Top Law Schools

Does anyone have evidence denying this claim? The more my cycle unfolds, the more I'm realizing it's predominantly LSAT based this cycle. Applications are up, schools are looking for above median numbers and holistic considerations are a fanciful myth. Who cares if you've proven that you'd be a tremendous addition to the legal profession, we need a few points over our median LSAT, Mr. professional.

It's a bit troubling to think my 7+ years of quantifiable acheivement in the real world is trumped by a fresh-out-of-undergrad applicant with an LSAT a few points higher (who didn't have to juggle working full time w/preparing) but that is exactly what the data is starting to prove.

Oh well - my presence on TLS might be extended until the fall as I may have to retake in June or Oct. Time to really prepare this time.

Speaking of which.... any advantage to taking June over Oct LSAT in terms of getting a possible advantage being the first app in the door w/score next cycle?

reasonabledoubt wrote:Does anyone have evidence denying this claim? The more my cycle unfolds, the more I'm realizing it's predominantly LSAT based this cycle. Applications are up, schools are looking for above median numbers and holistic considerations are a fanciful myth. Who cares if you've proven that you'd be a tremendous addition to the legal profession, we need a few points over our median LSAT, Mr. professional.

It's a bit troubling to think my 7+ years of quantifiable acheivement in the real world is trumped by a fresh-out-of-undergrad applicant with an LSAT a few points higher (who didn't have to juggle working full time w/preparing) but that is exactly what the data is starting to prove.

Oh well - my presense on TLS might be extended until the fall as I may have to retake in June or Oct. Time to really prepare this time.

Speaking of which.... any advantage to taking June over Oct LSAT in terms of getting a possible advantage being the first app in the door w/score next cycle?

Admission to Law School are always LSAT and GPA based... Work Experience is only ever a soft.

However it seems that work experience helps more in OCI once you get in to law school.

oops double posted

Nom Sawyer wrote:

reasonabledoubt wrote:Does anyone have evidence denying this claim? The more my cycle unfolds, the more I'm realizing it's predominantly LSAT based this cycle. Applications are up, schools are looking for above median numbers and holistic considerations are a fanciful myth. Who cares if you've proven that you'd be a tremendous addition to the legal profession, we need a few points over our median LSAT, Mr. professional.

It's a bit troubling to think my 7+ years of quantifiable acheivement in the real world is trumped by a fresh-out-of-undergrad applicant with an LSAT a few points higher (who didn't have to juggle working full time w/preparing) but that is exactly what the data is starting to prove.

Oh well - my presense on TLS might be extended until the fall as I may have to retake in June or Oct. Time to really prepare this time.

Speaking of which.... any advantage to taking June over Oct LSAT in terms of getting a possible advantage being the first app in the door w/score next cycle?

Admission to Law School are always LSAT and GPA based... Work Experience is only ever a soft.

However it seems that work experience helps more in OCI once you get in to law school.

I know, I know... I'm just here to say I think it's exceedingly fucked up. Impressive W/E should be more than a just a virtually meaningless "soft."

Your WE will help in the job search during LS if its actually "impressive" like you say it is.

Nom Sawyer wrote:

reasonabledoubt wrote:Does anyone have evidence denying this claim? The more my cycle unfolds, the more I'm realizing it's predominantly LSAT based this cycle. Applications are up, schools are looking for above median numbers and holistic considerations are a fanciful myth. Who cares if you've proven that you'd be a tremendous addition to the legal profession, we need a few points over our median LSAT, Mr. professional.

It's a bit troubling to think my 7+ years of quantifiable acheivement in the real world is trumped by a fresh-out-of-undergrad applicant with an LSAT a few points higher (who didn't have to juggle working full time w/preparing) but that is exactly what the data is starting to prove.

Oh well - my presense on TLS might be extended until the fall as I may have to retake in June or Oct. Time to really prepare this time.

Speaking of which.... any advantage to taking June over Oct LSAT in terms of getting a possible advantage being the first app in the door w/score next cycle?

Admission to Law School are always LSAT and GPA based... Work Experience is only ever a soft.

However it seems that work experience helps more in OCI once you get in to law school.

This.

And it won't change at top schools until they stop caring about USNWR ranking.

I think it really depends on what kind of work experience it is. The LSAT is meant to predict how well you should do in the first year of law school. I imagine that work experience really counts when they feel it is indicative of how you might fare in a law school environment. I've really outperformed my LSAT score this cycle, and the only factor that can explain it is work experience (not a URM or anything like that). The problem is that what kind of work prepares you for law school is much more subjective than the single number that is your LSAT score, hence it makes things much more unpredictable. Of course, I don't really know, but I think this explanation is plausible.

You know, there's a difference between work experience not mattering and it not mattering for you, right?

What are your numbers? Where did you apply? How much of a "boost" were you looking for?

i think WE has been helping my cycle personally. i went to a T2 undergrad and got into Harvard with non auto-admit stats. could have also been engineering background though.

