Top Law Schools

Does UT Austin consider only the highest score or do they consider all LSAT Scores….

Their website is kind of vague and says " If I take the LSAT more than once, which score does UT use?

Candidates with multiple LSAT scores will be evaluated using all reported scores. However, the Law School will no longer solely consider an applicant’s average score in the admissions review process. The ABA recently revised its survey reporting requirements; all law schools are being asked to report an applicant’s highest LSAT score."

Like many test takers I scored lower on exam day than on practice tests and got a 154…..i was expecting a high 150's low 160's…..but was wondering if UT is out of play as the 154 was well below their median even if I were to retake and get a 165+ I plan on a Sept or December retake

I live about an hour from Austin so I definitely plan to apply

Thanks!

I personally talked to the current head of admission at UT Law (I'm at UT for undergrad).

He said he wanted an addendum if the LSAT score jumped up over 5 points.

But that they don't average, though they may "consider" your other scores.

Essentially, just do better on your retake and you'll be fine. Submit an addendum to be safe.

I jumped more than 5, didn't even contemplate writing an addendum. They don't consider anything but the highest. I got exactly what my highest LSAT score said I deserved, maybe a little more.

Ut is almost certainly out of play with a 154

I meant is UT not an option for me because of my 154 .....or would I have a competitive chance with a 166 retake or so

I plan on retaking for sure but wasn't sure if the 154 would count against me even if I were to improve

MattM wrote:I meant is UT not an option for me because of my 154 .....or would I have a competitive chance with a 166 retake or so

I plan on retaking for sure but wasn't sure if the 154 would count against me even if I were to improve

It won't count against you at all. They only consider your highest score. It's as if the lower scores don't even exist.

BigZuck wrote:

MattM wrote:I meant is UT not an option for me because of my 154 .....or would I have a competitive chance with a 166 retake or so

I plan on retaking for sure but wasn't sure if the 154 would count against me even if I were to improve

It won't count against you at all. They only consider your highest score. It's as if the lower scores don't even exist.

Do you have a source on such a strong statement?

If you score a 179, and then a 121, it will not just be as if the lower score doesn't exist.

That being said, an increase from the 150's to the 160's (or higher) will be totally fine. And schools expect your score to increase from multiple tests.

Cradle6 wrote:

BigZuck wrote:

MattM wrote:I meant is UT not an option for me because of my 154 .....or would I have a competitive chance with a 166 retake or so

I plan on retaking for sure but wasn't sure if the 154 would count against me even if I were to improve

It won't count against you at all. They only consider your highest score. It's as if the lower scores don't even exist.

Do you have a source on such a strong statement?

If you score a 179, and then a 121, it will not just be as if the lower score doesn't exist.

That being said, an increase from the 150's to the 160's (or higher) will be totally fine. And schools expect your score to increase from multiple tests.

Really bro? For all practical purposes he is correct. Outside of the top 6 schools, data has shown time and again that schools only consider the highest score. As long as two scores were both achieved without cheating and the person actually tried hard and finished the test, yeah, in 99.9% of scenarios it will be like the lower score doesn't exist for schools outside of the top 6.

Cradle6 wrote:

BigZuck wrote:

MattM wrote:I meant is UT not an option for me because of my 154 .....or would I have a competitive chance with a 166 retake or so

I plan on retaking for sure but wasn't sure if the 154 would count against me even if I were to improve

It won't count against you at all. They only consider your highest score. It's as if the lower scores don't even exist.

Do you have a source on such a strong statement?

If you score a 179, and then a 121, it will not just be as if the lower score doesn't exist.

That being said, an increase from the 150's to the 160's (or higher) will be totally fine. And schools expect your score to increase from multiple tests.

I thought we were talking about jumping from the mid 150s to the mid 160s. Didn't realize we were talking about dropping from the high 170s to the low 120s. My b

op, u didn't even mention ur gpa

highest score is what matters

Okay, Thanks!

I will definitely like to improve…..I don't feel like my test day score was reflective of my prep….I scored a 154 on test day which was the same as I had gotten after 3-4 weeks of prep and was PT'ing in the high 150's low 160's right before the exam.

What would your take on taking the test or not in December be if I were practicing in the Low 162-163 range a few weeks before the test?…..While a 162 or 163 isn't bad for the other schools in Texas that Im looking at , that would be two exam scores well off the median for UT….Would I be better off sitting out a cycle of Law School and test in 2015?…….I would probably take the December LSAT even if I was PTing at 162/163 and apply to SMU or Baylor if I had no risk of jeopardizing my future chances of UT for another cycle,….but if the December test would hurt my chances for UT then I would probably sit out a cycle to improve .

