Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014) Forum

[Arrow4Christ]

Hopin for that JS1 this week.

I'll be happy if I finally go complete this week. Baby steps. Hoping you and Arrow get your JS1s though!

Thanks! And when did you submit?

[lawschool22]

Just checking in guys. Long time lurker. Just wanted to say I absolutely love your guys' enthusiasm and I'm wishing everyone the best this cycle.

I got the e-mail for my JS1 last week Friday. Just wanted to know if anyone knew the rate of acceptance for those who receive an interview?

There's no one rate of acceptance, because it still depends on your own personal application quality. But overall it's about 850/1200 who get accepted.

ls22 you're losing it. "Rate of acceptance" and "overall rate of acceptance" are the same thing.

Yeah you're right, I thought they were asking what the individual chances were or something.

[Kobaine51]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

[TripTrip]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180.

Whoa, retake a 176? Goodness. What's your GPA?

To be clear, even world record holding LSAT test takers who have been taking the LSAT for 20 years don't consistently get a 180. I think the highest you can ever guarantee, if there is such a thing, is 178.

[midwest17]

Just checking in guys. Long time lurker. Just wanted to say I absolutely love your guys' enthusiasm and I'm wishing everyone the best this cycle.

I got the e-mail for my JS1 last week Friday. Just wanted to know if anyone knew the rate of acceptance for those who receive an interview?

There's no one rate of acceptance, because it still depends on your own personal application quality. But overall it's about 850/1200 who get accepted.

ls22 you're losing it. "Rate of acceptance" and "overall rate of acceptance" are the same thing.

Yeah you're right, I thought they were asking what the individual chances were or something.

If one wants to be a Bayesian about it,

P(JS2 | JS1) = P(JS2) / P(JS1)

The 850/1200 is relevant in figuring out what your priors of P(JS2) and P(JS1) are based on the available data, but there's no obvious way to plug the number in and get a result.

[bhs12]

Hopin for that JS1 this week.

I'll be happy if I finally go complete this week. Baby steps. Hoping you and Arrow get your JS1s though!

Ditto! When did you submit?

[Kobaine51]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180.

Whoa, retake a 176? Goodness. What's your GPA?

To be clear, even world record holding LSAT test takers who have been taking the LSAT for 20 years don't consistently get a 180. I think the highest you can ever guarantee, if there is such a thing, is 178.

3.7+. I don't think I could guarantee a 180, but I would expect improvement with 95+% certainty, and give myself at least a 35% chance of hitting 180.

[SplitMyPants]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

This median change of +3 points is more biased towards people in the meat of the bell curve. In fact, given the LSAT bands, you're probably in a part of the curve where the median change is 0 or even possibly slightly negative... Of course that last part is pure speculation.

[lawschool22]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

There's no guarantee you will increase, and you could in all likelihood go down. Besides, I don't know that you really change your odds of acceptance all that much. Once you go 175+. The relevant questions are: what's your GPA and when did you apply?

[lawschool22]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180.

Whoa, retake a 176? Goodness. What's your GPA?

To be clear, even world record holding LSAT test takers who have been taking the LSAT for 20 years don't consistently get a 180. I think the highest you can ever guarantee, if there is such a thing, is 178.

3.7+. I don't think I could guarantee a 180, but I would expect improvement with 95+% certainty, and give myself at least a 35% chance of hitting 180.

How in the world can you expect to improve upon a 176 with 95% certainty? That seems a bit far-fetched. Tbh if you don't get in with a 3.7+/176 I don't know that a point or two more on the LSAT is going to change much for you. When did you apply?

[Slytherpuff]

Hopin for that JS1 this week.

I'll be happy if I finally go complete this week. Baby steps. Hoping you and Arrow get your JS1s though!

Thanks! And when did you submit?

Submitted 1/17 and still stuck on "Application Received 1/19."

[barrelofmonkeys]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

I very personally think it looks silly to retake a 176 (unless your sole purpose is to see if you can hit 180 and you aren't even applying to law school anymore).

If I were an adcom, I'd be like "this kid wasted 5 or more hours retaking a 176 when he could have actually done something worthwhile?" Whether the score went up or down, I'd frown upon it.

[Kobaine51]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180.

Whoa, retake a 176? Goodness. What's your GPA?

To be clear, even world record holding LSAT test takers who have been taking the LSAT for 20 years don't consistently get a 180. I think the highest you can ever guarantee, if there is such a thing, is 178.

3.7+. I don't think I could guarantee a 180, but I would expect improvement with 95+% certainty, and give myself at least a 35% chance of hitting 180.

How in the world can you expect to improve upon a 176 with 95% certainty? That seems a bit far-fetched. Tbh if you don't get in with a 3.7+/176 I don't know that a point or two more on the LSAT is going to change much for you. When did you apply?

In the month and a half before the test I averaged a 179 and never got below a 176. I performed as badly as I could have when I took the test.

[bbkk]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

I very personally think it looks silly to retake a 176 (unless your sole purpose is to see if you can hit 180 and you aren't even applying to law school anymore).

If I were an adcom, I'd be like "this kid wasted 5 or more hours retaking a 176 when he could have actually done something worthwhile?" Whether the score went up or down, I'd frown upon it.

+1.

[The-Specs]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180.

