PhD, Masters, 3.85, 163 Forum

[pjohnstron0626]

I am looking for advice please on the best application strategy to get into the best school I can.

For background purposes, I had a small scholarship offer at GULC two years ago but because of some thesis delays, decided not to attend law school last year. Instead, I thought I would retake the LSAT one more time as I finish my PhD. I'm not sure how I did, but am hoping for atleast a marginal 3-5 point bump.

I can follow the medians and number indicators on all the websites, but was wondering where my softs actually leave me: My Masters and PhD degree are in history at Oxford. As an undergraduate, I was a varsity athlete. Not that it matters, I have handful of scholarships and awards from grad. school. I also lectured and organized a few academic conferences at Oxford and worked briefly for my state's governor two years ago.

Do I have any chance at getting into a top 5 school? I know the numbers would suggest no way in hell, but who are the kids who get into these top schools well below the LSAT median? I saw Harvard lists accepted students with 158s in its range.

Would an ED application to Columbia improve my chances at getting in there at all? While I'm hoping for the best with this last test, I wanted to see where I am without a significant increase.

Thanks so much. Feel free to message me with any guidance/ advice.

[twenty]

The low LSAT scores you're seeing on the range is 1) going to go to someone with more impressive softs than yours, no offense, and 2) not something to count on even if your softs were as impressive.

You're obviously a smart guy - the MPhil/DPhil programs at Oxford are pretty brutal. If you don't hit 169+, then sit out the cycle or retake in December. Your GPA will give you a shot at a top school, but only if you have the LSAT to go with it.

[BigZuck]

Could also be people getting URM bumps and things of that nature.

Your softs are neat and all but I wouldn't expect them to help you outperform your numbers.

Don't ED anywhere that doesn't give out large scholarships to people who ED unless you're independently wealthy or have a benefactor paying for law school. Sticker price at Columbia is 300K, that's insane.

[banjo]

I think you're better off bumping this topic when you get your score back. In fact, if you're expecting only a 3-5 bump, I'd keep studying for the December test.

You can't be serious about ED at CLS--even non-TLS people know better than that nowadays. Apply broadly and get a good deal on your legal education.

[MattM]

The low LSAT scores accepted into HLS.....Could very well be because connections within the university as in the case of UT Austin

http://watchdog.org/146432/128-lsat-ut/ People scoring in the 130's got in UT due to connections.

I doubt URM would be enough of a boost at HLS to overcome a 158......Barring connections my guess is the applicant with a 158 who got in had at least two out of the three 1. URM 2. AMAZING softs 3. went to a undegrad where it is possible to get above a 4.0 cumulative GPA

[tier3]

Blanket t14. You have excellent credentials. See what they say.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

Retake until you get 169+ and you will have $ at T14s, possibly in to one of HYS, and full ride at lower ranked schools.

[A. Nony Mouse]

For the record, my experience is that PhD is a nice soft, but it isn't really going to lead you to outperform your numbers. It makes you a much better candidate than a K-JD with your numbers, but doesn't outweigh someone with your GPA but a better LSAT.

[pjohnstron0626]

Thanks, everyone.

I'll see what happens and post it for the next guy/gal.

[c11jweezy]

I wouldn't listen to what these people are saying. Perhaps the top 5 law schools would not value your PhD as much as a bump in an LSAT score, but certainly many of the t-14 will. With a remarkably high GPA and doctoral experience you have been able to not only demonstrate that you can master a field, but also to contribute to it. And your LSAT score is not bad, I believe 163=~89th percentile. I cant imagine getting a few more points correct on the LSAT would trump this. I also think it is interesting that the MEDIAN lsat score is what law schools must maintain. That means HALF of all admitted applicants score lower than the median, which does not fluctuate based on the distribution range. Had the MEAN values been what is reported, any "low" score has to be balanced out by a compensatory "high" score in order to keep the "average" from changing. Lets take 170 as a median score for example. If HALF of the students score lower than this, and all that is reported is the median score, then there is no difference between someone with a 169 or a 163, both are in the lower half of the distribution and neither lower the median. Who are the people who are admitted below the median? People like you my friend, who have unique experience to offer a classroom and those who have SHOWN that they can not only learn the material (which ANYONE can do) but also can add to it (which is a rare trait). Rock on dude and cast a wide net, you never know what you will catch.

[A. Nony Mouse]

From everything I know the above is overly optimistic, but good luck to you, OP - I hope you get an outcome you're happy with.

