Interesting, 155/3.9 - opinions appreciated Forum

[nygrrrl]

I will say with 99.9% certainty that Fordham, 'Dozo, NW, NYU and UConn are out.
That LSAT score - much though you don't want to hear this - is going to kill you. The reason I think most people are suggesting a retake is that with that GPA, even 7 more points would change everything.
What makes you diverse, if I may ask?

[matt690]

Is it worth applying to any of those reach schools - Ford, Cardoz, NYU, NW, Cornell

Can I write a diversity statement about family financial hardships, working and tutoring, learning to save, and how my exposure to seeing family first and trying their best although struggling exposed me and made me a more well-rounded individual?

[kalvano]

You can write all the statements you want, but in the end you're a 3.9 with a sub-par LSAT.

[law4vus]

Is it worth applying to any of those reach schools - Ford, Cardoz, NYU, NW, Cornell

Can I write a diversity statement about family financial hardships, working and tutoring, learning to save, and how my exposure to seeing family first and trying their best although struggling exposed me and made me a more well-rounded individual?

It won't help you outperform your numbers. Again, it's unfortunate but the nature of LS admissions. None of those schools are going to accept you, except maybe Cardozo which isn't worth the cost.

Everyone that is telling you to retake is telling you that because they don't want to see you make a bad decision that will result in a lot of debt with poor job prospects. If you don't want to listen, you have all the freedom to do so. Just plug your numbers into LSN and make your own conclusions. Nothing anyone can tell you here about your chances will be different than what you see on LSN because LS admissions is ALL about your LSAT and GPA.

You have a great GPA and a bad LSAT. If you're so hell-bent on going to school, ANY school, this year, then do it. Just don't expect people on here to tell you what you want to hear because in the end, you're not making a good decision and we will tell you as much.

[tennisking88]

Did you do poorly on the SAT? If so, write an addendum telling them your SAT score and saying you are terrible at standardized testing but your GPA proves that you are a good student.

Edit: some schools that come to mind (WUSTL, Wisconsin) will sometimes pull off high GPA's off of the WL. The problem is that OP's 155 is a really, really low score and could lower the schools 25%, if any of them care about it.

[094320]

..

[Philosopher King]

Did you do poorly on the SAT? If so, write an addendum telling them your SAT score and saying you are terrible at standardized testing but your GPA proves that you are a good student.

How do you know he took the SAT (or the ACT), much less did poorly. This is what is known in logic as a complex question fallacy.

[tennisking88]

Did you do poorly on the SAT? If so, write an addendum telling them your SAT score and saying you are terrible at standardized testing but your GPA proves that you are a good student.

How do you know he took the SAT (or the ACT), much less did poorly. This is what is known in logic as a complex question fallacy.

This is what is known on "earth" as an unnecessarily dickish response. No, I don't know if he took the SAT/ACT, that's why I asked. Sometimes schools will accept addenda for poor standardized test taking, and sometimes schools (BC comes to mind) will explicitly ask you what you got on your SAT. Some schools may have an adcomm who will be sympathetic to a lower LSAT score because he or she did as well or knows students who did really well regardless. Dick.

[nygrrrl]

Is it worth applying to any of those reach schools - Ford, Cardoz, NYU, NW, Cornell

Can I write a diversity statement about family financial hardships, working and tutoring, learning to save, and how my exposure to seeing family first and trying their best although struggling exposed me and made me a more well-rounded individual?

I mean it depends how much your money is worth to you. You could throw an app at Columbia, too, though we know you won't make it. There's always a 0.00_% chance, just depends if that's worth $100 to you.
I don't know anything about Ford or Cardozo, but unless there's something spectacular about you that you've left out(like did you win the olympics or anything), you will probably not be getting into NYU, NW, or Cornell and I personally would not spend the money on the apps with those odds.

Yeah, I posted above but Fordham won't take that LSAT and I doubt Dozo would, either.

[Philosopher King]

Did you do poorly on the SAT? If so, write an addendum telling them your SAT score and saying you are terrible at standardized testing but your GPA proves that you are a good student.

