3.8 Forum

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:29 pm

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/darascal

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/salsero

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/caciqueYara

Check these profiles out from last cycle. You're below both medians for t14 schools. Salsero's cycle may be most indicative of yours, although his GPA/LSAT are slightly higher. Search on LSN if you need more info.

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:33 pm

BLUERUFiO · Post by **BLUERUFiO** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:35 pm

Checking out these profiles made me very curious about which school they chose to attend.

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:39 pm

BLUERUFiO wrote:Checking out these profiles made me very curious about which school they chose to attend.

I think salsero went to UCI and rascal is still among us. No clue about cacique.I wish they would update their profiles for future MA/PR applicants.

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:41 pm

applyinglate wrote:
BentleyLittle wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/darascal

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/salsero

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/caciqueYara

Check these profiles out from last cycle. You're below both medians for t14 schools. Salsero's cycle may be most indicative of yours, although his GPA/LSAT are slightly higher. Search on LSN if you need more info.
so basically out of the t14? Because that's what I saw on those profiles.

also hispanic = mexican in lsn?

Best case scenario you're looking at a WL at this point. Maybe a WL>acceptance in the summer depending on how this cycle shakes out in general.

I would look up MA, Mexican, Mexican American, PR, etc. PR/Mexicans are the only hispanics that seem to receive some sort of URM boost.

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:43 pm

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:48 pm

I really couldn't give you advice on a certain school. Even those guys got WL'd and never got called back. Honestly, if you're set on applying this cycle I'd retake in February. I think today is the last day to register. Otherwise, retake in June/September and apply early next cycle.

You could also be wasting hundreds on applications. Use that $ on a retake.

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:52 pm

A retake for me is difficult. English isn’t my first language, and according to my pt averages a 162 was one point above my past 5 tests average.
Even if you can’t predict, any guesses?

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:55 pm

applyinglate wrote:A retake for me is difficult. English isn’t my first language, and according to my pt averages a 162 was one point above my past 5 tests average.
Even if you can’t predict, any guesses?

Well congrats on the 162 as an ESL! Lots of people can't break 160 with English as a first language. I think if you're smart enough to score a 162, a couple more points could be within your reach. You have nothing to lose as schools take your highest score.

With that being said, you're applying late with your stats. There was a MA URM with a 160 that got Cornell earlier in the cycle but she applied in September.

Where do you want to practice? Have you thought about a strong regional? I know Iowa (maybe a full ride) and Illinois would give you decent money with your stats.

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:58 pm

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:00 pm

If you want to be in California you really need to retake. You're probably out at S, B, USC, UCLA. Irvine is a toss up but you probably wouldn't get much $. Those are really the only schools worth going to from what I understand.

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:01 pm

BentleyLittle wrote:If you want to be in California you really need to retake. You're probably out at S, B, USC, UCLA. Irvine is a toss up but you probably wouldn't get much $. Those are really the only schools worth going to from what I understand.

would berk be an instant out for me?

eaternation · Post by **eaternation** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:05 pm

sent u a pm

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:05 pm

applyinglate wrote:
BentleyLittle wrote:If you want to be in California you really need to retake. You're probably out at S, B, USC, UCLA. Irvine is a toss up but you probably wouldn't get much $. Those are really the only schools worth going to from what I understand.
would berk be an instant out for me?

I would say so.

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:08 pm

Seems like I have a shot at cornell?

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:09 pm

eaternation wrote:sent u a pm

you didnt.

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:09 pm

applyinglate wrote:Seems like I have a shot at cornell?

Couldn't hurt if you really wanted to throw an app. But all those people that were admitted applied early.

Also, see this thread http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=222406

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:13 pm

BentleyLittle wrote:
applyinglate wrote:Seems like I have a shot at cornell?
Couldn't hurt if you really wanted to throw an app. But all those people that were admitted applied early.

Also, see this thread http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=222406

Thanks.
Also whats up with HLS and Uchi?
How much difference does applying early makes for urm?

BentleyLittle · Post by **BentleyLittle** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:20 pm

Chicago definitely prefers that you apply early so I would save your money there. And H would be a hail mary unless you retake in Feb and kill it.

applyinglate · Post by **applyinglate** » Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:49 pm

BentleyLittle wrote:Chicago definitely prefers that you apply early so I would save your money there. And H would be a hail mary unless you retake in Feb and kill it.

I see. Oh well. I guess I can try to retake...

3.8 Forum

3.8

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM

Re: 3.58 162 URM