Top Law Schools

I took the LSAT back in 2012, without studying and scored mid 160s. Now deciding it's time to actually apply and looking to take the LSAT again. I studied this time, but work has been hectic and haven't had a chance to crack down this last month. My LSAT would be this Monday (registered first time as Sabbath taker, now that way for life.) Is it worth me taking it or waiting until December to do it? My worry is that if I don't perform my best, I don't feel I can apply to T6 schools with a third retake in December.

Any advice much appreciated!

Nyu claims they do but from some of people who get in, it seems to be BS.

Yale seems to be the only school that cares about multiple scores though. Most schools just care about your higest score

Some schools claim to "consider all scores/testing history" other state that under certain circumstance will average. Not really sure the extent to which this occurs. Yale is the most notable example.

Schools are only required to report the highest scores these days, and I speculate they only really take the highest score at most school in most cases.

Does anyone know a good reason why there is such confusion over this topic? What do the admissions offices have to gain by being so vague?

trontastic wrote:Does anyone know a good reason why there is such confusion over this topic? What do the admissions offices have to gain by being so vague?

If a school is interested in doing a genuinely holistic review, then of course all LSAT scores will be taken into consideration, if only in a marginal way.

If a school is interested in gaming the rankings, then of course only the highest LSAT score will be considered, since that's the only score that's reported.

Admitting that you only take the highest score into consideration means admitting that you belong in the latter category, which just happens to include all law schools other than Yale.

IMO, if you absolutely crush the LSAT-- no matter how many times you take it--you can tell a valuable story that schools will value. I think if you improve from score to score you can tell a story that makes sense and explains why that happened and in most cases couldnt hurt you.

I know the general wisdom seems to suggest only your highest score is considered, but I imagine it would hurt a little if your scores got worse over time. Multiple, improving scores should be fine tho

trontastic wrote:Does anyone know a good reason why there is such confusion over this topic? What do the admissions offices have to gain by being so vague?

Part of the difficulty is some schools offer a cut and dry explanation of whether they take the highest score, and or if and when they average. Other schools make vague claims like the example below:

Columbia – “Even though the ABA requires that we report the highest LSAT score, the Committee considers the entire LSAT testing history when evaluating applications for admission.”

My guess is that schools do not want to make hard and fast statements regarding admissions, which allows them more discretion.

Another Example:

Berkeley – “We advise preparing well and performing your best on test day in order to take the LSAT only once. However if something unexpected occurs that negatively affects your performance, or if you believe you could improve your performance, then you may wish to consider taking the test again. We usually use the highest score. We use the average if multiple scores are closely clustered. We will not penalize you for canceling scores in accordance with what LSAC policy.”

What exactly determines closely clustered ? 2 points, 3 points, 4 points ..?

One reason for the confusion likely is that, until 2006, the ABA required law schools to report their LSAT median, 25th, and 75th percentile scores with reference to students' average LSAT score. In '06, the ABA switched to requiring the data to reference each student's highest score. I think that a lot of admissions language is leftover from those days, before the law schools lost their main incentive to care about average LSAT score. It's possible that some admissions offices still care about average score or big score disparities, but I think that a lot of references to average scores are either artifacts or attempts to save face and not admit that the school cares primarily about its reported numbers.