How do you know he took the SAT (or the ACT), much less did poorly. This is what is known in logic as a complex question fallacy.

This is what is known on "earth" as an unnecessarily dickish response. No, I don't know if he took the SAT/ACT, that's why I asked. Sometimes schools will accept addenda for poor standardized test taking, and sometimes schools (BC comes to mind) will explicitly ask you what you got on your SAT. Some schools may have an adcomm who will be sympathetic to a lower LSAT score because he or she did as well or knows students who did really well regardless. Dick.

You asked if he did poorly, not if he took it in the first place. So you committed the complex question fallacy. But if the other stuff you say is right about a poor SAT score being helpful then I wish that I took the SATs. I kind of had this same idea in my mind but I thought it was just me. It makes sense that a low SAT would be good for an addendum arguing that the low LSAT should be de-emphasized but that's precisely why I though maybe I was wrong--because it makes sense and the law school admissions process doesn't make sense. So you and I agree where it matters.

[matt690]

Tennisking,

Thanks so much.

For the lsat, my score landed me around 65 percentile. I had a similar situation on the sat, with a score that landed me in a very similar percentile.

Should I write this and offer to send in my scores?

Thanks so much everyone!

[No13baby]

It probably won't hurt to write an addendum explaining that you did poorly on your SATs as well, but don't expect it to work miracles. I agree with other posters to check on LSN to see where you have a realistic shot with your numbers.

The problem you're seeing with lawschoolpredictor.com is that, for most of the schools you listed, you're way below the average LSAT and way above the average GPA, and the site is averaging these results and telling you that you have a decent chance. If you really need a place to start, look at schools where your LSAT is at about the 25th percentile - they'll likely bite with your high GPA.

Please, please, please study and retake, though. Taking a year off to work between now and next cycle can only help you, and if you can get into the 160s your options will be so much better. I would sell one of my kidneys for your GPA. You're doing yourself a disservice by settling for that score.

[law4vus]

Please, please, please study and retake, though. Taking a year off to work between now and next cycle can only help you, and if you can get into the 160s your options will be so much better. I would sell one of my kidneys for your GPA. You're doing yourself a disservice by settling for that score.

Dude's made up his mind. I don't know why ANYONE would be that obsessed about going to law school, but more power to him lol

[tennisking88]

Tennisking,

Thanks so much.

For the lsat, my score landed me around 65 percentile. I had a similar situation on the sat, with a score that landed me in a very similar percentile.

Should I write this and offer to send in my scores?

Thanks so much everyone!

Yeah, like the poster above said, don't expect miracles. But it's clearly (hopefully) the weakest part of your application, and if you explain every reason why there is a huge discrepancy between your really good GPA and your poor LSAT score, it can only help.

[sgoingIP]

I have asked this exact question to two separate admission people at two different schools who say never claim you are bad at standardize test outside of having some medical excuse that gives you more time.

Why - at the end of law school, you have to take the hardest standardize test of them all - the BAR.

But at this point, it seems you are just throwing s**t at the wall to see what sticks.

As for retaking, I would only consider that if you haven't taken a lsat class. If you have - so be it.

[Flips88]

California Berkley (reach, maybe can get in, state tuition possible but tough)

This was a gem right here

[auntjulia]

Chances threads like this make me sick with pity.

OP, retaking, as you are being advised, is the best option for you.

The other posters here are giving you that advice because the thought of what your life will be like trying to pay back Cardozo at sticker is brutal. You seem like a nice hardworking person, no one wants you to suffer the fate you likely will if you go through with this.

You mention that your parents weren't well off. You are all but assuring yourself the same fate. Possibly worse.

I don't get how you can even consider law school given your current position. I have a 169/3.8 and parents who can help me out financially and I'm extremely anxious about my potential for financial solvency after law school, even with my options.

I don't think I can look at another one of these chances threads because seeing people deliberate and talk themselves into decisions that could likely ruin their lives is tragic and depressing.

OP, LISTEN


edit: BTW, the reason no one will answer your question straight up is because what you're asking is akin to a question like: "should I develop a crack addiction or a heroin addiction?"

