3.2 GPA/ 156 practice LSAT- chances in Texas Forum

[muscleboundlaw]

Hey guys,

I am new to these boards so I apologize if this is long. I graduated from Loyola University of Chicago last summer with two degrees: Finance and History. Unfortunately, due to partying and a horrible idea to be a doctor the first two years of college, my GPA is not the greatest in the world ( first two years 2.7, final three years 3.5). I have taken practice LSAT's and without much preparation I have been able to get a 156. I know this is not great and that I could do better with time but I am delaying the Law School process for now. I just moved to Virginia with my GF so she could go to med school. I planned on going to law school to get a dual jd/mba, but due to current conditions I will get my MBA first and then apply to law school after I get my MBA. That will be my most prevalent soft over the next couple of years. Anyway, with this knowledge, what schools should I consider post MBA with my degrees, gpa, and lsat? I need it to be in Texas because my GF and I plan on moving there to stay closer to her family so if we could focus on these law schools I would appreciate it. I am not too worried about the cover of my law degree as I plan on practicing in Texas, so I don't necessarily need it to be UT- Austin, but I also want it to carry some weight in the business world ( I want to focus in corporate law).

I apologize for the length of this post, but any help is greatly appreciated. Any ideas where I should stand with my LSAT to get into the UT- Austin, SMU, or Baylor's?

[Yeezus.]

Why do you want to get an MBA if you are looking to practice corporate law?

[muscleboundlaw]

Why do you want to get an MBA if you are looking to practice corporate law?

Honestly, I just wanted to get a decent soft in my law school application and get a little more from my Finance education (portfolio management, international finance, etc). I don't have much in terms of softs from undergrad, and I figure that would be a nice one to have for a law school application and for any type of Financial position I wish to pursue in the future.

[kalvano]

I am not too worried about the cover of my law degree as I plan on practicing in Texas, so I don't necessarily need it to be UT- Austin

I don't understand this sentence.

Regardless, out everywhere worth going without an LSAT of at least 163-165.

[muscleboundlaw]

I am not too worried about the cover of my law degree as I plan on practicing in Texas, so I don't necessarily need it to be UT- Austin

I don't understand this sentence.

Regardless, out everywhere worth going without an LSAT of at least 163-165.

Sorry about that. I don't necessarily need to go to a school that is nationally recognized or a top 14. I'm looking to stay in Texas, but I still want the school to hold weight IN Texas.

[Nova]

Youre probably in at Texas Tech, STLC, and St. Mary's.

You should retake for UH/SMU/UT

[cotiger]

Why do you want to get an MBA if you are looking to practice corporate law?

Honestly, I just wanted to get a decent soft in my law school application and get a little more from my Finance education (portfolio management, international finance, etc). I don't have much in terms of softs from undergrad, and I figure that would be a nice one to have for a law school application and for any type of Financial position I wish to pursue in the future.

An MBA without significant work experience is both a waste of money and not an interesting soft. It just looks like you're accumulating degrees.

You need to get that LSAT up to the 161-163 range for UH or the 163-165 range for SMU in order to get a chance for a bit of money. Basically, you want to be a point or two above the median LSAT score because of your GPA. If you can get it up to 168 you could get UT, though make sure to gain residency first.

These are really the only three schools you should be considering. SMU or UH with some money, or UT with residency.

[muscleboundlaw]

Why do you want to get an MBA if you are looking to practice corporate law?

Honestly, I just wanted to get a decent soft in my law school application and get a little more from my Finance education (portfolio management, international finance, etc). I don't have much in terms of softs from undergrad, and I figure that would be a nice one to have for a law school application and for any type of Financial position I wish to pursue in the future.

An MBA without significant work experience is both a waste of money and not an interesting soft. It just looks like you're accumulating degrees.

You need to get that LSAT up to the 161-163 range for UH or the 163-165 range for SMU in order to get a chance for a bit of money. Basically, you want to be a point or two above the median LSAT score because of your GPA. If you can get it up to 168 you could get UT, though make sure to gain residency first.

These are really the only three schools you should be considering. SMU or UH with some money, or UT with residency.

I will be working and volunteering alongside the MBA so my resume will be a little stronger than just an MBA. However, I do get your point, and I wish my undergrad came with a little more "stuff" in it, so my softs could be stronger.

