LSAT Repeater: 165/160/170 3.87 TFA - Chances at HYS CCN? Forum

[SordidLSATHistory]

Hi TLS!

Graduated from a top 50 private university with a 3.87, repeated the LSAT about once a year 3 years running - 165 / 160 (bombed last year) / 170 (study finally pays off!). Completing my 3rd year teaching through TFA. Double majored Psyc and Poli Sci (weak soft, I know). What are my chances at HYS / CCN?

I've checked out mylsn.info, but it doesn't take into account strong softs (TFA) and the repeating LSAT factor. Thoughts?

Long time lurker, first time poster. Thanks for the consideration!

[aboutmydaylight]

In at NYU down and TFA will probably help you outperform your numbers slightly. HYS is a reach, but it wouldn't surprise me if you get CC.

[teampeeta]

This is by far one of the most difficult chances posts I've seen. Your softs seem to be on the strong side and, AFAIK, your numbers aren't knocking you out anywhere in the t6. They just aren't locking anything in either (to the extent that numbers can lock people into schools). This is a cop-out answer, but I think your results this cycle will depend almost entirely on how you present yourself in your PS and how favorably your recommenders speak about you in their letters.

My guess is that you'll probably get all of CCN with Columbia being the hardest to predict because it's so LSAT heavy.HYS is more difficult to call because it'll depend on intangibles. I'll say in at H or S (WL at the other) and out at Y. It's entirely possible that you could get all 3 or none at all.

This guy got all 3- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/advicewelcome ; this guy got S but none of CCN- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/sunnyalways ; this person got H- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/rmd312 ; this person got H and not S- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/lauralei ; this woman got H and Y- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/EA88 ; this guy is a vet and didn't get HYS- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hubbz

Good luck!

[dnptan]

This is by far one of the most difficult chances posts I've seen. Your softs seem to be on the strong side and, AFAIK, your numbers aren't knocking you out anywhere in the t6. They just aren't locking anything in either (to the extent that numbers can lock people into schools). This is a cop-out answer, but I think your results this cycle will depend almost entirely on how you present yourself in your PS and how favorably your recommenders speak about you in their letters.

My guess is that you'll probably get all of CCN with Columbia being the hardest to predict because it's so LSAT heavy.HYS is more difficult to call because it'll depend on intangibles. I'll say in at H or S (WL at the other) and out at Y. It's entirely possible that you could get all 3 or none at all.

This guy got all 3- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/advicewelcome; this guy got S but none of CCN- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/sunnyalways; this person got H- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/rmd312; this person got H and not S- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/lauralei; this woman got H and Y- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/EA88; this guy is a vet and didn't get HYS- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hubbz

Good luck!

I think this is a bit too optimistic. I can definitely see H or S WLing you, but I would be very surprised if you got in straight. You are below both medians for H, and S is well, S. I think you have a slim shot at Y though, because of softs. I agree with in at NYU down, and can see CC, but expect WL-->in at Columbia just because of LSATs.

To be fair, your softs are above average rather than soft (3 years of TFA, good job!) but they aren't amazing enough to mitigate your LSAT at H IMO.

Retake for a 173+ and I'd say solid H and lock CCN. Best of luck!

P.S. Remember Yale and Harvard average LSATs, and nobody knows what S does.

[Tiago Splitter]

P.S. Remember Yale and Harvard average LSATs, and nobody knows what S does.

Don't spread misinformation.

Retake for a 173+ and I'd say solid H and lock CCN. Best of luck!

This is good advice. If your statement above were true this advice wouldn't make any sense.

[dnptan]

P.S. Remember Yale and Harvard average LSATs, and nobody knows what S does.

Don't spread misinformation.

Sorry, didn't mean "average", meant "considers previous LSATs" but to simplify you can think of it as averaging:

Y: We do not use a formula or index to weigh various factors (like LSAT scores). We consider all of the information about an applicant, including multiple LSAT scores. We do not average scores, nor do we look at only your high score. [How do you weigh LSAT scores?]
http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/jdadmissionsfaq.htm

H: The LSAT need be taken only once. If you take the test more than once, all scores and their average will be reported and considered. [LSAT: Q2]
http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/ ... jdfaq.html

Retake for a 173+ and I'd say solid H and lock CCN. Best of luck!

This is good advice. If your statement above were true this advice wouldn't make any sense.

Averages increase if your score increases. This is a mathematical fact.

[Tiago Splitter]

P.S. Remember Yale and Harvard average LSATs, and nobody knows what S does.