[gnomgnomuch]

I wouldn't listen to what these people are saying. Perhaps the top 5 law schools would not value your PhD as much as a bump in an LSAT score, but certainly many of the t-14 will. With a remarkably high GPA and doctoral experience you have been able to not only demonstrate that you can master a field, but also to contribute to it. And your LSAT score is not bad, I believe 163=~89th percentile. I cant imagine getting a few more points correct on the LSAT would trump this. I also think it is interesting that the MEDIAN lsat score is what law schools must maintain. That means HALF of all admitted applicants score lower than the median, which does not fluctuate based on the distribution range. Had the MEAN values been what is reported, any "low" score has to be balanced out by a compensatory "high" score in order to keep the "average" from changing. Lets take 170 as a median score for example. If HALF of the students score lower than this, and all that is reported is the median score, then there is no difference between someone with a 169 or a 163, both are in the lower half of the distribution and neither lower the median. Who are the people who are admitted below the median? People like you my friend, who have unique experience to offer a classroom and those who have SHOWN that they can not only learn the material (which ANYONE can do) but also can add to it (which is a rare trait). Rock on dude and cast a wide net, you never know what you will catch.

A simple check on LSN would basically prove that wrong. At a 163 you are sitting below every t-14's 25%. Right now, maybe 4 or 5 of the t-14 are in play, but those that are in play, would most likely come at no scholly... which is 280k of debt. Getting up to a 167 would put the lower t-14 in play with money, and you might be able to snag one of CCN. Getting to a 170 puts literally every school into play, the lower t-14 would throw serious money (think full or close to full scholarships) and you'd get money CCN, as well as possibly get one of HYS. Finally a 173+ would make you a serious contender for the Butler, Mordecai, Hamilton, Ruby and etc, as well as a likely in at H, and good shots at S and Y.


Law schools cant report PHD's, they can report a GPA and an LSAT. The PHD and Masters are impressive, and they'll take that into account, but it shouldn't translate into more than a couple of points in terms of LSATs. Law schools care about rankings, which are produced through stats. So a k-jd with a 3.85 but a 170 would be more preferable to most schools then you at a 3.85 and a 163.

The only schools where the PHD/Masters really count would be HYS but your LSAT is so far away from what they generally take that you won't get in anyway and it would more or less be a waste of money/time.

[c11jweezy]

I definitely hear what you guys are saying but there are people who get accepted to the t14 who are below the medians and below the 25th percentile. Lets take Harvard for example, who has a class of 560 each year. Now since the median, first quartile and third quartile are reported let assume that these number are set in stone, and Harvard would DIE before compromising them. That leaves 140 students who are below the 25th lsat percentile in the incoming class each year!!!!! These students could all have lsats of 120 and it would make NO DIFFERENCE. Of course Harvard would not take these applicants for obvious reasons, but hopefully you see my point. Essentially the LSAT scores for 140 students DO NOT influence the median, and 1st and 3rd quartiles reported each year. Back to my point about your doctorate, that is a unique trait which says a lot about you. Now you just need to tie in why law school and how your experience to this point makes you a valuable addition to the law school community.

[BigZuck]

I definitely hear what you guys are saying but there are people who get accepted to the t14 who are below the medians and below the 25th percentile. Lets take Harvard for example, who has a class of 560 each year. Now since the median, first quartile and third quartile are reported let assume that these number are set in stone, and Harvard would DIE before compromising them. That leaves 140 students who are below the 25th lsat percentile in the incoming class each year!!!!! These students could all have lsats of 120 and it would make NO DIFFERENCE. Of course Harvard would not take these applicants for obvious reasons, but hopefully you see my point. Essentially the LSAT scores for 140 students DO NOT influence the median, and 1st and 3rd quartiles reported each year. Back to my point about your doctorate, that is a unique trait which says a lot about you. Now you just need to tie in why law school and how your experience to this point makes you a valuable addition to the law school community.

URMs, super softs, sky high GPAs, legacy, etc.

The OP doesn't really have any of that. Grad degree plus athlete is cool but I wouldn't expect him to vastly outperform his LSAT score. Can you point to some PhDers on LSN who have?

[c11jweezy]

"The OP doesn't really have any of that. Grad degree plus athlete is cool but I wouldn't expect him to vastly outperform his LSAT score. Can you point to some PhDers on LSN who have?"

http://www.hourumd.com/?lsat=163&gpa=3.85

here you can see people who were accepted to t-14 schools with a 3.85 and 163. Obviously it is tough to know if someone has a PhD, but it is also inappropriate to assume this people were all URMs

[BigZuck]

"The OP doesn't really have any of that. Grad degree plus athlete is cool but I wouldn't expect him to vastly outperform his LSAT score. Can you point to some PhDers on LSN who have?"

http://www.hourumd.com/?lsat=163&gpa=3.85

here you can see people who were accepted to t-14 schools with a 3.85 and 163. Obviously it is tough to know if someone has a PhD, but it is also inappropriate to assume this people were all URMs

What is that site? I'm not familiar with it

Lsn with URM's excluded:


Also I don't think sneaking into Northwestern at sticker would be quite the coup you seem to think it would be