I have kept a constant improvement starting at a lowly 145 and haven't really felt I have maxed out so sitting out a cycle wouldn't be the worst idea to improve my chances at better schools.

MattM wrote:Okay, Thanks!

I will definitely like to improve…..I don't feel like my test day score was reflective of my prep….I scored a 154 on test day which was the same as I had gotten after 3-4 weeks of prep and was PT'ing in the high 150's low 160's right before the exam.

What would your take on taking the test or not in December be if I were practicing in the Low 162-163 range a few weeks before the test?…..While a 162 or 163 isn't bad for the other schools in Texas that Im looking at , that would be two exam scores well off the median for UT….Would I be better off sitting out a cycle of Law School and test in 2015?…….I would probably take the December LSAT even if I was PTing at 162/163 and apply to SMU or Baylor if I had no risk of jeopardizing my future chances of UT for another cycle,….but if the December test would hurt my chances for UT then I would probably sit out a cycle to improve .

I have kept a constant improvement starting at a lowly 145 and haven't really felt I have maxed out so sitting out a cycle wouldn't be the worst idea to improve my chances at better schools.

You need to put in much, much more prep than a month. Most TLSers spend anywhere from three months to half a year seriously prepping. You need to be PTing ~ three points higher than the score you want. If you want to get into UT you need to be PTing 170 consistently. You should still be shooting for a UT worthy score if you want SMU or Houston, or maybe Baylor, as you can't justify attending either without a good scholarship.

Do not take the test until you are ready to get the score you need, and for the love of Zeus do not attend like A&M or some other Texas TTT just because you don't want to retake/can't dramatically improve. If you can't break into the mid 160s you need to think about another career path.

I prepped since Mid February for the June exam….what I meant to say is I was my second practice exam after 3-4 weeks of prep was a 154 so i was a bit disappointed my exam day score was a 154 even though i feel had improved a lot in my knowledge of the LSAT from March to June and got better in PT's but my score didn't show it…..

That being said I agree, I'll aim for a UT and see where that takes me…….certainly better to retake and/or sit out a cycle if necessary….I feel like I can improve as each score has gotten better so there is no reason stop improving…..if I feel like I had "maxed out" I would take a SMU or a Baylor instead of aiming for UT, ...but it doesn't make sense to stop now since I can get into UT with a lot of work

I'e taken two 35 min LR sections within the last week and got -2 and -3 so a UT type of score is not unrealistic with hard work

Cradle6 wrote:
If you score a 179, and then a 121, it will not just be as if the lower score doesn't exist.

Why not? No one "lucks into" a 179, so there's no reason to think that score isn't legitimate/representative. An abysmally-low score, on the other hand, could simply mean the person was sick on test day, or mis-bubbled heinously. Maybe not a 121 - you'd almost have to try to score that low, but I don't see adcomms having any problem at all disregarding a subsequent lower score, especially when they don't have to report it to anyone.

Cradle6 wrote:I personally talked to the current head of admission at UT Law (I'm at UT for undergrad).

He said he wanted an addendum if the LSAT score jumped up over 5 points.

But that they don't average, though they may "consider" your other scores.

Essentially, just do better on your retake and you'll be fine. Submit an addendum to be safe.

Not sure who the head of admission is at UT Law since you say "he" considering the dean of admissions is a woman...

EDIT: Realized you were probably talking about the director, who is in fact, male.

MattM wrote:Okay, Thanks!

I will definitely like to improve…..I don't feel like my test day score was reflective of my prep….I scored a 154 on test day which was the same as I had gotten after 3-4 weeks of prep and was PT'ing in the high 150's low 160's right before the exam.

What would your take on taking the test or not in December be if I were practicing in the Low 162-163 range a few weeks before the test?…..While a 162 or 163 isn't bad for the other schools in Texas that Im looking at , that would be two exam scores well off the median for UT….Would I be better off sitting out a cycle of Law School and test in 2015?…….I would probably take the December LSAT even if I was PTing at 162/163 and apply to SMU or Baylor if I had no risk of jeopardizing my future chances of UT for another cycle,….but if the December test would hurt my chances for UT then I would probably sit out a cycle to improve .

I have kept a constant improvement starting at a lowly 145 and haven't really felt I have maxed out so sitting out a cycle wouldn't be the worst idea to improve my chances at better schools.

This. And data this cycle implies unless you're URM you'll need 167+ to get in.

