168, 3.7 Nice Softs Forum
- Kswizzie

- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm
168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Okay so I got 168 on the LSAT and a 3.7 from a solid state school. I doubt that a retake would be worth it as I studied quite a bit and my final score was one less the my best prep test...
As for the softs
Foreign Immigrant
Fluent in Polish and Russian
3 years in the AF reserve
Two summer internships (non-law related)
Writing a senior honors thesis
Political Science Major, Double Minor in Russian and History
Probably some solid Recs
Want to be an Air Force JAG
And My Schools: Safeties: Illinois (IL Resident), USC, Notre Dame Targets: Cornell, Vandy, GTown, Reaches: Duke, UVA, Michigan (ED?)
As for the softs
Foreign Immigrant
Fluent in Polish and Russian
3 years in the AF reserve
Two summer internships (non-law related)
Writing a senior honors thesis
Political Science Major, Double Minor in Russian and History
Probably some solid Recs
Want to be an Air Force JAG
And My Schools: Safeties: Illinois (IL Resident), USC, Notre Dame Targets: Cornell, Vandy, GTown, Reaches: Duke, UVA, Michigan (ED?)
- vespertiliovir

- Posts: 327
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:52 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
I would guess you'll be WLed at all your reaches, and maybe even a few of your targets. LSN makes it seem like you're right on the cusp for ranks 17-13 or so: http://tinyurl.com/27ufosz
However, it looks like you should get at least one of those targets (just hard to guess which), so best of luck!!
However, it looks like you should get at least one of those targets (just hard to guess which), so best of luck!!
- romothesavior

- Posts: 14692
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Predictions:
Illinois- In w/ $$$
USC- In w/ $$
ND- In w/ $$
Cornell- In (maybe a little $)
Vandy- In w/$$
Gtown- WL
Duke- WL, prob out
UVA- WL, out
Michigan- I think either WL or maybe even in
FWIW, I was a 168/3.75 and I am also an Illinois resident. Results at schools you are applying to:
Illinois- Full ride
Cornell- In, no money
Vandy- In w/ 60k
Gtown- WL
Duke- Rejected
Michigan (ED)- Deferred to RD and WL'd
Illinois- In w/ $$$
USC- In w/ $$
ND- In w/ $$
Cornell- In (maybe a little $)
Vandy- In w/$$
Gtown- WL
Duke- WL, prob out
UVA- WL, out
Michigan- I think either WL or maybe even in
FWIW, I was a 168/3.75 and I am also an Illinois resident. Results at schools you are applying to:
Illinois- Full ride
Cornell- In, no money
Vandy- In w/ 60k
Gtown- WL
Duke- Rejected
Michigan (ED)- Deferred to RD and WL'd
- im_blue

- Posts: 3272
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 3:53 am
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Safeties: Illinois (IL Resident), USC, Notre Dame
Targets: Cornell, Vandy
Reaches: GTown, Duke, UVA, Michigan
Targets: Cornell, Vandy
Reaches: GTown, Duke, UVA, Michigan
- senunit

- Posts: 61
- Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:19 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Lsn is great for your purposes. Try lawschoolpredictor. com for some legit stats. The new programs been updated based on rankings and other credentials so you should be able to get a ball park estimate there. Good luck!
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Kswizzie

- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
So I took a good look at LSP and with an ED at NYU it gives me a "consider". Is it joking? Is consider the same as deny? or do I actually have a shot?
-
paralegal

- Posts: 163
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:04 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
If you look at the acceptances (green spots) on the 2009-2010 graph for NYU on LSN, you'll see that there were admits with 168 LSATs; but they had 3.9 GPAs. And most of those acceptances applied ED even with a 3.9 GPA.....
- Dr. Strangelove