Don't spread misinformation.

Sorry, didn't mean "average", meant "considers previous LSATs" but to simplify you can think of it as averaging:

Y: We do not use a formula or index to weigh various factors (like LSAT scores). We consider all of the information about an applicant, including multiple LSAT scores. We do not average scores, nor do we look at only your high score. [How do you weigh LSAT scores?]
http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/jdadmissionsfaq.htm

H: The LSAT need be taken only once. If you take the test more than once, all scores and their average will be reported and considered. [LSAT: Q2]
http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/ ... jdfaq.html

Retake for a 173+ and I'd say solid H and lock CCN. Best of luck!

This is good advice. If your statement above were true this advice wouldn't make any sense.

Averages increase if your score increases. This is a mathematical fact.

First of all, we have plenty of evidence that Harvard does not strictly average as they claim to. They claim to "report" the average but they aren't reporting it to US News, which is all that matters and which is why there are plenty of people on TLS alone who have gotten into Harvard with weak "average" LSAT scores.

Second, thank you for the math lesson. But if this person gets a 173 her average would be 167. You think that's getting Harvard if they average?

[dnptan]

Not trying to start a fight here. I'm just saying that HLS says that, and I take their word. I guess the Engineer in me just likes taking evidence into scenario. I'd prefer a referenced explanation/opinion than a completely subjective one.

Second, in my opinion a rising LSAT trend looks good. I'd say a rising 173 coupled with a 3.87 is a solid app, hence a solid H, not a lock by any means. This is all speculation of course, although it would be much appreciated if instead of disagreeing with me (which I welcome) outright, that you provide something to back it up. Not for my sake, but for OP. It's he/she that is looking for advice on the matter. You and I are clearly of differing opinions and that is totally fine. We are both entitled to that. But my goal here is to give the OP a viewpoint which is just a bit more than 100% speculation.

I concede that you may be 100% right, and all this published information is completely misleading.

[wtrc]

Nobody averages.

[Tiago Splitter]

I'm not trying to start a fight and realize my first comment made me look like an ass so I'm sorry for that.

It's worth noting that while we all want objective info, neither Yale nor Harvard even says that they average. Harvard comes closer by saying that they "consider" the average but given the incentives created by the ABA and US News (both of which report only the highest score) a presumption should exist that they highest score carries the most weight.

Here are some LSAT retake success stories at Harvard. Note that none of these people have especially strong GPAs.:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/broadstreet11
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/applemaroon
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/redsox99
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/jamdd1980
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/bbsg

OP I think you are probably out at HYS but have a good shot everywhere else with likely big money coming your way from somewhere in the bottom half of the T-14.

[062914123]

.

[SteelPenguin]

I'm going to disagree with some of the posts here and say you're a strong candidate for Columbia, even with the below median LSAT. I was running numbers a couple days ago, and most people with 170 and 3.8~ got in iirc.

[thewaves]

I will say that you have a good shot at CCN. I'd take lawschoolnumbers profiles with a grain of salt. One of those profiles was a rhodes/marshall scholar but did not disclose that publicly. That is a significant soft. TFA is a good soft, but it won't do too much to outperform your numbers unless you craft a compelling application with your essays and recommendations.

[SordidLSATHistory]

Thanks for all of the input!

I'm pretty bent on doing this cycle and want to take the risk averse route with the LSAT - it's not that I don't think I could do better (I was actually considering canceling as I walked out on test day - didn't feel as good as most of my PTs), but when you're talking about the 170's margin of error scores can vary, and I feel like another low (or even high-160's) one would shoot my borderline chances in the foot.

Follow Up:

I would be pretty happy getting in at Columbia, but it seems like ED there wouldn't provide enough of a boost to justify turning my back on the chances I have elsewhere, especially if my chances at HYS are better than totally negligible (though the consensus seems to be that they're looking pretty doubtful). Advice?

Thanks again for the time you put into your responses. This has been helpful!

[teampeeta]

Sorry, OP, just realized I accidentally included semicolons in my LSN hyperlinks in my previous post. It's fixed now.

It may be a bit optimistic, but I maintain that your stats plus TFA gives you a shot at one of HYS if you play your cards right. Good luck with your cycle!

[xylocarp]

P.S. Remember Yale and Harvard average LSATs, and nobody knows what S does.

Don't spread misinformation.