I figured that those three were the ones that carried the most weight. Is there any way that I could receive financial aid from UT? A score in the 170's for instance?

[cotiger]

Why do you want to get an MBA if you are looking to practice corporate law?

Honestly, I just wanted to get a decent soft in my law school application and get a little more from my Finance education (portfolio management, international finance, etc). I don't have much in terms of softs from undergrad, and I figure that would be a nice one to have for a law school application and for any type of Financial position I wish to pursue in the future.

An MBA without significant work experience is both a waste of money and not an interesting soft. It just looks like you're accumulating degrees.

You need to get that LSAT up to the 161-163 range for UH or the 163-165 range for SMU in order to get a chance for a bit of money. Basically, you want to be a point or two above the median LSAT score because of your GPA. If you can get it up to 168 you could get UT, though make sure to gain residency first.

These are really the only three schools you should be considering. SMU or UH with some money, or UT with residency.

I will be working and volunteering alongside the MBA so my resume will be a little stronger than just an MBA. However, I do get your point, and I wish my undergrad came with a little more "stuff" in it, so my softs could be stronger.

I figured that those three were the ones that carried the most weight. Is there any way that I could receive financial aid from UT? A score in the 170's for instance?

UT with money is a possibility, but you would need to get in the 170s.

That MBA is going to contribute approximately zero to your law school application. Law school is primarily a numbers game, with softs coming in to play only at the margin. Regardless, your MBA would not particularly increase your softs strength. If you have an independently good reason for getting an MBA now, fine. But don't be doing it for how it looks on an app.

[muscleboundlaw]

[/quote]UT with money is a possibility, but you would need to get in the 170s.

That MBA is going to contribute approximately zero to your law school application. Law school is primarily a numbers game, with softs coming in to play only at the margin. Regardless, your MBA would not particularly increase your softs strength. If you have an independently good reason for getting an MBA now, fine. But don't be doing it for how it looks on an app.[/quote]

Fair enough- I am not getting the MBA as an app booster, but thanks for clarifying anyways. I will focus solely on LSAT now since my GPA is cemented and I can't do anything about it.

Also, I remember looking at these ranking a year or two ago and seeing UT in the t14. Am I losing my mind or has Texas dropped out of the t14?
While my chances of leaving Texas are minimal, having the option would not hurt. I am still considering Chicago (depends on where my GF gets residency), but I will be moving to Texas after school. Knowing that only t14 carry weight nationally freaks me out. If this were to be the case, my only two options would be Northwestern and U Chicago and that is not an easy battle to fight.

[Ramius]

I am not getting the MBA as an app booster, but thanks for clarifying anyways.

Then why are you getting one? You talk extensively of being bound to Texas, not some specific career aspiration. I think you need to put a little more thought into your goals with a JD or an MBA before you start deciding if/where/when to enroll in school. Many people confuse practicing corporate/business/international trade/"whatever else may in theory be helped by an MBA" law with needing an MBA. It's been discussed widely on these forums that an MBA is in no way required for doing any of those things. An MBA won't hurt you, but it's a rare situation where it'll help you in a legal career.

That all being said, if you decide that law school is for you, shoot for a 168+ and get UT for a decent price if you're Texas or bust. Or wife up that future MD and get paid if it seems easier (coming from some experience, it's not a horrible place to be )

[cotiger]

UT with money is a possibility, but you would need to get in the 170s.

That MBA is going to contribute approximately zero to your law school application. Law school is primarily a numbers game, with softs coming in to play only at the margin. Regardless, your MBA would not particularly increase your softs strength. If you have an independently good reason for getting an MBA now, fine. But don't be doing it for how it looks on an app.

Fair enough- I am not getting the MBA as an app booster, but thanks for clarifying anyways. I will focus solely on LSAT now since my GPA is cemented and I can't do anything about it.

Also, I remember looking at these ranking a year or two ago and seeing UT in the t14. Am I losing my mind or has Texas dropped out of the t14?
While my chances of leaving Texas are minimal, having the option would not hurt. I am still considering Chicago (depends on where my GF gets residency), but I will be moving to Texas after school. Knowing that only t14 carry weight nationally freaks me out. If this were to be the case, my only two options would be Northwestern and U Chicago and that is not an easy battle to fight.