Whoa, retake a 176? Goodness. What's your GPA?

To be clear, even world record holding LSAT test takers who have been taking the LSAT for 20 years don't consistently get a 180. I think the highest you can ever guarantee, if there is such a thing, is 178.

3.7+. I don't think I could guarantee a 180, but I would expect improvement with 95+% certainty, and give myself at least a 35% chance of hitting 180.

If you don't get in it isn't your LSAT and GPA that are the problem. There is something else in your application that needs fixing. HTH.

[Kobaine51]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

I very personally think it looks silly to retake a 176 (unless your sole purpose is to see if you can hit 180 and you aren't even applying to law school anymore).

If I were an adcom, I'd be like "this kid wasted 5 or more hours retaking a 176 when he could have actually done something worthwhile?" Whether the score went up or down, I'd frown upon it.

This has been my worry, but it seems that outcomes are better at 178+ LSAT than 176. I think the number itself matters a lot, and that is atypical, but imagine two applicants with the same gpa, one retook a 171->179 and the other has a 176, it can safely be said that the 179 retake has a better chance of admission. Now imagine that the 176->179/180, there is no way that person would have a worse chance of admission than the person who started at 171. That's just my thoughts, I see the problems with retaking, which is why I am asking yinz for advice.

[Kobaine51]

If you don't get in it isn't your LSAT and GPA that are the problem. There is something else in your application that needs fixing. HTH.

I agree with this, though I do not think there is something else substantially wrong with my application. Retaking does not, however, preclude improvement in other areas.

[fivestarfolds]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

I very personally think it looks silly to retake a 176 (unless your sole purpose is to see if you can hit 180 and you aren't even applying to law school anymore).

If I were an adcom, I'd be like "this kid wasted 5 or more hours retaking a 176 when he could have actually done something worthwhile?" Whether the score went up or down, I'd frown upon it.

This is a clear cut case. Withdraw and retake.

[chneyo]

...

[barrelofmonkeys]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

I very personally think it looks silly to retake a 176 (unless your sole purpose is to see if you can hit 180 and you aren't even applying to law school anymore).

If I were an adcom, I'd be like "this kid wasted 5 or more hours retaking a 176 when he could have actually done something worthwhile?" Whether the score went up or down, I'd frown upon it.

This has been my worry, but it seems that outcomes are better at 178+ LSAT than 176. I think the number itself matters a lot, and that is atypical, but imagine two applicants with the same gpa, one retook a 171->179 and the other has a 176, it can safely be said that the 179 retake has a better chance of admission. Now imagine that the 176->179/180, there is no way that person would have a worse chance of admission than the person who started at 171. That's just my thoughts, I see the problems with retaking, which is why I am asking yinz for advice.

I don't know if there's data on how a 176-->180 taker performs in admissions cycles, because I think most people with 176s aren't silly enough to retake, but again, I think it would actually come off as a negative soft.

At any rate, if you were asking us for advice, then I think you've gotten a pretty clear consensus.

ETA: Also, is not this discussion a wee bit premature anyway? Am I correct in thinking that you are still just, like many of us, waiting on a JS2?

[The-Specs]

If you don't get in it isn't your LSAT and GPA that are the problem. There is something else in your application that needs fixing. HTH.

I agree with this, though I do not think there is something else substantially wrong with my application. Retaking does not, however, preclude improvement in other areas.

You're right, it does not preclude improvement in other areas but maybe the problem with your app was that you came off as a person who would retake a 176.

[yomisterd]

So I'm thinking about retaking if I don't do well this cycle to go 176 -> 180. It seems to me that there is a substantial enough difference in admission chances with those few points to make it worthwhile. Obviously you absorb some risk retaking, but it seems like the median difference from first take to second take is +3 at least, and I was substantially outperforming my real test on PTs. I'm sure some of you are in the same boat, what do you think?

I very personally think it looks silly to retake a 176 (unless your sole purpose is to see if you can hit 180 and you aren't even applying to law school anymore).

If I were an adcom, I'd be like "this kid wasted 5 or more hours retaking a 176 when he could have actually done something worthwhile?" Whether the score went up or down, I'd frown upon it.

This is a clear cut case. Withdraw and retake.

+1 LOL

I, like Theo and Arrow, am hoping for dat JS1.

[Gary]

In the month and a half before the test I averaged a 179 and never got below a 176. I performed as badly as I could have when I took the test.[/quote]

I would say to retake and see if you improve to 179-80 and if so then make the judgement. I was practice testing the same as you... But I scored lower on the actual test and that's very typical. Don't go in expecting to do better with 95% confidence... That's absurd.

[Gary]

If you don't get in it isn't your LSAT and GPA that are the problem. There is something else in your application that needs fixing. HTH.

I agree with this, though I do not think there is something else substantially wrong with my application. Retaking does not, however, preclude improvement in other areas.

You're right, it does not preclude improvement in other areas but maybe the problem with your app was that you came off as a person who would retake a 176.

Lol at this. People retake a 170 for one extra point that makes all the difference. Adcoms understand the importance they themselves place on the LSAT which makes people retake for a few points. Plus, mylsn shows a significant jump in acceptance rate/ scholarship money from the jump from 175/6 to 179/80.

[chneyo]

...