LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ) Forum

[thorntonjm2]

Hello TLSers,

After numerous hours of trying to find a law school candidate with similar credentials as myself, I have decided that I would resort to posting on TLS in hopes that someone with a similar situation stumbles across this thread and came give me some insight on how strong my application REALLY is. I have entered my not so stellar scores into many different law school predictor applications, but do not believe those truly reflect the strength of my "resume." So let me run down what my application looks like:

LSAT: 160
UGPA: 3.76 (Economics - Virginia Commonwealth Univ)
Cumul GPA: 3.38
Graduate Degree: MA Economics (3.75)

The first question you might be asking is why such a large differential in UGPA and Cumul. GPA? The answer is that I played baseball at a Division III school my freshman/sophomore year which required 3-5 days of traveling a week. Being that I initially only went to college to play baseball, I slacked off my freshman year. Needless to say, it is reflected in my cumulative GPA. I did, however, opt to retake those classes when I transferred and proceeded to get mostly A's for the remained of my college career, including in graduate school.

It is probably worth noting that both my BS and MA degrees are not in behavioral economics, but in mathematical economics, focusing heavily on econometrics. This makes the program extremely difficult - we have 5 students left in our program... we started with 25.

I am the first in my family, both immediate and generations past, to go to college and have done so on my own dime ( extreme economic hardship over the last 4 years). I spent a summer in a law office in Louisiana doing research for Katrina claims, was President and Treasurer of the Kappa Sigma Fraternity, have worked 20+ hours while attending school, and managed a large number of individuals during summers for a pool management company (60-70 hours a week). I believe the letters of recommendations sent in on my behalf are likely very strong being that my professors actually approached me asking if they could write me a letter when the heard I was considering law school. From what I have been told, my personal statement is strong and captures the story above nicely without being to forward.

This is my application in a nutshell. Should I be applying to schools that are "reachers" being that I pretty much have to get $$ to be able to go anywhere? Will schools consider how high my UGPA is when evaluating my application? Do you think the intangibles as mentioned above are enough to make a considerable difference in an admissions decision?

Here are the schools I have applied to and my predictions as to what their decision is likely to be:

University of Miami: Admit $
Baylor University (summer): Accepted
University of Alabama: Reject/WL
Texas Tech University: Admit $$
University of Houston: Accept/WL
University of South Carolina: Accept $$
Wake Forest University: Admit/WL
University of Florida: ??
Arizona State University: Accept
Marquette University: Accept $$
William and Mary: WL
Temple University: Accept
Georgia State University: Accept
Michigan State University: Accept $$
Case Western University: Accept

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! Also, if you have a similar situation as mine and would be willing to share your application experience, it would be most helpful!

Thanks in advance!

[LawSchoolChampion]

If your graduate program is as difficult as you claim it to be you should retake the LSAT.

I think your current predictions are decent, though I don't know much about the financial aspects.

You really should retake, IMO.

[thorntonjm2]

I have considered that option especially since I was scoring 170+ on the 5 previous proctored practice tests and the section I consistently scored perfect on ,logic games, was my worst section on the actual exam because I diagrammed the last game wrong. BUT that being said, time is a huge consideration and the costs of taking the February administration in my situation outweigh the benefits. I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent. If you graduate at the top of your class at a school that has some credibility then I think opportunities will be plentiful.

Thank you for the feedback. For me retaking is not an option, unfortunately.

[YourCaptain]

I have considered that option especially since I was scoring 170+ on the 5 previous proctored practice tests and the section I consistently scored perfect on ,logic games, was my worst section on the actual exam because I diagrammed the last game wrong. BUT that being said, time is a huge consideration and the costs of taking the February administration in my situation outweigh the benefits. I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent. If you graduate at the top of your class at a school that has some credibility then I think opportunities will be plentiful.

Thank you for the feedback. For me retaking is not an option, unfortunately.

90% chance this wont happen. the costs of attending a bad school outweigh the benefits.

as an econ major (behavior too) you should realize your current trajectory is awful.

[thorntonjm2]

I was going to respond to the above comment by expanding on the statements I posted earlier, but being that you seem to have no interest in providing useful feedback i will save my energy. You obviosuly have mind reading powers anyways - knowing little to nothing about my personal situation and being able to make such a bold observation about MY cost/benefit analysis...

Reading some of the posts on this website has been quite disappointing, I must be honest. I incorrectly assumed that everyone would be capable of providing useful and relevant information - I was wrong.

[pugilistjd]

90% chance this wont happen. the costs of attending a bad school outweigh the benefits.

as an econ major (behavior too) you should realize your current trajectory is awful.

LOL I love how, on TLS, not having a coin-flip's chance at the absolute best possible job opportunities in (any) legal market based on grades alone= AWFUL TRAJECTORY/RETAKE/DON'T GO. What a bunch of life-averse babies.

[LawSchoolChampion]

I have considered that option especially since I was scoring 170+ on the 5 previous proctored practice tests and the section I consistently scored perfect on ,logic games, was my worst section on the actual exam because I diagrammed the last game wrong. BUT that being said, time is a huge consideration and the costs of taking the February administration in my situation outweigh the benefits. I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent. If you graduate at the top of your class at a school that has some credibility then I think opportunities will be plentiful.