You'll need a 172 to get into Northwestern. UChi is out of the question.

If you're definitely moving to Texas after school, then UT is hands down the best of your options. UT is not one of the "T14", but if you're looking for placement power in Texas, then UT is better than all but the T6 (at least from what I've gleaned from this site).

Still, you need to get a 168 to get UT. You have a ways to go, so get studying!

[muscleboundlaw]

I am not getting the MBA as an app booster, but thanks for clarifying anyways.

Then why are you getting one? You talk extensively of being bound to Texas, not some specific career aspiration. I think you need to put a little more thought into your goals with a JD or an MBA before you start deciding if/where/when to enroll in school. Many people confuse practicing corporate/business/international trade/"whatever else may in theory be helped by an MBA" law with needing an MBA. It's been discussed widely on these forums that an MBA is in no way required for doing any of those things. An MBA won't hurt you, but it's a rare situation where it'll help you in a legal career.

That all being said, if you decide that law school is for you, shoot for a 168+ and get UT for a decent price if you're Texas or bust. Or wife up that future MD and get paid if it seems easier (coming from some experience, it's not a horrible place to be )

I am bound to Texas because of my GF and her family (by the way thanks for the advice on the wife-ing it up, I am proposing soon ). I did have the perception that having a business degree would help my efforts in corporate law, but I have learned that it is not necessary. The MBA is a means of furthering my finance education and gaining grounds in business itself. I did very little networking and internship work in college, and I am a bit behind the ball with my current business experience. In a perfect world, I would have had a financial analyst job secured out of college, but my idiocy has put me in a predicament. While law school was my first choice, I am delaying it because I don't want to move too far away from where me and mine are currently located ( Blacksburg, VA by VA Tech). We did long distance for a year and a half and swore up and down that we would never do it again. I took the hit, moved over here to a town with very little to offer so she could finish up ( we'll interchange by her applying to residency wherever I get into law school). So my entire goal, while we live here, is to get a good job in business and further my education in Finance ( very interested in portfolio management and other financial aspects).

To be honest, corporate law has always been the idea because of my business inclination, BUT I am interested by law for a myriad of reasons. I have thought about other fields, and am sure that once I do get in, I might end up changing my mind.

[muscleboundlaw]

UT with money is a possibility, but you would need to get in the 170s.

That MBA is going to contribute approximately zero to your law school application. Law school is primarily a numbers game, with softs coming in to play only at the margin. Regardless, your MBA would not particularly increase your softs strength. If you have an independently good reason for getting an MBA now, fine. But don't be doing it for how it looks on an app.

Fair enough- I am not getting the MBA as an app booster, but thanks for clarifying anyways. I will focus solely on LSAT now since my GPA is cemented and I can't do anything about it.

Also, I remember looking at these ranking a year or two ago and seeing UT in the t14. Am I losing my mind or has Texas dropped out of the t14?
While my chances of leaving Texas are minimal, having the option would not hurt. I am still considering Chicago (depends on where my GF gets residency), but I will be moving to Texas after school. Knowing that only t14 carry weight nationally freaks me out. If this were to be the case, my only two options would be Northwestern and U Chicago and that is not an easy battle to fight.

You'll need a 172 to get into Northwestern. UChi is out of the question.

If you're definitely moving to Texas after school, then UT is hands down the best of your options. UT is not one of the "T14", but if you're looking for placement power in Texas, then UT is better than all but the T6 (at least from what I've gleaned from this site).

Still, you need to get a 168 to get UT. You have a ways to go, so get studying!

Ouch..... I believe you but do you happen to have a source on this. Also, I have seen some of the scatter graphs of acceptances to UT and they don't look promising with my gpa. Do you think a 168 guarantees acceptance or just puts me in a better position?

Yep, I'm lucky I found this forum. I studied on and off for a bit and ended up with the same score over two practice tests and one actual one (155-156). I will retake in a few years and pursue that with the advice given on these boards.

[francesfarmer]

I am not getting the MBA as an app booster, but thanks for clarifying anyways.

Then why are you getting one? You talk extensively of being bound to Texas, not some specific career aspiration. I think you need to put a little more thought into your goals with a JD or an MBA before you start deciding if/where/when to enroll in school. Many people confuse practicing corporate/business/international trade/"whatever else may in theory be helped by an MBA" law with needing an MBA. It's been discussed widely on these forums that an MBA is in no way required for doing any of those things. An MBA won't hurt you, but it's a rare situation where it'll help you in a legal career.

