools even with a 170, unless its mid/high 170 and you have a good explanation as far as your GPA. Not trying to be harsh, just honest.

This is wrong. UVa/GULC PT/WUSTL are all very possible with a 2.99/170.

Look up which schools are splitter-friendly (http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com) and apply there. Don't just do T20 because you should have some safeties but with a 170+ I would expect that you shouldn't settle for anything less than a splitter-friendly T30 or so unless you go to a lower school with on a large scholarship.

More so depends on the school. I guess don't listen to me I don't live in the US. I know in Canada, you have a 0% chance at any of the top 5 with a GPA below 3 regardless of LSAT. The LSAT here isn't as important in the overall scheme of things as it is in the states.

And the reason I saw top 5 is because there are only about 20 law schools in Canada total LOL

More so depends on the school. I guess don't listen to me I don't live in the US. I know in Canada, you have a 0% chance at any of the top 5 with a GPA below 3 regardless of LSAT. The LSAT here isn't as important in the overall scheme of things as it is in the states.

Yeah, but the rank of your undergrad institution matters more than in the US, right?

kkklick wrote:More so depends on the school. I guess don't listen to me I don't live in the US. I know in Canada, you have a 0% chance at any of the top 5 with a GPA below 3 regardless of LSAT. The LSAT here isn't as important in the overall scheme of things as it is in the states.

Fair enough. The US schools all value LSAT extremely highly, none of them will forgive a low LSAT, though some are more forgiving of low GPA's and some are less.

Well the GPA is largely due to an F received in a lab because a lab partner failed to turn in his part of a final presentation. I had an A average, but this was the only grade in the lab and if you fail the lab you fail the entire course. Blah

"This is wrong. UVa/GULC PT/WUSTL are all very possible with a 2.99/170.

Look up which schools are splitter-friendly (http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com) and apply there. Don't just do T20 because you should have some safeties but with a 170+ I would expect that you shouldn't settle for anything less than a splitter-friendly T30 or so unless you go to a lower school with on a large scholarship."

Seriously, you just made my day

omg wrote:I got 2 167's and really wanted to go to UVA. Admissions there told me to take it a third time. I got a 171 and got in. (My three tests were in a row: Sep/Oct, Dec, Feb. It was miserable but worth it.)

Do it.

Wow that kind of sucks.. Great that you finally got in, but damn

daisuki wrote:Wow that kind of sucks.. Great that you finally got in, but damn

I definitely recommend taking the LSAT 3 times to help get into better schools if a higher LSAT is possible for you and will do increase your chances at better schools.

The amount of time/effort spent studying for the LSAT is minimal compared to what you gain in the end.

omg wrote:I got 2 167's and really wanted to go to UVA. Admissions there told me to take it a third time. I got a 171 and got in. (My three tests were in a row: Sep/Oct, Dec, Feb. It was miserable but worth it.)

Do it.

wait, so UVA doesnt take the average of all scores? they only take the highest of all attempts?

Norlan wrote:

omg wrote:I got 2 167's and really wanted to go to UVA. Admissions there told me to take it a third time. I got a 171 and got in. (My three tests were in a row: Sep/Oct, Dec, Feb. It was miserable but worth it.)

Do it.

wait, so UVA doesnt take the average of all scores? they only take the highest of all attempts?

even schools that say the average with the exception of HYS (who don't need to worry about rankings) probably focus on a higher score. their ranking (i.e. their claim to $$$$$$$$) is largely based off YOUR LSAT, and only YOUR HIGHEST LSAT.

niederbomb wrote:

So is it bad to take a third time, I don't know how it is in the U.S, but in Canada they take your highest.

...I wish I were Canadian. The USA is mixed between snob "the LSAT need only be taken once" Harvard and more understanding "if you do worse than your practice tests, and you take it again with a higher score, and we will focus on your higher score" Chicago.

Don't you mean Cornell instead of Chicago?