3.7/158 History Major Forum

[irenic]

Agreed, which is why I find it frustrating to see people taking advice from some at TLS who assume everybody and their dog can get a 170.

That's not why people say "retake" and that's not why people say "170+ or bust" or that sort of thing. The perception isn't that everyone can get a 165 or a 170, but that if you can't, you really need to reexamine your career plans. A law degree is ridiculously expensive to obtain, law itself is a merciless career path, and the over-saturation in the job market is a very real problem that people in the T14 are facing (including T14 people on this site, sadly). How do you think someone will fare in a TTT when T14 people can't even get jobs?

The best thing TLS ever did for me was help convince me not to go to law school. It's not rude. It's not overly pessimistic. It's a reality check that breaks down this idea of everyone being a "special snowflake." They'll take your money. They'll print you a degree. Does that mean you're going to find a job or be successful or not drown in debt? Hell no.

I don't disagree with your assessment of the legal job market right now, but I think some at TLS decide not to look at how shitty the job market is in general. FWIW, there are plenty of public schools whose tuition is fairly low. Sure, taking out $150,000 in loans for a T2 or TTT private school is a bad idea. However, if you have the opportunity to go to law school taking out minimal loans (<$50,000) and it is the profession you vehemently want to do as your career, then I don't see how you can argue against that pursuit.

[cortnf]

I don't disagree with your assessment of the legal job market right now, but I think some at TLS decide not to look at how shitty the job market is in general. FWIW, there are plenty of public schools whose tuition is fairly low. Sure, taking out $150,000 in loans for a T2 or TTT private school is a bad idea. However, if you have the opportunity to go to law school taking out minimal loans (<$50,000) and it is the profession you vehemently want to do as your career, then I don't see how you can argue against that pursuit.

You argue against it by saying good luck ever finding a job without being in the top 10% of your class. Doing something besides law >>>>> 50k in debt and no law-related job

[Fast_Fingers]

If you didn't take an LSAT prep course to get your score, I'd recommend retaking. Having a $1000 +50 day investment result in potential scholarships may be a better route. In the meantime, you can try law clerking or something relevant to your field.

In my experience, UCLA (heck, most California schools except for Davis) and UT Austin are sticklers for numbers. They didn't like me for my GPA, but I don't know if they'll like you for your LSAT.

[DukeCornell]

Retake. You can get some good scholarship money at T2s if you raise your LSAT 5 points or so.

He would likely get into several T1s with a 3.7/163. Why bother w/ the T2s at that point?

To be fair, 99% of TLS would be telling him to retake even with a 163 167 to aim for T14.

This is soooooo true!

[Birdlaw]

Don't ask TLS what your chances are if your LSAT score is below a 169.
158 = retake. 1st retake = 164 = retake. 2nd retake = 169 = retake. 3rd retake = 174 = apply to T14 and go to the highest ranked one.

I had similar numbers as you: 3.83/159 after the June LSAT. I retook it because I was scoring higher than that on practice tests and didn't really feel comfortable on the exam. In October I got a 163. I'm not retaking it in December because at best I would only maybe score one or two points higher and at worst score one or two points lower.

Retake it if you really think you can do better, if not you are probably to most of your schools minus Notre Dame. 158's not a bad score, going somewhere regional and getting a 3.7 would be better than going to a t-14 and getting a 2.3.

[IamAskier]

Don't ask TLS what your chances are if your LSAT score is below a 169.
158 = retake. 1st retake = 164 = retake. 2nd retake = 169 = retake. 3rd retake = 174 = apply to T14 and go to the highest ranked one.

I had similar numbers as you: 3.83/159 after the June LSAT. I retook it because I was scoring higher than that on practice tests and didn't really feel comfortable on the exam. In October I got a 163. I'm not retaking it in December because at best I would only maybe score one or two points higher and at worst score one or two points lower.

Retake it if you really think you can do better, if not you are probably to most of your schools minus Notre Dame. 158's not a bad score, going somewhere regional and getting a 3.7 would be better than going to a t-14 and getting a 2.3.