That's an extreme example but understand, people will be unwilling to advise you to make an extremely poor decision just because you insist they choose from among several options. And that's because those aren't the only options.

[Philosopher King]

I don't think I can look at another one of these chances threads because seeing people deliberate and talk themselves into decisions that could likely ruin their lives is tragic and depressing.
OP, LISTEN

What's tragic is the LSAT's very existence. LSAC people should get life in prison for the lives they have ruined.

[thederangedwang]

I don't think I can look at another one of these chances threads because seeing people deliberate and talk themselves into decisions that could likely ruin their lives is tragic and depressing.
OP, LISTEN

What's tragic is the LSAT's very existence. LSAC people should get life in prison for the lives they have ruined.

Yeah, this act is getting old. You are going to get progressively douchier and douchier responses if you keep this up.

[Philosopher King]

I don't think I can look at another one of these chances threads because seeing people deliberate and talk themselves into decisions that could likely ruin their lives is tragic and depressing.
OP, LISTEN

What's tragic is the LSAT's very existence. LSAC people should get life in prison for the lives they have ruined.

Yeah, this act is getting old. You are going to get progressively douchier and douchier responses if you keep this up.

No I think you take the top prize for such responses...

[thederangedwang]

I don't think I can look at another one of these chances threads because seeing people deliberate and talk themselves into decisions that could likely ruin their lives is tragic and depressing.
OP, LISTEN

What's tragic is the LSAT's very existence. LSAC people should get life in prison for the lives they have ruined.

Yeah, this act is getting old. You are going to get progressively douchier and douchier responses if you keep this up.

No I think you take the top prize for such responses...

Reading comp fail.

[bhan87]

edit: BTW, the reason no one will answer your question straight up is because what you're asking is akin to a question like: "should I develop a crack addiction or a heroin addiction?"

That's an extreme example but understand, people will be unwilling to advise you to make an extremely poor decision just because you insist they choose from among several options. And that's because those aren't the only options.

Extreme? I think not. That example seems spot on.

Another example: Should you bet $250,000 on 12 or 15 at a roulette table?

[law4vus]

Guys, why are you being so mean?

OP is a special snowflake that's going to do well no matter what, wherever he goes. No matter the hundreds of T14 grads each year that can't find work. He's so super special that he'll go to a TTT in New York and beat out several Columbia and NYU grads for jobs.

[snehpets]

I don't think I can look at another one of these chances threads because seeing people deliberate and talk themselves into decisions that could likely ruin their lives is tragic and depressing.
OP, LISTEN

What's tragic is the LSAT's very existence. LSAC people should get life in prison for the lives they have ruined.

How besides something like the LSAT do you expect schools to assess thousands of applications when the difficulty of obtaining a high GPA differs so widely between schools and majors, people's 'softs' are often related to family connections rather than skill, etc.? What is your alternative suggestion? I see you posting stuff about the unfairness of the LSAT frequently, so surely you have something else in mind.

[Philosopher King]

I don't think I can look at another one of these chances threads because seeing people deliberate and talk themselves into decisions that could likely ruin their lives is tragic and depressing.
OP, LISTEN

What's tragic is the LSAT's very existence. LSAC people should get life in prison for the lives they have ruined.

How besides something like the LSAT do you expect schools to assess thousands of applications when the difficulty of obtaining a high GPA differs so widely between schools and majors, people's 'softs' are often related to family connections rather than skill, etc.? What is your alternative suggestion? I see you posting stuff about the unfairness of the LSAT frequently, so surely you have something else in mind.

Yeah, a more holistic approach and the use of the type of reasoning skills that they want their students to have. They should see a cumulative 4.0 GPA with a double major in philosophy and political science as conclusive evidence that I have the skills the LSAT tests for. Just take one sample class out: Logic. I got a 96% in that class (which is an A of course). That included dozens of hours of lecture, dozens of hours of studying, three tests, and one cumulative final exam. The professor was a good teacher and there was no way I could have gotten the grades I did without being good at logic. Does not that say more about my logic abilities than 35 minutes of filling in bubbles on the LSAT LR section while having to pee really really bad?