That all being said, if you decide that law school is for you, shoot for a 168+ and get UT for a decent price if you're Texas or bust. Or wife up that future MD and get paid if it seems easier (coming from some experience, it's not a horrible place to be )

I am bound to Texas because of my GF and her family (by the way thanks for the advice on the wife-ing it up, I am proposing soon ). I did have the perception that having a business degree would help my efforts in corporate law, but I have learned that it is not necessary. The MBA is a means of furthering my finance education and gaining grounds in business itself. I did very little networking and internship work in college, and I am a bit behind the ball with my current business experience. In a perfect world, I would have had a financial analyst job secured out of college, but my idiocy has put me in a predicament. While law school was my first choice, I am delaying it because I don't want to move too far away from where me and mine are currently located ( Blacksburg, VA by VA Tech). We did long distance for a year and a half and swore up and down that we would never do it again. I took the hit, moved over here to a town with very little to offer so she could finish up ( we'll interchange by her applying to residency wherever I get into law school). So my entire goal, while we live here, is to get a good job in business and further my education in Finance ( very interested in portfolio management and other financial aspects).

To be honest, corporate law has always been the idea because of my business inclination, BUT I am interested by law for a myriad of reasons. I have thought about other fields, and am sure that once I do get in, I might end up changing my mind.

I think you need to 1. think about what you actually want to do with your career and decide on MBA vs. JD and 2. wait until your SO actually has post-med school placement to figure out the law school situation if that's what you decide to do.

[cotiger]

Ouch..... I believe you but do you happen to have a source on this. Also, I have seen some of the scatter graphs of acceptances to UT and they don't look promising with my gpa. Do you think a 168 guarantees acceptance or just puts me in a better position?

Yep, I'm lucky I found this forum. I studied on and off for a bit and ended up with the same score over two practice tests and one actual one (155-156). I will retake in a few years and pursue that with the advice given on these boards.

A 168 will give you a shot, but for anything close to a "guarantee" you'll need to get 170+

Go over to mylsn.info and plug in 164-172 and 3.10-3.35 for the last cycle (2012-2013), and click on the arrows at the right of the UT line. It's a small sample but still illustrative. Below 167 isn't happening. 167-169 is borderline, so it will come down to your softs (including PS, WE, LORs, etc). All 5 of the 170-172's got in.

That amount of studying isn't going to be enough to raise your scores to the levels that you need. I'm not a TLS LSAT studying pro, but ask around and there are tons of people who will tell you the best way to study. I took over 25 PTs and raised my score 12 points from a cold diagnostic. That's the level of preparation that you need to commit to.

Also, remember that SMU and UH are decent schools if you're staying in Texas. If you top out at a score that won't get you into UT but will get you money from those two, that's an okay outcome.

[cotiger]

Also, this.

I think you need to 1. think about what you actually want to do with your career and decide on MBA vs. JD and 2. wait until your SO actually has post-med school placement to figure out the law school situation if that's what you decide to do.

[muscleboundlaw]

Also, this.

I think you need to 1. think about what you actually want to do with your career and decide on MBA vs. JD and 2. wait until your SO actually has post-med school placement to figure out the law school situation if that's what you decide to do.

Thanks for your advice frances and the breakdown cotiger- I appreciate it. I am 1 billion percent certain that I will pursue a career in law. I have my own ambition and reasoning for it. I will have to wait to make sure the SO has her stuff figured out, so for now this is speculative. Just getting antsy, because in a perfect world I would have been in law school studying instead of worrying about it.

And cotiger, I did not state what I wanted to say correctly. I have read over these boards, and definitely understand the commitment and pain that the LSAT requires. What I meant to say was, when I am ready to apply, I will use some of the great advice from this forum to study correctly and boost my chances of getting into some of the schools mentioned.

[BigZuck]

I go to UT

Corporate law is basically just big law. No school in Texas places particularly well in large law firms. UT is hands down the best but even they are only placing 35%ish or so. That ruffles feathers when you say it and people like to claim self-selection but if more people could have big law coming out of UT I'm pretty firmly convinced they would take it.