Thank you for the feedback. For me retaking is not an option, unfortunately.

Unless the costs of taking the LSAT again would cost you more than almost 100,000 dollars, I must disagree.

A 170+ would certainly give you a lot of scholorship money from almost every school on that list - forget about top teir schools.

A 3.38 will kill many of them anyways, even with a 175+ some will still be out of the question. But, a 170+ does open up full or near full rides at most of those schools, and some better schools.

To some extent, law school is what you make of it, but the word "plentiful" is not the word I would use to describe the top 10% of Miam or Uf.

They'll all get job (exceptions exist, I am sure), but they may not be exactly what they were looking for.

The real question you need to ask yourself is if you would be happy living in lorida, or Texas, or South Carolina, ect. No school that you've listed as Admit will carry you into another state (for at least 5-6 years).

[moneybagsphd]

LSAT: 160
UGPA: 3.76 (Economics - Virginia Commonwealth Univ)
Cumul GPA: 3.38
Graduate Degree: MA Economics (3.75)

Unfortunately, Cum GPA is the only one LSs care about. 3.38/160 prospects aren't great.

[law4vus]

Why has there been an influx of 0Ls under this notion of "law school being what you make of it" and expecting to place top 10% at a lower tier school?

I think unless you're actually in law school, no one can really express to you how little of your success is actually under your control. It's great to be confident in yourself, but in the end the odds are the odds regardless of "personal situation" (whatever that means). Everyone in law school is smart, everyone is shooting for the top of the class, and everyone studies their ass off. The rest comes down to whether you can type-vomit onto a page faster than the rest of your peers. If the majority knows 90% of the material and you type-vomit 91%, you win! If you type 89%, welcome to hell.

And no, I haven't gotten my grades back from this past semester so I'm not completely jaded.

[Mal Reynolds]

For someone who is seemingly so well-versed in econometrics, you should really give more credence to the advice being given. The job prospects from those schools are dicey at best and your cost/benefit analysis of law school being "what you make it" is pretty terrible. If you want to go to those schools you should be paying close to nothing. Retaking the LSAT is so much easier than doing as well as you would have to to be successful out of those schools.

[law4vus]

Retaking the LSAT is so much easier than doing as well as you would have to to be successful out of those schools.

It boggles my mind how no one can ever understand this concept.

[thorntonjm2]

Retaking the LSAT is so much easier than doing as well as you would have to to be successful out of those schools.

It boggles my mind how no one can ever understand this concept.

It might be easier for some, but in my situation it is not. I have already weighed those options as I had clarified earlier in the chat. If it was an option, I WOULD retake.

TO ALL: JUST IN CASE YOU MISSED IT THE FIRST 3 TIMES, LET ME CLARIFY - RETAKING IS NOT AN OPTION FOR PERSONAL REASONS!!!

[thorntonjm2]

For someone who is seemingly so well-versed in econometrics, you should really give more credence to the advice being given. The job prospects from those schools are dicey at best and your cost/benefit analysis of law school being "what you make it" is pretty terrible. If you want to go to those schools you should be paying close to nothing. Retaking the LSAT is so much easier than doing as well as you would have to to be successful out of those schools.

First, I am not really sure what being well-versed in econometrics has to do with giving more credence to other peoples advice. Second, is law school not what you make it? Are you telling me that no one has ever done well for themselves coming out of one of the listed schools above. My next door neighbor, a close family friends has, and he went to Miami (partner-biglaw).

The reason MY cost/benefit analysis might differ from others is because I have an uncle that owns a private firm as well as my neighbor above, who have both told my upon passing the bar I had a job, regardless of what school I went to (within reason of course).

I also have a job lined if all else fails as a payment analyst at the Federal Reserve. I never said that I was definitely going to a law school listed above even if I had to pay full sticker, that was just assumed on everyone else's part. I know that I need significant financial support to justify law school. That was the reason for this post, to find someone that has had similar credentials and had experience applying to some of these schools.

[AriGoldButNicer]

there are so many things wrong with your logic that it's obvious you need to study for the LSAT.

[thorntonjm2]

90% chance this wont happen. the costs of attending a bad school outweigh the benefits.

as an econ major (behavior too) you should realize your current trajectory is awful.

LOL I love how, on TLS, not having a coin-flip's chance at the absolute best possible job opportunities in (any) legal market based on grades alone= AWFUL TRAJECTORY/RETAKE/DON'T GO. What a bunch of life-averse babies.

It is REALLY pissing my off haha. I am glad someone else noticed it. They argue that because I am 0L, I don't know what law school is like. But then on the same token they tell me that I have no chance on getting money to the schools I applied to..yet they are not on the admissions board. In fact, you can go look at some of the statistics for acceptance and scholarship figures and see that some with LSAT and GPA worse then mine have received a great amount of money.