Agreed, my thoughts exactly. Even if I managed to raise my score into the 160 range (which I know is possible), I feel there is still no guarantee on getting into a T-14. I'm happy staying regional, so my rational is "why bother". I guess scholarship money would be nice, but the in-state tuition at Utah is reasonable. I would accrue more debt retaking, squeaking by admissions into a T-14, and paying the FULL 40-50k a year plus living expenses, with the big salary, post-graduation job only slightly more attainable than if I had just attended regionally.

[whymeohgodno]

Don't ask TLS what your chances are if your LSAT score is below a 169.
158 = retake. 1st retake = 164 = retake. 2nd retake = 169 = retake. 3rd retake = 174 = apply to T14 and go to the highest ranked one.

I had similar numbers as you: 3.83/159 after the June LSAT. I retook it because I was scoring higher than that on practice tests and didn't really feel comfortable on the exam. In October I got a 163. I'm not retaking it in December because at best I would only maybe score one or two points higher and at worst score one or two points lower.

Retake it if you really think you can do better, if not you are probably to most of your schools minus Notre Dame. 158's not a bad score, going somewhere regional and getting a 3.7 would be better than going to a t-14 and getting a 2.3.

Agreed, my thoughts exactly. Even if I managed to raise my score into the 160 range (which I know is possible), I feel there is still no guarantee on getting into a T-14. I'm happy staying regional, so my rational is "why bother". I guess scholarship money would be nice, but the in-state tuition at Utah is reasonable. I would accrue more debt retaking, squeaking by admissions into a T-14, and paying the FULL 40-50k a year plus living expenses, with the big salary, post-graduation job only slightly more attainable than if I had just attended regionally.

No

[JazzOne]

Don't ask TLS what your chances are if your LSAT score is below a 169.
158 = retake. 1st retake = 164 = retake. 2nd retake = 169 = retake. 3rd retake = 174 = apply to T14 and go to the highest ranked one.

I had similar numbers as you: 3.83/159 after the June LSAT. I retook it because I was scoring higher than that on practice tests and didn't really feel comfortable on the exam. In October I got a 163. I'm not retaking it in December because at best I would only maybe score one or two points higher and at worst score one or two points lower.

Retake it if you really think you can do better, if not you are probably to most of your schools minus Notre Dame. 158's not a bad score, going somewhere regional and getting a 3.7 would be better than going to a t-14 and getting a 2.3.

Agreed, my thoughts exactly. Even if I managed to raise my score into the 160 range (which I know is possible), I feel there is still no guarantee on getting into a T-14. I'm happy staying regional, so my rational is "why bother". I guess scholarship money would be nice, but the in-state tuition at Utah is reasonable. I would accrue more debt retaking, squeaking by admissions into a T-14, and paying the FULL 40-50k a year plus living expenses, with the big salary, post-graduation job only slightly more attainable than if I had just attended regionally.

No

[cortnf]

Don't ask TLS what your chances are if your LSAT score is below a 169.
158 = retake. 1st retake = 164 = retake. 2nd retake = 169 = retake. 3rd retake = 174 = apply to T14 and go to the highest ranked one.

I had similar numbers as you: 3.83/159 after the June LSAT. I retook it because I was scoring higher than that on practice tests and didn't really feel comfortable on the exam. In October I got a 163. I'm not retaking it in December because at best I would only maybe score one or two points higher and at worst score one or two points lower.

Retake it if you really think you can do better, if not you are probably to most of your schools minus Notre Dame. 158's not a bad score, going somewhere regional and getting a 3.7 would be better than going to a t-14 and getting a 2.3.

Agreed, my thoughts exactly. Even if I managed to raise my score into the 160 range (which I know is possible), I feel there is still no guarantee on getting into a T-14. I'm happy staying regional, so my rational is "why bother". I guess scholarship money would be nice, but the in-state tuition at Utah is reasonable. I would accrue more debt retaking, squeaking by admissions into a T-14, and paying the FULL 40-50k a year plus living expenses, with the big salary, post-graduation job only slightly more attainable than if I had just attended regionally.

No

[Birdlaw]

Everyone is saying NO to that debt notion, but doesn't placement within your school matter for how much money you can make?

Example:
What would be better situation to make more money from?
Finishing in the top 5% from Utah (Regional School) - exit with relatively little debt
Finishing in the bottom 33% from Georgetown (T14) - you can't afford buy a VCR

I'm not saying that this poster would do this differently, but obviously the competition at a T14 would be intense.