BigZuck wrote:

Cradle6 wrote:

BigZuck wrote:

MattM wrote:I meant is UT not an option for me because of my 154 .....or would I have a competitive chance with a 166 retake or so

I plan on retaking for sure but wasn't sure if the 154 would count against me even if I were to improve

It won't count against you at all. They only consider your highest score. It's as if the lower scores don't even exist.

Do you have a source on such a strong statement?

If you score a 179, and then a 121, it will not just be as if the lower score doesn't exist.

That being said, an increase from the 150's to the 160's (or higher) will be totally fine. And schools expect your score to increase from multiple tests.

I thought we were talking about jumping from the mid 150s to the mid 160s. Didn't realize we were talking about dropping from the high 170s to the low 120s. My b

If you were just talking about this case, then you're right and I apologize.

Maybe I'm using too much LSAT logic on this, but I interpreted your post as saying that "your lower score simply doesn't exist" in all other cases, which is simply insane.

To use a much more normal example, if someone has a 155, a 160, and a 165, compared to someone with just a 165, then the single 165 scorer looks better (even if marginally). A score decrease would look worse.

And why would he say that he wants an addendum for such a slight score increase if lower scores have no (read: 0) weight on admission?

I know retaking is always the answer on these forums (usually true), but there are times it's not.

I'm talking about the (vast?) majority of real life cases. For example-Jump from a 155 to a 170. Unless its maybe HYS (or, oddly enough, NYU seems to care about multiple takes for God knows what reason) it's not going to matter at all. You'll be treated as a 170. Especially at a school like UT. I mean, if it makes you feel better to write an addendum then go for it I guess. But if it's some weird excuse or just "I studied harder" or whatever then I think at best it'll have no effect and maybe they'll be put off if it's too excuse-y.

Speaking to UT specifically, I had a few different score jumps, first was 6 points and the second was 2 points. I didn't even contemplate writing an addendum and it didn't matter. That's only one anecdote so feel free to ignore it. And by all means do/believe whatever an adcom tells you. I never made a regular habit of that but maybe that's a good thing to do, I dunno. I can say that regardless of what Mr. Riley said, I had a big jump, didn't write an addendum, and it didn't matter at UT. It certainly wasn't something I had to do, and not writing one didn't adversely affect me.

Also, according to the Dean of Admissions, UT basically has a numerical index for deciding what scholarship one gets. It's based on LSAT/GPA combo and the LSAT they use for that is the highest. Not the average or anything like that. She has posted about it in at least one Facebook group before, feel free to ask her about it.

I feel like a 160 --> 173 scorer would be viewed as just a 173 scorer. But what about 171 --> 173? Am I wrong in thinking this would be subconsciously averaged or something? Sorry to go off-topic.

tskela wrote:I feel like a 160 --> 173 scorer would be viewed as just a 173 scorer. But what about 171 --> 173? Am I wrong in thinking this would be subconsciously averaged or something? Sorry to go off-topic.

Subconscious doesn't matter. School's medians are what is important.

WokeUpInACar wrote:

tskela wrote:I feel like a 160 --> 173 scorer would be viewed as just a 173 scorer. But what about 171 --> 173? Am I wrong in thinking this would be subconsciously averaged or something? Sorry to go off-topic.

Subconscious doesn't matter. School's medians are what is important.

Yup, I knew that. Duh. Time to stop playing "if I was an admissions person".

BigZuck wrote:I'm talking about the (vast?) majority of real life cases. For example-Jump from a 155 to a 170. Unless its maybe HYS (or, oddly enough, NYU seems to care about multiple takes for God knows what reason) it's not going to matter at all. You'll be treated as a 170. Especially at a school like UT. I mean, if it makes you feel better to write an addendum then go for it I guess. But if it's some weird excuse or just "I studied harder" or whatever then I think at best it'll have no effect and maybe they'll be put off if it's too excuse-y.

Speaking to UT specifically, I had a few different score jumps, first was 6 points and the second was 2 points. I didn't even contemplate writing an addendum and it didn't matter. That's only one anecdote so feel free to ignore it. And by all means do/believe whatever an adcom tells you. I never made a regular habit of that but maybe that's a good thing to do, I dunno. I can say that regardless of what Mr. Riley said, I had a big jump, didn't write an addendum, and it didn't matter at UT. It certainly wasn't something I had to do, and not writing one didn't adversely affect me.

Also, according to the Dean of Admissions, UT basically has a numerical index for deciding what scholarship one gets. It's based on LSAT/GPA combo and the LSAT they use for that is the highest. Not the average or anything like that. She has posted about it in at least one Facebook group before, feel free to ask her about it.

Definitely. I called about a scholarship and was told explicitly that my LSAT/GPA didn't meet the schollie reqs b/c <3.0. Splittler problems.