- Posts: 557
- Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:59 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
You'll probably not get into UVA or Michigan, so it might be worth it to apply ED.
I think you could get into Dook, they are a little more lax on LSAT than the other two and your grades are pretty good.
Georgetown is a coin flip. You're right in the middle (GPA slightly above median, LSAT slightly below median). You may get in- you may not.
Your chances are probably better at Cornell & Vandy than at Gtown.
I'd be very surprised if you don't get into all of the schools you call safeties.
I think you could get into Dook, they are a little more lax on LSAT than the other two and your grades are pretty good.
Georgetown is a coin flip. You're right in the middle (GPA slightly above median, LSAT slightly below median). You may get in- you may not.
Your chances are probably better at Cornell & Vandy than at Gtown.
I'd be very surprised if you don't get into all of the schools you call safeties.
- romothesavior

- Posts: 14692
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Georgetown is an auto-reject, and his odds at Michigan are better than Duke. Dunno why you continue to give poor advice.Dr. Strangelove wrote:You'll probably not get into UVA or Michigan, so it might be worth it to apply ED.
I think you could get into Dook, they are a little more lax on LSAT than the other two and your grades are pretty good.
Georgetown is a coin flip. You're right in the middle (GPA slightly above median, LSAT slightly below median). You may get in- you may not.
Your chances are probably better at Cornell & Vandy than at Gtown.
I'd be very surprised if you don't get into all of the schools you call safeties.
- mpasi

- Posts: 322
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:26 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Not to be mean, but I think you've overestimated your soft factors a bit. The foreign immigrant factor won't help you too much, if at all. There are a lot of foreign-born folks who apply. What sets you apart from them?
Your ambitions matter less than what you've done up to this point. The military experience may make up for the weakness of the first two, though. Where did you do your internships? What was the nature of the work?
Unless you're going into int'l law (which I don't think you are), the foreign language skills won't help, either.
As is the case with your immigration status, your major isn't hard, so adcomms won't be impressed by that or the two minors. What sets you apart from the other people who have similar things in their applications?
Your ambitions matter less than what you've done up to this point. The military experience may make up for the weakness of the first two, though. Where did you do your internships? What was the nature of the work?
Unless you're going into int'l law (which I don't think you are), the foreign language skills won't help, either.
As is the case with your immigration status, your major isn't hard, so adcomms won't be impressed by that or the two minors. What sets you apart from the other people who have similar things in their applications?
- Kswizzie

- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
One was at a US congressional campaign where I did graphic design and military outreach stuff...(aside from typical intern bitch work) the other was a Nursing College did mostly data entry and analysis (aside from typical intern bitch work)
- romothesavior

- Posts: 14692
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Won't matter. You have solid enough numbers. I'd say your list looks good. ED to Michigan if you are interested.Kswizzie wrote:One was at a US congressional campaign where I did graphic design and military outreach stuff...(aside from typical intern bitch work) the other was a Nursing College did mostly data entry and analysis (aside from typical intern bitch work)
- Kswizzie

- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Not to attack your position but why would law schools specifically ask whether you have language skills if they weren't important to them?mpasi wrote: Unless you're going into int'l law (which I don't think you are), the foreign language skills won't help, either.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- vespertiliovir

- Posts: 327
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:52 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
So that when they publish their incoming class profile, they can say "we have students who speak 12398 different languages, including Aramaic, Esperanto, and Klingon."Kswizzie wrote:Not to attack your position but why would law schools specifically ask whether you have language skills if they weren't important to them?
- webbylu87

- Posts: 659
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:07 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Is it bad every time I see the phrase "nice softs" I giggle a little bit to myself? 
Edit: Aw, typofail.
Edit: Aw, typofail.
Last edited by webbylu87 on Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- kazu

- Posts: 1600
- Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:35 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
I do the same thingwebbylu87 wrote:Is it bad every time I see the phrase "nice softs" I giggle a little bet to myself?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- mpasi

- Posts: 322
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:26 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Kswizzie wrote:Not to attack your position but why would law schools specifically ask whether you have language skills if they weren't important to them?mpasi wrote: Unless you're going into int'l law (which I don't think you are), the foreign language skills won't help, either.
How is it relevant to a legal education, especially one that doesn't involve international law courses?
- Kswizzie

- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Aren't there many firms with offices all over the world wouldn't it be an asset to be able to speak to people that work for your firm in other countries even if you're not specifically involved in the same practice area maybe wrong but I do know that language skills are considered valuable in most lines of work in our era of globalizationmpasi wrote:Kswizzie wrote:Not to attack your position but why would law schools specifically ask whether you have language skills if they weren't important to them?mpasi wrote: Unless you're going into int'l law (which I don't think you are), the foreign language skills won't help, either.
How is it relevant to a legal education, especially one that doesn't involve international law courses?
- mpasi

- Posts: 322
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:26 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Kswizzie wrote:Aren't there many firms with offices all over the world wouldn't it be an asset to be able to speak to people that work for your firm in other countries even if you're not specifically involved in the same practice area maybe wrong but I do know that language skills are considered valuable in most lines of work in our era of globalizationmpasi wrote:Kswizzie wrote:Not to attack your position but why would law schools specifically ask whether you have language skills if they weren't important to them?mpasi wrote: Unless you're going into int'l law (which I don't think you are), the foreign language skills won't help, either.
How is it relevant to a legal education, especially one that doesn't involve international law courses?
How much contact does a JAG attorney have with global firms, though? I'm not knocking your skills, but rather questioning why you think your language proficiency is such a sparkling asset. It's not. English is a (near) universal language...someone in those global firms et al speaks it incredibly well. Millions of people are already fluent in it, or learning it. Globalization works both ways. I won't even touch on translators, or senior staffers who speak the same lanuages.
I'm not saying you won't get into law school, or that the ones that give you a good look won't appreciate your abilities, but to continue with this unique snowflake mentality is a little silly. Your numbers matter far more than the languages you speak. The schools you're applying to won't go "oh, he speaks this and this, let's admit him now!". They don't know where you'll end up at the end of your education. They probably won't care. So, in light of that, how does the language proficiency matter so much?
- Kswizzie

- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
I agree with you about 95%, I don't think language skills are going to something that will have a huge impact on my cycle but they are a distinguishing factor between myself and someone with like numbers that doesn't have them. As to importance for JAG, JAGs are deployable and you never know where you may land. Language skills are important for all military officers to the point that demonstrating proficiency gives you increased pay. In the spirit of bringing our debate to a close... what r my chances at my schools in your opinion?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- mpasi

- Posts: 322
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:26 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
I think you need to move Cornell and Vandy to "reach" column, and maybe add American and GW to your target list, and add Catholic to the safeties. A reservist friend of mine is at American now, and seems to love it. Someone else on this board is in the National Guard and attends GW part-time. I think DC would be best for you, given your interest in military service and the military-friendly nature of the DC schools. Please keep us (or just me) updated on where you end up.
-
Pearalegal

- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:50 am
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
Vandy certainly isn't a reach, though Cornell got tricky around the 168/ 3.6-3.7s this cycle. American is a safety, GW as well...though those are definitely good schools to add.mpasi wrote:I think you need to move Cornell and Vandy to "reach" column, and maybe add American and GW to your target list,
-
Pearalegal

- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:50 am
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
I really, really think they are. Same LSAT, lower GPA and got in to almost all of those (save 1) and ended up with some solid money at Texas, my ultimate pick.amyLAchemist wrote:Have apps gotten more competitive lately? I would have though UCLA/USC/Texas/Vandy would be targets
- Kswizzie

- Posts: 153
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm
Re: 168, 3.7 Nice Softs
amyLAchemist wrote:Throw an app to Berkeley as a reach, seriously. My friends who were ex-military had seriously lower numbers than you, and were not URM. Your numbers are in the ballpark.
Not that it is a bad thing, it is a small plus, but I do think you are overestimating how good the language thing is though.
Daisy Dukes? Bikinis on Top?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login