Your gpa puts you in a really tough spot. I don't think UT at (instate) sticker is worth it, especially if you have to take out money to live on. You would need big law and you would have less than a 50% shot. I think the only way you could make UT worthwhile is if you move to Texas and establish residency and then get that LSAT up to 170+ (and assuming they keep up their generosity to instate splitters) you should have enough of a scholarship to make it worthwhile.

But if you did all that you would have a legit shot at Northwestern and UVA, two schools who place much better into corporate law jobs.

Basically I think you need to decide if you want corporate law or a lawyer job in Texas. UT is the best of both worlds, but I wouldn't bet 100K+ on UT getting you both of those things.

Also I'm probably a little bit overly conservative about this stuff so maybe other UT peeps will disagree.

[muscleboundlaw]

I go to UT

Corporate law is basically just big law. No school in Texas places particularly well in large law firms. UT is hands down the best but even they are only placing 35%ish or so. That ruffles feathers when you say it and people like to claim self-selection but if more people could have big law coming out of UT I'm pretty firmly convinced they would take it.

Your gpa puts you in a really tough spot. I don't think UT at (instate) sticker is worth it, especially if you have to take out money to live on. You would need big law and you would have less than a 50% shot. I think the only way you could make UT worthwhile is if you move to Texas and establish residency and then get that LSAT up to 170+ (and assuming they keep up their generosity to instate splitters) you should have enough of a scholarship to make it worthwhile.

But if you did all that you would have a legit shot at Northwestern and UVA, two schools who place much better into corporate law jobs.

Basically I think you need to decide if you want corporate law or a lawyer job in Texas. UT is the best of both worlds, but I wouldn't bet 100K+ on UT getting you both of those things.

Also I'm probably a little bit overly conservative about this stuff so maybe other UT peeps will disagree.

Wow, very informative stuff, thank you. One thing I do know is that Texas schools are much more generous to Texas residents ( being a Texan is huge in every way). I did live there for a year, and just moved to Virginia, so I am wondering if I will need to reestablish residency when I get there.

My question is, if I wish to stay in Texas and work in corporate, does UT give me a leg up IN Texas or will I still be behind the 8 ball with the t14's? I think that's essentially what you're saying, but I want to make sure that it applies in Texas as well. One thing I keep on hearing about Texas law schools is that they treat their own well, so I am hoping to take advantage of that. If that does not apply to corporate law then that's a shame.

[Ramius]

I am not getting the MBA as an app booster, but thanks for clarifying anyways.

Then why are you getting one? You talk extensively of being bound to Texas, not some specific career aspiration. I think you need to put a little more thought into your goals with a JD or an MBA before you start deciding if/where/when to enroll in school. Many people confuse practicing corporate/business/international trade/"whatever else may in theory be helped by an MBA" law with needing an MBA. It's been discussed widely on these forums that an MBA is in no way required for doing any of those things. An MBA won't hurt you, but it's a rare situation where it'll help you in a legal career.

That all being said, if you decide that law school is for you, shoot for a 168+ and get UT for a decent price if you're Texas or bust. Or wife up that future MD and get paid if it seems easier (coming from some experience, it's not a horrible place to be )

I am bound to Texas because of my GF and her family (by the way thanks for the advice on the wife-ing it up, I am proposing soon ). I did have the perception that having a business degree would help my efforts in corporate law, but I have learned that it is not necessary. The MBA is a means of furthering my finance education and gaining grounds in business itself. I did very little networking and internship work in college, and I am a bit behind the ball with my current business experience. In a perfect world, I would have had a financial analyst job secured out of college, but my idiocy has put me in a predicament. While law school was my first choice, I am delaying it because I don't want to move too far away from where me and mine are currently located ( Blacksburg, VA by VA Tech). We did long distance for a year and a half and swore up and down that we would never do it again. I took the hit, moved over here to a town with very little to offer so she could finish up ( we'll interchange by her applying to residency wherever I get into law school). So my entire goal, while we live here, is to get a good job in business and further my education in Finance ( very interested in portfolio management and other financial aspects).

To be honest, corporate law has always been the idea because of my business inclination, BUT I am interested by law for a myriad of reasons. I have thought about other fields, and am sure that once I do get in, I might end up changing my mind.

