Top Law Schools

Took a 156 LSAT back in Oct 2010, then a 160 in June 2011. Shitty, I know. GPA was a 3.93 with a fine arts BA. Been working at a (biglaw?) firm for about a year now doing data-entry type stuff. Any guesses? Most are TTT anyway.

American University
Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
GWU
Howard University
University of Baltimore School of Law
David A. Clarke School of Law
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

vor12 wrote:Took a 156 LSAT back in Oct 2010, then a 160 in June 2011. Shitty, I know. GPA was a 3.93 with a fine arts BA. Been working at a (biglaw?) firm for about a year now doing data-entry type stuff. Any guesses? Most are TTT anyway.

American University
Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
GWU
Howard University
University of Baltimore School of Law
David A. Clarke School of Law
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

Retake. Definitely retake.Head over here to study: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=6

A lot of people would kill for your GPA. With a 170+, you'd break into a good portion of the T14.

TripTrip wrote:

vor12 wrote:Took a 156 LSAT back in Oct 2010, then a 160 in June 2011. Shitty, I know. GPA was a 3.93 with a fine arts BA. Been working at a (biglaw?) firm for about a year now doing data-entry type stuff. Any guesses? Most are TTT anyway.

American University
Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
GWU
Howard University
University of Baltimore School of Law
David A. Clarke School of Law
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

Retake. Definitely retake.Head over here to study: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=6

A lot of people would kill for your GPA. With a 170+, you'd break into a good portion of the T14.

Even though it was with a fine arts major?

The first go-round, I practiced on my own from a few prep-books (on some bad advice from my school law counselor who somehow translated high SAT scores to likely high LSATs). Second time, I did an online course with Blueprint (I half-assed toward the end more than I should have and didn't do many full-length practice tests).

But to be honest, I feel like I've hit my peak and doubt I'd break 165 on a re-take. 170 is definitely out of the question, and another try would mean waiting for the next cycle (I'd have been out of school for 4 years by then.) Is it worth the risk of a score drop for a re-take that might give me 162 at best, and tacking on 3 scores to my applications?

vor12 wrote:

TripTrip wrote:

vor12 wrote:Took a 156 LSAT back in Oct 2010, then a 160 in June 2011. Shitty, I know. GPA was a 3.93 with a fine arts BA. Been working at a (biglaw?) firm for about a year now doing data-entry type stuff. Any guesses? Most are TTT anyway.

American University
Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
GWU
Howard University
University of Baltimore School of Law
David A. Clarke School of Law
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

Retake. Definitely retake.Head over here to study: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=6

A lot of people would kill for your GPA. With a 170+, you'd break into a good portion of the T14.

Even though it was with a fine arts major?

The first go-round, I practiced on my own from a few prep-books (on some bad advice from my school law counselor who somehow translated high SAT scores to likely high LSATs). Second time, I did an online course with Blueprint (I half-assed toward the end more than I should have and didn't do many full-length practice tests).

But to be honest, I feel like I've hit my peak and doubt I'd break 165 on a re-take. 170 is definitely out of the question, and another try would mean waiting for the next cycle (I'd have been out of school for 4 years by then.) Is it worth the risk of a score drop for a re-take that might give me 162 at best, and tacking on 3 scores to my applications?

You're selling yourself short! If you lack the confidence/drive to study and do well on the LSAT, then I don't have much hope for you in the real world.

Hopefully being cynical will knock some sense into you. Trust me, I struggled with this test and felt the same way as you, but would you really feel comfortable dropping big bucks for a 40% chance at a legal job?

vor12 wrote:

TripTrip wrote:

vor12 wrote:Took a 156 LSAT back in Oct 2010, then a 160 in June 2011. Shitty, I know. GPA was a 3.93 with a fine arts BA. Been working at a (biglaw?) firm for about a year now doing data-entry type stuff. Any guesses? Most are TTT anyway.

American University
Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
GWU
Howard University
University of Baltimore School of Law
David A. Clarke School of Law
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

Retake. Definitely retake.Head over here to study: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=6

A lot of people would kill for your GPA. With a 170+, you'd break into a good portion of the T14.

Even though it was with a fine arts major?

The first go-round, I practiced on my own from a few prep-books (on some bad advice from my school law counselor who somehow translated high SAT scores to likely high LSATs). Second time, I did an online course with Blueprint (I half-assed toward the end more than I should have and didn't do many full-length practice tests).