I think that with the considerable rise in applications, schools resort more to the numbers game than they usually would. However, I wouldn't say that holistic admissions is a total myth. I have a 165/3.7 and was flat out rejected from George Washington but put on reserve at Cornell. I can't explain why Cornell didn't also flat out reject me, unless they were paying attention to things other than my LSAT score.

I understand your frustration however in LSAT we're all equal, and that's why I believe it should carry the weight that it does.

englawyer wrote:i think WE has been helping my cycle personally. i went to a T2 undergrad and got into Harvard with non auto-admit stats. could have also been engineering background though.

Or it could have been 173/3.9.

Work experience never mattered anywhere but Northwestern. Top-B-Schools.com is that way ->

Desert Fox wrote:

englawyer wrote:i think WE has been helping my cycle personally. i went to a T2 undergrad and got into Harvard with non auto-admit stats. could have also been engineering background though.

Or it could have been 173/3.9.

nah... 173/3.9 was only a 80% shot last cycle.. I highly doubt those numbers were the main factor

Nom Sawyer wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

englawyer wrote:i think WE has been helping my cycle personally. i went to a T2 undergrad and got into Harvard with non auto-admit stats. could have also been engineering background though.

Or it could have been 173/3.9.

nah... 173/3.9 was only a 80% shot last cycle.. I highly doubt those numbers were the main factor

there are a few 173/3.9 hanging out on these forums w/o a Harvard admit. maggiebrie and voidsix come to mind.

I admit I was on solid ground to begin with but I think that those numbers alone will not carry an application there.

englawyer wrote:

Nom Sawyer wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

englawyer wrote:i think WE has been helping my cycle personally. i went to a T2 undergrad and got into Harvard with non auto-admit stats. could have also been engineering background though.

Or it could have been 173/3.9.

nah... 173/3.9 was only a 80% shot last cycle.. I highly doubt those numbers were the main factor

there are a few 173/3.9 hanging out on these forums w/o a Harvard admit. maggiebrie and voidsix come to mind.

I admit I was on solid ground to begin with but I think that those numbers alone will not carry an application there.

But you also have no reason to think it was your W/E.

It could be engineering (3.9 is amazing unless you went to a TTT engineering school, and even there its good), it could have been your PS, it could have a LOR.

deleted

Desert Fox wrote:Work experience never mattered anywhere but Northwestern. Top-B-Schools.com is that way ->

This...WE is just a soft and can distinguish between 2 ppl with the same numbers, but you have to first have the numbers to even have the WE soft considered...

If u applied to b-schools, WE would be the most important factor, followed by gmat then grades.

amputatedbrain wrote:I think it really depends on what kind of work experience it is. The LSAT is meant to predict how well you should do in the first year of law school. I imagine that work experience really counts when they feel it is indicative of how you might fare in a law school environment. I've really outperformed my LSAT score this cycle, and the only factor that can explain it is work experience (not a URM or anything like that). The problem is that what kind of work prepares you for law school is much more subjective than the single number that is your LSAT score, hence it makes things much more unpredictable. Of course, I don't really know, but I think this explanation is plausible.

+1
this has been my experience this cycle too. outperforming my numbers. i also wrote the hell out of my applications.

reasonabledoubt wrote:It's a bit troubling to think my 7+ years of quantifiable acheivement in the real world is trumped by a fresh-out-of-undergrad applicant with an LSAT a few points higher (who didn't have to juggle working full time w/preparing) but that is exactly what the data is starting to prove.

LOL if you ever though 7+ years of WE could overcome a few LSAT points. I would be surprised if it even counted for 1 LSAT point. Basically it's a tie-breaker between you and the undergrad with the same LSAT.

I don't agree with OP at all. I've gotten into some great schools and I'm pretty confident it's related to my extensive pizza delivery experience.

No different last cycle fwiw. Where WE does help some in admissions is gpa forgiveness, especially if its from a while back. You will see a blip here or there of that 3.2er getting into that t18 that took no one else that low, and frequently that's a non-trad with good we (or military). But still, have to be above/at median lsat.

An oci bump would be huge tho

Um, Northwestern?

In general WE tends to count more for GPA forgiveness than LSAT forgiveness. Largely because WE and the former both measure work ethic, and the latter measures who well the person reasons under time pressure.

It can be frustrating, I have 6 years of WE, and am in a similar situation. But, if you throw enough darts at the board, you're gonna hit something. I have gotten into schools I thought I had no shot at. Had to be my W/E.

rayiner wrote:Um, Northwestern?

In general WE tends to count more for GPA forgiveness than LSAT forgiveness. Largely because WE and the former both measure work ethic, and the latter measures who well the person reasons under time pressure.

A much better measure of how someone reasons under pressure can be derived from judging that person's significant work experience, if it exists.