Just wanted to hazard some follow-on advice about your GF's residency plans. Understand that while she controls where she applies and can interview as widely as she is given interviews, it's ultimately a blind process where she puts together her list of preferences and she is given the residency program that accepts her that is highest on that list. So while it's great in theory to say she'll do residency wherever you get into law school, there is still a good deal of mystery in that process that she won't be able to control. I just went through this with my wife, and believe me that we had no idea going into it where her residency would end up, and once we found out, my choices were limited to where she got residency or being long distance. Thems the breaks of having two aspiring professionals.

[JazzOne]

I'd be worried about making long-term life "deals" with someone I'm not married to. Your SO pursued her own academic ambitions without you. Who's to say she won't take the best residency regardless of what that means for your academic goals? I would even argue that she SHOULD take the best residency available to her rather than catering to your law school goals since law school is frequently a horrible, horrible financial decision.

Also, I attended UT, and I don't think UT is worth in-state sticker price. I attended on a full tuition scholarship, and I still think I paid too much. Law school in general offers a very poor return on your investment.

[muscleboundlaw]

Matthew- what did you guys decide?
John- I am proposing soon and we have talked extensively about marriage so that is happening. I chose to follow her to med school, she offered that I go to school first But i did not want to drag her along beca use i was dumb in undergrad and she busted her ass. We understand that it will be difficult but we have discussed this in length and while we might not be situated 10 miles away, we want to at least be a drive away from each other if we have to be ( much better than our previous long distance for a year and a half from Chicago to San Antonio). The point is, she will apply in places that will work for me. Obviously, she will apply to multiple residencies within the state but we'll hope it works out that way. If not, well, cars were created for a reason.

[Ramius]

I skipped out on law school and kept my current job and my wife got residency in the same area. Now I'm in the tough spot of deciding if I ever want to apply again in the future after residency is finished. Only time will tell on that one. Whatever you end up deciding, good luck and I hope it all works out for you!

[BigZuck]

I go to UT

Corporate law is basically just big law. No school in Texas places particularly well in large law firms. UT is hands down the best but even they are only placing 35%ish or so. That ruffles feathers when you say it and people like to claim self-selection but if more people could have big law coming out of UT I'm pretty firmly convinced they would take it.

Your gpa puts you in a really tough spot. I don't think UT at (instate) sticker is worth it, especially if you have to take out money to live on. You would need big law and you would have less than a 50% shot. I think the only way you could make UT worthwhile is if you move to Texas and establish residency and then get that LSAT up to 170+ (and assuming they keep up their generosity to instate splitters) you should have enough of a scholarship to make it worthwhile.

But if you did all that you would have a legit shot at Northwestern and UVA, two schools who place much better into corporate law jobs.

Basically I think you need to decide if you want corporate law or a lawyer job in Texas. UT is the best of both worlds, but I wouldn't bet 100K+ on UT getting you both of those things.

Also I'm probably a little bit overly conservative about this stuff so maybe other UT peeps will disagree.

Wow, very informative stuff, thank you. One thing I do know is that Texas schools are much more generous to Texas residents ( being a Texan is huge in every way). I did live there for a year, and just moved to Virginia, so I am wondering if I will need to reestablish residency when I get there.

My question is, if I wish to stay in Texas and work in corporate, does UT give me a leg up IN Texas or will I still be behind the 8 ball with the t14's? I think that's essentially what you're saying, but I want to make sure that it applies in Texas as well. One thing I keep on hearing about Texas law schools is that they treat their own well, so I am hoping to take advantage of that. If that does not apply to corporate law then that's a shame.

If you reside in Virginia now then you are a Virginia resident and will have to reestablish residency.

I feel pretty confident saying that any T14 (and especially the higher ranked T14s and southern T14s like Duke and UVA) will give you a leg up in big law hiring over a UT grad. That's the perception I got when I did all my research for law school. UT will get more firms at OCI than any other school and there might be some firms that would privilege UT over all else but by and large it is my understanding that Texans can pretty easily get big law in Texas coming from T14s. That is not the case for UT grads. You still need to have pretty darn good grades coming out of UT.

If you want big law above all else then go to a place like Northwestern
If you want Texas above all else then go to UT
If you want Texas big law but are totally fine with not getting it and can afford to pay off your loans without it then go to UT