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

[Kobaine51]

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?

I am waiting on a JS2, but there is nothing I can do now to impact my odds for this year, so I'm thinking about ways to improve the next time I apply should it come to that.

I am a little surprised at the response here. I thought the consensus on the LSAT boards was more or less "always retake," I am unsure why that would be any different at the high end. Yales 75th could easily be 177 this year, and if that is the case there is a clear advantage to even a 1 point boost. I don't think I have a really good chance at Yale anyway, but nonetheless I think it's a little strange that doing everything possible to improve an application would be seen as a negative, as it clearly is here.

[neprep]

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

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 and the lowest I scored in the month before was a 178... 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.

Statistically*, repeat test takers with an original score of 176 have less-than-sanguine prospects. For the 10-11 sample, for example, of the 5 brave people who retook a 176, 3 had score decreases and 1 had no change.


*lol, but you know what I mean

[residentemma]

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.

I read somewhere that the average test taker performs 2-3 points lower than their practice test average on the real thing. There's barely a statistically significant difference between a 176 and 179 anyway, and like ls22 said already, depending on how the test goes you could very well go down. It's a great score and already above median... doesn't seem worth it

The LSAT sucks. I literally would rather get a masters than take it again.

PS: TLS tells most people to retake because most of the people who ask if they should retake say something like "I'm a reverse splitter, 4.25 and 156, any chances at HYS???" ...you have a 176

[Gary]

I also retook a mid170s score and without doing that I would not have received a Butler.

How can you possibly know this?

Softs aren't strong/ LSAT typically out of butler range.

[caiti]

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 disagree - I got a 176 and, so far, literally could not have had a better cycle. Maybe it could matter for Y, but my 176 hasn't "held me back" at all. If you decide you don't like your outcomes and want to wait another cycle, then I guess you could think about retaking. 176 is above all but Yale's 75%s, and if you don't get into schools, it isn't because of the 176. I've gotten H already, without stellar softs/WE and not a super-high GPA. There's no real reason to retake.

[chneyo]

...

[Gary]

I also retook a mid170s score and without doing that I would not have received a Butler.

How can you possibly know this?

Softs aren't strong/ LSAT typically out of butler range.

So then you're speculating. Thanks. Glad I cleared that up.

Word. I also speculate that if I didn't score above a 170 I wouldn't have gotten a Butler.

[residentemma]

I also retook a mid170s score and without doing that I would not have received a Butler.

How can you possibly know this?

Softs aren't strong/ LSAT typically out of butler range.

So then you're speculating. Thanks. Glad I cleared that up.

Yeah a 173 got a Butler this year...

[Gary]

Lol. OP retake if you want. It's a minimal investment and Saturday mornings are usually spent hungover anyways. Indisputable that increased scores lead to more $$ and better chances so try your luck.

[selden]

.

[Theopliske8711]

I don't think a retake will hurt, but there are a lot of uncontrollable variables that come into play when aiming for such a jump. The margin of error is very small.

[lawschool22]

Hey 176 person, I have a question that (I don't think) you answered: when did you apply?

Also, another question: are you K-JD? Do you have any work experience?

I'm asking because I think if you don't get in that (1) applying really early next cycle and (2) perhaps taking a year off and getting work experience, would help your application way more than a potential-but-unlikely "jump" from 176->180.

[ShrimpToastMasters]

Hey 176 person, I have a question that you didn't answer: when did you apply?

Also, another question: are you K-JD? Do you have any work experience?

I'm asking because I think if you don't get in that (1) applying really early next cycle and (2) perhaps taking a year off and getting work experience, would help your application way more than a potential-but-unlikely "jump" from 176->180.

+1 on WE. If you are K-JD, WE will likely help way WAY more than the 180, in the event that you even got the 180. I also think that this advice, while true for all K-JDs and all schools, is even more accurate for HLS.

[Gary]

Hey 176 person, I have a question that (I don't think) you answered: when did you apply?

