Top Law Schools

delete

If you are a URM write it down on the application. The University will decide if it counts or not. Without, which seems to be the case, I'd say you have a shot at Berkley with the GPA. And if you are AA, you have a shot anywhere with a 3.9 and 168.

The law school predictor has you at 44% chance stanford, 64% Berkeley, 71% UCLA, 63% Penn, 52% UChicago

I'd say you have a pretty good shot at getting into at least 2 of those places.

I have a 3.97 and I'm taking the LSAT this june. While my goal is 170+, my PTs at right about the 168-170 level. I have 2 weeks left to prepare, so I'm hoping I can boost that at least a few points, but I'll be happy with anything that goes 170+

With that being said, Stanford and Berkeley seem to favor GPA more relative to other top schools, so I wouldn't be discouraged at all with your stats.

Are you from CA or just want to practice there? I'd say that you're a very good candidate for UCLA, and a good consider for Berkeley (make sure your PS and softs are in order). Stanford is a stretch, but if you really wow them, who knows? I think you could get a WL from stanford, and then who knows from there?

GL

dowon wrote:As it stands, what are my chances at:
1) Stanford
2) Berkeley
3) UCLA
4) UPenn
5) U of Chicago

I'd say WL at Penn and Chicago, probably in at UCLA but I didn't apply there and therefore didn't follow them, and Berkeley and Stanford are probably anyone's guess. Going to depend a lot more on your softs & theoretical URM status. (Which is it, if you don't mind me asking? Or which do you think it'd be?)

Have you considered any other schools in the T-14?

If URM, then you're in at all but Stanford. If not, you're likely out at all but UCLA and Berkeley. So you might wanna figure that out, chief.

What is your race/ethnicity?

i had your exact stats:

in at chicago
in at penn
in at ucla
waitlisted at berkeley (cross fingers!)
denied by stanford.

so, don't lose hope. i also walked the fine line where i am def in one of those diversity groups that is not considered a urm technically.

tintin wrote:i had your exact stats:

in at chicago
in at penn
in at ucla
waitlisted at berkeley (cross fingers!)
denied by stanford.

so, don't lose hope. i also walked the fine line where i am def in one of those diversity groups that is not considered a urm technically.

Well, I stand corrected. That's helpful info for the OP.

Still, you need to figure out if you're a URM or not.

deleted

I think you've got a strong chance for UCLA, good at Penn, OK at Chicago and Berkeley, Weak for Stanford.

If they take you as a URM, I'd say you're in at all of them.

dowon wrote:Thanks for everyone's feedback. It seems like admissions could go either way, but at least I have some hope. I have looked at other schools in the T14, but I am not sure how well I would fit there.

Actually, I am multi-racial. I am Asian and Native Hawaiian, which is not considered URM since Hawaiians are not recognized federally as an indigenous people. Because Hawaiians are not recognized and Asians are already over-represented in law schools, I am not sure how much my "diversity" can actually help me.

Asians/Pacific Islanders are not URMs. Write the diversity statement though, I'd imagine it can only help if you can show how you would contribute to a diverse learning environment.

I think native hawaiian will help you, asian won't. aren't native hawaiians kinda like native americans in the oppression / underrepresented aspects? that could def help if you present it the right way.

Has anyone asked the schools whether a Native Hawaiian, who self-identifies as such, can check the "Native American" box? I've seen this question asked before--in part because of the Akaka bill--but I don't think there is harm in asking the schools. It is a bit of a political hot potato, in which case they might just defer to your self-identification as a "native American."

Check what you have always checked when filling out the ethnicity question?

That being said, does one need a tribal card to check Native American?