[thorntonjm2]

LSAT: 160
UGPA: 3.76 (Economics - Virginia Commonwealth Univ)
Cumul GPA: 3.38
Graduate Degree: MA Economics (3.75)

Unfortunately, Cum GPA is the only one LSs care about. 3.38/160 prospects aren't great.

I have heard this, but have met with a few admission officers who have told me otherwise. Hopefully the admission officers weren't just telling me what I wanted to hear. Then again I don't see why they would, they have nothing to gain from it being that they had already waived my application fee.

[thorntonjm2]

there are so many things wrong with your logic that it's obvious you need to study for the LSAT.

A statement without any support: congratulations! You are officially smarter than everyone here!

[Helmholtz]

I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent.

Yeah, and your LSAT score is what you make it to a certain extent, but you shit the bed when it came to that, so.....

[AriGoldButNicer]

is it really what you make of it? basketball is what you make of it, but i'm still not 6 foot 5 or over, and can't rebound.grades are random. do u have a great money making personality?

for someone starting economics, OP sucks at economical decision making. you said you know 1 guy who made partner from MIA. I know 1 guy who won the lotto so why don't I just put 200k on my dog's birthday, and call it a day.

no one is saying don't go to law school if being a lawyer will make you happy.

they're saying going to a school with a 50% shot at 160k is smarter than going to one with a 1% chance at 160k. OP is like the hero in call to the wild. he knows only 1 in 9 survive, but really believes he'll be the 1 in 9.

[thorntonjm2]

I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent.

Yeah, and your LSAT score is what you make it to a certain extent, but you shit the bed when it came to that, so.....

Oh my bad, I forgot the LSAT was a perfect predictor of how you will do in law school...

[AriGoldButNicer]

I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent.

Yeah, and your LSAT score is what you make it to a certain extent, but you shit the bed when it came to that, so.....

Oh my bad, I forgot the LSAT was a perfect predictor of how you will do in law school...

that's not what he was suggesting. he was pointing to another entity similar in 1 key regard, and pointing out you failed to make very well of it.

also, refusal to make a sacrifice to get a great lsat score is a pretty decent predictor that you won't make sacrficies to do great in law school.

[Helmholtz]

I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent.

Yeah, and your LSAT score is what you make it to a certain extent, but you shit the bed when it came to that, so.....

Oh my bad, I forgot the LSAT was a perfect predictor of how you will do in law school...

Not my point at all, but thanks for playing.

Let me spell it out:

OP: I AM SUPERIOR TO OTHER PEOPLE TAKING THIS TEST. THE LSAT IS WHAT YOU MAKE IT. (I'm assuming this is how it went down given how this thread is going so far)
OP's results: 160

OP: I AM SUPERIOR TO MY FUTURE CLASSMATES. LAW SCHOOL IS WHAT YOU MAKE IT.
OP's results: ?????

[thorntonjm2]

is it really what you make of it? basketball is what you make of it, but i'm still not 6 foot 5 or over, and can't rebound.grades are random. do u have a great money making personality?

for someone starting economics, OP sucks at economical decision making. you said you know 1 guy who made partner from MIA. I know 1 guy who won the lotto so why don't I just put 200k on my dog's birthday, and call it a day.

no one is saying don't go to law school if being a lawyer will make you happy.

they're saying going to a school with a 50% shot at 160k is smarter than going to one with a 1% chance at 160k. OP is like the hero in call to the wild. he knows only 1 in 9 survive, but really believes he'll be the 1 in 9.

You're right, basketball is a completely relevant analogy... Oh and so is the lottery. Truly brilliant! And now your talking my language, using expected values and such - again you hit this one out of the ball park. And I point out where I said I would be making 160K coming out law school.. because that is not what I am talking about, nor was that the point of this post. I don't understand what I am not being clear about here.

[AriGoldButNicer]

is it really what you make of it? basketball is what you make of it, but i'm still not 6 foot 5 or over, and can't rebound.grades are random. do u have a great money making personality?

for someone starting economics, OP sucks at economical decision making. you said you know 1 guy who made partner from MIA. I know 1 guy who won the lotto so why don't I just put 200k on my dog's birthday, and call it a day.

no one is saying don't go to law school if being a lawyer will make you happy.

they're saying going to a school with a 50% shot at 160k is smarter than going to one with a 1% chance at 160k. OP is like the hero in call to the wild. he knows only 1 in 9 survive, but really believes he'll be the 1 in 9.

You're right, basketball is a completely relevant analogy... Oh and so is the lottery. Truly brilliant! And now your talking my language, using expected values and such - again you hit this one out of the ball park. And I point out where I said I would be making 160K coming out law school.. because that is not what I am talking about, nor was that the point of this post. I don't understand what I am not being clear about here.

ok you're right. you're clearly feeling it, and will make a brilliant lawyer. the name on your degree doesn't matter anyway. you should definitely go to Miami, and make partner then tell us how we were all wrong when you drive around in your ferrari. i mean, you clearly want to be a lawyer in your heart, and that's all that firms look at when they hire.

[Helmholtz]

I don't understand what I am not being clear about here.

I think the majority of us are a little unclear about when your delusions in life started cropping up.