Sorry, didn't mean "average", meant "considers previous LSATs" but to simplify you can think of it as averaging:

Y: We do not use a formula or index to weigh various factors (like LSAT scores). We consider all of the information about an applicant, including multiple LSAT scores. We do not average scores, nor do we look at only your high score. [How do you weigh LSAT scores?]
http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/jdadmissionsfaq.htm

H: The LSAT need be taken only once. If you take the test more than once, all scores and their average will be reported and considered. [LSAT: Q2]
http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/ ... jdfaq.html

I realize that this has already been addressed, but here's more evidence that the averaging thing isn't real:

Karen can we get your take on how HYS (or just H) treat retakes (average vs. highest)? I've seen Mike's but not yours...

The same ABA reporting rules apply to HYS: high score wins!
The application reviewer will look at everything because that's what's in front of them, but the high score is what is reported, and that's the one that will stick out in their mind. Of course there are extreme/unusual cases where multiple tests are looked at differently (like if you've taken the test 10+ times)..

[cotiger]

Not trying to start a fight here. I'm just saying that HLS says that, and I take their word. I guess the Engineer in me just likes taking evidence into scenario. I'd prefer a referenced explanation/opinion than a completely subjective one.

Hard evidence: If HLS averaged (or strongly considered the average) instead of primarily just looking at the top score, you wouldn't see such a sharp divide between LSAT of just below median vs just above:



Rather, you'd see something more like Berkeley (which probably cares the least about LSAT scores out of anywhere in the T14):



Especially in this era of many retakes, the difference between the average score and the top score for many candidates is going to be wildly different.

Let's take OP as an example. If he gets a 173 on a retake, his average is now 167. However, people with his profile (just below median GPA/at or slightly above median highest LSAT) got in HLS 76% of the time. Compare that to someone with the same GPA, but who took the LSAT only once for a 167. Despite having the same average LSAT and GPA as OP, that person has an ~0% chance of getting into HLS.

That vast of a differential cannot be explained away. I think it's pretty clear that the only LSAT that really matters is your highest.

[Noodlebrain]

Cotiger, where did those tables come from? I've yet to see something in that format.

[cotiger]

Cotiger, where did those tables come from? I've yet to see something in that format.

Excel. I just took the LSN data for last cycle and calculated the percentage of applicants accepted in each band of 0-24, 25-49, 50-74, and 75-100 for LSAT/GPA.

The exact results for HLS that I mentioned were 0/17=0% for 164-169/3.77-3.87 and 16/21=76% for 173-174/3.77-3.87

[Noodlebrain]

Cotiger, where did those tables come from? I've yet to see something in that format.

Excel. I just took the LSN data for last cycle and calculated the percentage of applicants accepted in each band of 0-24, 25-49, 50-74, and 75-100 for LSAT/GPA.

The exact results for HLS that I mentioned were 0/17=0% for 164-169/3.77-3.87 and 16/21=76% for 173-174/3.77-3.87

Gotcha - I probably should have figured that out but thanks Is there somewhere on LSN that provides raw data or did you just manually do the searches?

[cotiger]

Cotiger, where did those tables come from? I've yet to see something in that format.

Excel. I just took the LSN data for last cycle and calculated the percentage of applicants accepted in each band of 0-24, 25-49, 50-74, and 75-100 for LSAT/GPA.

The exact results for HLS that I mentioned were 0/17=0% for 164-169/3.77-3.87 and 16/21=76% for 173-174/3.77-3.87

Gotcha - I probably should have figured that out but thanks Is there somewhere on LSN that provides raw data or did you just manually do the searches?

I just manually did the searches.

[Noodlebrain]

Cotiger, where did those tables come from? I've yet to see something in that format.

Excel. I just took the LSN data for last cycle and calculated the percentage of applicants accepted in each band of 0-24, 25-49, 50-74, and 75-100 for LSAT/GPA.

The exact results for HLS that I mentioned were 0/17=0% for 164-169/3.77-3.87 and 16/21=76% for 173-174/3.77-3.87

Gotcha - I probably should have figured that out but thanks Is there somewhere on LSN that provides raw data or did you just manually do the searches?

I just manually did the searches.

Damn! I was really hoping you found a secret treasure trove of raw data. Oh well, thanks for doing the manual labor

[Tiago Splitter]

Damn! I was really hoping you found a secret treasure trove of raw data. Oh well, thanks for doing the manual labor

You can use mylsn.info to get started.

[Noodlebrain]

Damn! I was really hoping you found a secret treasure trove of raw data. Oh well, thanks for doing the manual labor

You can use mylsn.info to get started.

Haha, oh I've checked mylsn.info more than is healthy for anyone. Thanks though!