But to be honest, I feel like I've hit my peak and doubt I'd break 165 on a re-take. 170 is definitely out of the question, and another try would mean waiting for the next cycle (I'd have been out of school for 4 years by then.) Is it worth the risk of a score drop for a re-take that might give me 162 at best, and tacking on 3 scores to my applications?

Doesn't really sound like you've done much prep at all, and you even admit you half-assed part of your BP course. what makes you think you hit your peak?

The score drop is a non-factor. Please retake and dont settle for less than a T14 with that GPA. None of those schools are worth attending (except maybe Howard if you are URM, but that also means you're already competitive for T14)

rebexness wrote:Are you URM? (guessing bc Howard...)

If so, you really aren't in a bad place and should be aiming much higher.

Maybe technically URM, but not for admission purposes.

How high are we talking if I manage a 165?

ChampagnePapi wrote:Doesn't really sound like you've done much prep at all, and you even admit you half-assed part of your BP course. what makes you think you hit your peak?

The score drop is a non-factor. Please retake and dont settle for less than a T14 with that GPA. None of those schools are worth attending (except maybe Howard if you are URM, but that also means you're already competitive for T14)

Is "gut-feeling" an invalid answer?

Since this will be my third try, screwing up again isn't an option. And if my only shot at T14 requires a 170+, a ten-point increase is a real challenge. I just think, "how could I improve? I have to get the right answers faster." I just can't honestly believe I could work out the test much faster than I did the last two times. Maybe it's just that I couldn't "feel" myself improving so its become a self-fulfilling prophecy?

dirtrida2 wrote:You're selling yourself short! If you lack the confidence/drive to study and do well on the LSAT, then I don't have much hope for you in the real world.

Hopefully being cynical will knock some sense into you. Trust me, I struggled with this test and felt the same way as you, but would you really feel comfortable dropping big bucks for a 40% chance at a legal job?

I think I'm personally too cynical for my own good - I just don't know how much of this test is teachable, know what I mean? People say the LSAT is all about studying but what makes it different from other aptitude tests where eventually you've got to hit a cap on your natural ability? I suppose you've just got to rely on your practice test average but I'm genuinely concerned a third try will only further demonstrate that I can't reach as far as T14 (or even T30) requires.

Of course, one could say "If it's not T14 don't bother," which I've come to agree with at times. But since I can't have any guarantees anyway...I think it just comes down to the likelihood of shooting myself in the foot with one of these schools vs. the likelihood a third LSAT will hurt me more/waste another year without significantly improving my odds.

vor12 wrote:

rebexness wrote:Are you URM? (guessing bc Howard...)

If so, you really aren't in a bad place and should be aiming much higher.

Maybe technically URM, but not for admission purposes.

How high are we talking if I manage a 165?

ChampagnePapi wrote:Doesn't really sound like you've done much prep at all, and you even admit you half-assed part of your BP course. what makes you think you hit your peak?

The score drop is a non-factor. Please retake and dont settle for less than a T14 with that GPA. None of those schools are worth attending (except maybe Howard if you are URM, but that also means you're already competitive for T14)

Is "gut-feeling" an invalid answer?

Since this will be my third try, screwing up again isn't an option. And if my only shot at T14 requires a 170+, a ten-point increase is a real challenge. I just think, "how could I improve? I have to get the right answers faster." I just can't honestly believe I could work out the test much faster than I did the last two times. Maybe it's just that I couldn't "feel" myself improving so its become a self-fulfilling prophecy?

dirtrida2 wrote:You're selling yourself short! If you lack the confidence/drive to study and do well on the LSAT, then I don't have much hope for you in the real world.

Hopefully being cynical will knock some sense into you. Trust me, I struggled with this test and felt the same way as you, but would you really feel comfortable dropping big bucks for a 40% chance at a legal job?

I think I'm personally too cynical for my own good - I just don't know how much of this test is teachable, know what I mean? People say the LSAT is all about studying but what makes it different from other aptitude tests where eventually you've got to hit a cap on your natural ability? I suppose you've just got to rely on your practice test average but I'm genuinely concerned a third try will only further demonstrate that I can't reach as far as T14 (or even T30) requires.