What situation would you rather be in?
Finishing the bottom 33% in GTown would be nearly impossible to compete with everyone in DC that did better than you.
This can be said of almost any T14 school because of the cities they are located in. Exceptions of Yale and Harvard.
Finishing in the top of a regionally powerful school would almost ensure some type of job in Utah.

But, what do I know? I'm not in law school. Maybe the name brand is all that matters.

[whymeohgodno]

Everyone is saying NO to that debt notion, but doesn't placement within your school matter for how much money you can make?

Example:
What would be better situation to make more money from?
Finishing in the top 5% from Utah (Regional School) - exit with relatively little debt
Finishing in the bottom 33% from Georgetown (T14) - you can't afford buy a VCR

I'm not saying that this poster would do this differently, but obviously the competition at a T14 would be intense.

What situation would you rather be in?
Finishing the bottom 33% in GTown would be nearly impossible to compete with everyone in DC that did better than you.
This can be said of almost any T14 school because of the cities they are located in. Exceptions of Yale and Harvard.
Finishing in the top of a regionally powerful school would almost ensure some type of job in Utah.

But, what do I know? I'm not in law school. Maybe the name brand is all that matters.

Going to ANY school expecting to finish in the top 5% is dumb.

[JazzOne]

Everyone is saying NO to that debt notion, but doesn't placement within your school matter for how much money you can make?

Example:
What would be better situation to make more money from?
Finishing in the top 5% from Utah (Regional School) - exit with relatively little debt
Finishing in the bottom 33% from Georgetown (T14) - you can't afford buy a VCR

I'm not saying that this poster would do this differently, but obviously the competition at a T14 would be intense.

What situation would you rather be in?
Finishing the bottom 33% in GTown would be nearly impossible to compete with everyone in DC that did better than you.
This can be said of almost any T14 school because of the cities they are located in. Exceptions of Yale and Harvard.
Finishing in the top of a regionally powerful school would almost ensure some type of job in Utah.

But, what do I know? I'm not in law school. Maybe the name brand is all that matters.

Going to ANY school expecting to finish in the top 5% is dumb.

+1

No one really knows how he will do in law school, so it's best to assume median if you're going to contemplate hypotheticals. There are many externalities that affect law school grades, so it is fallacious to think that hard work is sufficient for top grades.

[beach_terror]

Retake. You can get some good scholarship money at T2s if you raise your LSAT 5 points or so.

He would likely get into several T1s with a 3.7/163. Why bother w/ the T2s at that point?

Because the difference between T2s and T1s is basically non-existent, outside of biglaw placement for some of T30 - especially ITE.

[TommyK]

OP - In response "what else is a history major to do?"

Please don't go to law school if you feel like this is the only option for you. It's tough to find a job ITE, but if you hustle and network, it's doable for a fresh grad with ambition and good communication skills. For the vast majority of people, the major really doesn't matter as much as people think it does. If you had a marketing major, your job search would not be considerably easier - it just means that you probably would have had an internship and experience attempting to network.

I don't want to be part of the mindless chorus of "Don't go to law school", but... seriously, don't go to law school if you're not sure you want to go.

[FunkyJD]

If law school doesn't work out this cycle I'll probably take the year and reevaluate. My goal, with or without a JD, is hopefully a government or public interest job, preferably in the environmental/natural resource spheres. The intense schedule and work load of the private sector is by no means a deal-breaker, and given the potentially high grade salary I think I might eventually go that route.

I'm not opposed to retaking, I just hate standardized testing. Right now I'm just hoping that 158 doesn't keep me out of ALL my top choices.

Have you considered policy school? GRE is a joke. With your GPA and a good GRE, you'd be in the running for some serious cash from a MPP program. Given your specific interests, check out the graduate policy programs at Stanford and Duke.

[Spinozist21]

Agreed, which is why I find it frustrating to see people taking advice from some at TLS who assume everybody and their dog can get a 170.

That's not why people say "retake" and that's not why people say "170+ or bust" or that sort of thing. The perception isn't that everyone can get a 165 or a 170, but that if you can't, you really need to reexamine your career plans. A law degree is ridiculously expensive to obtain, law itself is a merciless career path, and the over-saturation in the job market is a very real problem that people in the T14 are facing (including T14 people on this site, sadly). How do you think someone will fare in a TTT when T14 people can't even get jobs?