Also, another question: are you K-JD? Do you have any work experience?

I'm asking because I think if you don't get in that (1) applying really early next cycle and (2) perhaps taking a year off and getting work experience, would help your application way more than a potential-but-unlikely "jump" from 176->180.

+1

[Tela1283]

Do y'all think we're gonna get some js2's today? They usually start around 430 right

[The-Specs]

Also, in my JS1 my interviewer discussed my application from last year with me and it seemed that I got major points for applying twice because it showed I was committed to going to Harvard and that I was willing to work and improve for what I wanted.

It is possible that a retake may give you some small boost but I think just applying again next year (while doing something productive in the meantime) would give you a much bigger boost. But honestly, I predict that all of this will be moot, your GPA is good, your LSAT is great, you will most likely get in.

[ShrimpToastMasters]

I also retook a mid170s score and without doing that I would not have received a Butler.

How can you possibly know this?

Softs aren't strong/ LSAT typically out of butler range.

Yeah a 173 got a Butler this year...

As that 173, I +1 this message.

[Gary]

Yeah a 173 got a Butler this year...[/quote]

As that 173, I +1 this message.[/quote]

I apologize people . Is it better if I say this: my chances of getting a butler drastically increased with a retake.

[esrom55]

I apologize people . Is it better if I say this: my chances of getting a butler drastically increased with a retake.

No. The point here is that you have no idea if you would have gotten the Butler with your older score, so you can only speculate that you think it was due to your higher LSAT score. The reality is that you could have gotten the Butler even without the retake, and your higher score had no influence on your receiving the Butler.

[neprep]

I apologize people . Is it better if I say this: my chances of getting a butler drastically increased with a retake.

No. The point here is that you have no idea if you would have gotten the Butler with your older score, so you can only speculate that you think it was due to your higher LSAT score. The reality is that you could have gotten the Butler even without the retake, and your higher score had no influence on your receiving the Butler.

TL;DR Gar, everyone is giving you a massive compliment by saying that so amazing and Butler-deserving was your application that it rose above silly things like the LSAT.

[lawschool22]

I apologize people . Is it better if I say this: my chances of getting a butler drastically increased with a retake.

No. The point here is that you have no idea if you would have gotten the Butler with your older score, so you can only speculate that you think it was due to your higher LSAT score. The reality is that you could have gotten the Butler even without the retake, and your higher score had no influence on your receiving the Butler.

TL;DR Gar, everyone is giving you a massive compliment by saying that so amazing and Butler-deserving was your application that it rose above silly things like the LSAT.

+1

Yeah, we're getting sidetracked from the bigger issue which is that the other guy/gal should probably not retake the 176.

[Tela1283]

I'm so unproductive right now it's a joke. I feel like everyday is gonna be like this till I hear something haha

[Kobaine51]

No. The point here is that you have no idea if you would have gotten the Butler with your older score, so you can only speculate that you think it was due to your higher LSAT score. The reality is that you could have gotten the Butler even without the retake, and your higher score had no influence on your receiving the Butler.

I like the admonishment of speculation quickly succeeded by baseless speculation.

[barrelofmonkeys]

Yeah, we're getting sidetracked from the bigger issue which is that the other guy/gal should probably not retake the 176. WHERE ARE THE JS2s?!?

[Gary]

I apologize people . Is it better if I say this: my chances of getting a butler drastically increased with a retake.

No. The point here is that you have no idea if you would have gotten the Butler with your older score, so you can only speculate that you think it was due to your higher LSAT score. The reality is that you could have gotten the Butler even without the retake, and your higher score had no influence on your receiving the Butler.

Seriously? It's great that shrimp got a butler with a 173. Last year a non-URM tlser got into Harvard with a 165. If someone has a 165 they could potentially net Harvard, but I would say their chances increase with a retake to 175+. We can never be 100% sure that retaking helped. So if that's what you're trying to say then great.