Of course, one could say "If it's not T14 don't bother," which I've come to agree with at times. But since I can't have any guarantees anyway...I think it just comes down to the likelihood of shooting myself in the foot with one of these schools vs. the likelihood a third LSAT will hurt me more/waste another year without significantly improve my odds.

You don't need a 170 to crack the t14. What were you averaging on practice tests

vor12 wrote:

rebexness wrote:I think I'm personally too cynical for my own good - I just don't know how much of this test is teachable, know what I mean? People say the LSAT is all about studying but what makes it different from other aptitude tests where eventually you've got to hit a cap on your natural ability?

The whole goddamned thing is teachable. It's a matter of dedication, because it can take 200-300 hours of dedicated LSAT study time to improve your score. Worst case scenario is you get scholarship from a school you were already going to get into with that score and you save $200k on tuition. Then you were making $1000/hr for the time you spent studying for the LSAT. Worth it?

TripTrip wrote:The whole goddamned thing is teachable. It's a matter of dedication, because it can take 200-300 hours of dedicated LSAT study time to improve your score. Worst case scenario is you get scholarship from a school you were already going to get into with that score and you save $200k on tuition. Then you were making $1000/hr for the time you spent studying for the LSAT. Worth it?

I really should do some more research into the structure of the test in order to grasp why exactly it's so teachable versus aptitude type tests like the SAT, just for my own understanding. But that's a topic for another thread altogether, I suppose.

I take that "retake" is the best option for me based on these replies because of my GPA (you can't really go back in time to improve a GPA, but if you have a solid one to start off with, you can try to improve your LSAT score.) In my case it's just a matter of lost time versus return on investment, but since it's practically impossible to get any merit aid with my current score...three attempts just makes me twitchy with fear. You have a good point though, can't argue with that.

ChampagnePapi wrote:You don't need a 170 to crack the t14. What were you averaging on practice tests

Gah, it was so long ago....I'd say low 160s, because I remember idiotically patting myself on the back for hitting 165 on one of the tests, which was my ultimate goal after the first glorious 156

Retake, GPA is potentially good enough for HYS with over a 170.

.

I love reverse splitters. Your lazy asses give me a shot at awesome schools. So don't retake and go to American at sticker.

.

Regulus wrote:

NoodleyOne wrote:I love reverse splitters. Your lazy asses give me a shot at awesome schools. So don't retake and go to American at sticker.

And I love normal splitters. Your laziness throughout college has also helped my chances at some good schools.

My turn. I love both of y'all. Y'all reverse and traditional splitters aren't gonna get the scholly money I will get with both numbers being relatively high.

.

Puffin wrote:Retake, GPA is potentially good enough for HYS with over a 170.

With a 170, OP would have a decent shot at Stanford and a great shot at Berkeley. Dear god, retake.

And with the W/E, you'd have a really good chance at a full ride at NU.

Anyone with the work ethic to get a 4.0 and the ability to get a 160 can do a sustained study method required to get a 170. DO NOT waste that GPA on those schools. If you need any more motivation, think of themoney you could be saving with a minimum of work- much higher than the likely entry-level salary out of those schools if you even get a job.

OP, what do you mean you are not a URM for admissions purposes?

RETAKE! I had these same numbers the first time I applied (and a DREADFUL PS I might add) and I got into UF, Hastings, American, UMiami, and waitlisted at GW. I didn't enroll, retook the LSAT last year and now I've Already been accepted to Berkeley and Duke. Retake! Don't waste that GPA - its worth it to study a few more hours and get that better score.

I'll echo the sentiments of everybody else ITT and point out something with which you can motivate yourself in putting in those LSAT studying hours: instead of thinking of studying as getting more scholarship money/higher lifetime earnings, phrase it to yourself as actually getting paid big bucks to study.

I agree with everyone, but just to add a piece of information because you seem misinformed: no one cares about how many times you've retaken. USNWR doesn't care-->admissions officers don't care. A 156/160/170 will have an essentially identical cycle to someone with just a 170.

To the above - I hope scores are looked at like you say. I will see this cycle.

Anyways OP, feel free to look at my cycle on LSN as the year progresses to see what can happen to a multiple testtaker (160-->174). Profile is under the same name.

A retake is definitely a good idea, BUT if you're completely against it (or retake and don't improve), you should have some decent options. I was in a similar spot last year, and ended up getting $$ @ GW with some serious negotiations. Just prep for a TON of waitlists and ride the wave.