The best thing TLS ever did for me was help convince me not to go to law school. It's not rude. It's not overly pessimistic. It's a reality check that breaks down this idea of everyone being a "special snowflake." They'll take your money. They'll print you a degree. Does that mean you're going to find a job or be successful or not drown in debt? Hell no.

I didn't know that you weren't in law school.

Interesting.

Anyways, yes you are correct about over-saturation etc...but that doesn't mean that no one can find a top from a T2.

[Grizz]

Retake. You can get some good scholarship money at T2s if you raise your LSAT 5 points or so.

He would likely get into several T1s with a 3.7/163. Why bother w/ the T2s at that point?

Because the difference between T2s and T1s is basically non-existent, outside of biglaw placement for some of T30 - especially ITE.

This.

[FuManChusco]

So far I've read the following ridiculous comments in this thread.

OP could finish top 5% just because its a regional lower ranked school. That doesn't mean it's full of dunces.

Job prospects are only slightly higher at T14. Seriously?

OP could slide into a T14 with a 3.7/163. You can't honestly think that.

/rant.

[Seally]

Definitely, retaking is a possibility if I don't get in where I want. Scholarship money aside though, I'm just more curious about whether or not with my current numbers I'll get accepted.

Trust me, with your numbers, i should just re-take LSAT and do everything for a Scholarship, you will realize it was a good idea when you'll your friends struggling to pay these loans back.

[IamAskier]

Thanks all, you've given me much to ponder.

As for the "don't go to law school" advice, while a MPP may seem like the better option, I like the broad spectrum the JD degree offers, and the environmental/natural resource policy route is just one I'm currently considering. Truth is, I'm still not entirely sure what my ultimate plan is, I just know that it involves a legal education.

Maybe TLS will completely disagree, but looking back in ten years I am confident that having received a JD will at least not have been a bad thing, and I'll hopefully be in a better position job prospects-wise than if I hadn't. Is that not why many of us are expending some much time, effort, money, frustration, etc. trying to get into these places?

[Grizz]

Thanks all, you've given me much to ponder.

As for the "don't go to law school" advice, while a MPP may seem like the better option, I like the broad spectrum the JD degree offers, and the environmental/natural resource policy route is just one I'm currently considering. Truth is, I'm still not entirely sure what my ultimate plan is, I just know that it involves a legal education.

Maybe TLS will completely disagree, but looking back in ten years I am confident that having received a JD will at least not have been a bad thing, and I'll hopefully be in a better position job prospects-wise than if I hadn't. Is that not why many of us are expending some much time, effort, money, frustration, etc. trying to get into these places?

If you're not 100% sure you want to be a lawyer, do NOT go to law school. It is NOT a versatile degree, no matter what laypeople say.

[TommyK]

And looking back, you may realize that getting a Master of Science in Organic Chemistry will not be a bad thing. Our advice would likely be the same if you're not sure you want to be a chemist or an academic - don't drop $100k on a degree you're not sure you're going to use.

Just because J.D. may not be a horrible thing to get doesn't mean it's worth the three years and cost of a house. You're clearly looking for an opinion to reaffirm what you've already decided to do.

[IamAskier]

I agree, I guess I already have made up my mind, and this thread seems to have gone a little off topic. The original question was regarding my chances; I guess discussing the rational behind obtaining a law degree hijacked it a bit.

[Grizz]

I agree, I guess I already have made up my mind, and this thread seems to have gone a little off topic. The original question was regarding my chances; I guess discussing the rational behind obtaining a law degree hijacked it a bit.

It's a valid hijack.

[TommyK]

I agree, I guess I already have made up my mind, and this thread seems to have gone a little off topic. The original question was regarding my chances; I guess discussing the rational behind obtaining a law degree hijacked it a bit.

It's a valid hijack.

Agreed. It's like somebody asking, "What's my chance of crossing this huge canyon with my motorcycle?" and then people saying, "uhhh... maybe you should not try?"* Not sure it's not so much hijacking so much as questioning an underlying premise. But good luck on the whole life-altering decision made without significant consideration thing!


*I love bad metaphors.