Top Law Schools

.

If you were scoring 172, why would you not retake? Do you understand the possibilities you have with a 172... or even a 170?

ilikebaseball wrote:If you were scoring 172, why would you not retake? Do you understand the possibilities you have with a 172... or even a 170?

Because that would mean I would have to wait for the June test? And that's past most deadlines? Like I said, I haven't completely crossed that possibility off of my list, but if I take the June test then I need to take a year off, and that's not really ideal for me right now. I'm hoping to see what my options are this cycle before being forced to take a year off.

And, again, those were only two practice tests. Totally could've been flukes.

You'll probably be on a number of waitlists when you take June, and when you get your score you'll get off those waitlists with lots of money.

Right now you can get a full ride to a mediocre school with mediocre employment prospects. With a slightly better score you can get a full ride to one of the best schools in the country. It seems shockingly obvious what the right decision is here.

Either this is a flame or you have seriously horrible judgment. Definitely leaning towards flame.

Tiago Splitter wrote:You'll probably be on a number of waitlists when you take June, and when you get your score you'll get off those waitlists with lots of money.

Right now you can get a full ride to a mediocre school with mediocre employment prospects. With a slightly better score you can get a full ride to one of the best schools in the country. It seems shockingly obvious what the right decision is here.

Do schools even have lots of money to offer that late in the game? I was under the impression that funds usually ran out earlier than that.

Nathanael wrote:Either this is a flame or you have seriously horrible judgment. Definitely leaning towards flame.

Funny, the judgement seems decidedly less horrible when considering that taking a year off would mean student loans would kick in and I'd be struggling to make ends meet. Not to mention, trying to get decent employment with my lack of experience and a useless degree in History would be more stressful than it would be worth.

I wouldn't say that someone has horrible judgment. She just started thinking about law school, hasn't done much research yet, and is asking for advice.

OP, you have something that a lot of us with lower GPAs would kill for. The point is while you can never retake your GPA, you can retake the LSAT. Even if it's gonna take a few months of studying and 200 or so bucks, it'll be saving you tens of thousands of dollars in the long run. With a 4.0 and a 170+ LSAT you are looking at admission to a T6 (top 6) law school,
Big scholarships at the T14 (possibly full rides), and the amazing opportunities that come with it. With a 172+, you are also a potential admit for Yale, Harvard, and Stanford. If your whole career is based of off this one decision, it makes a lot more sense to apply next cycle after you retake the LSAT. You will save so much money in the long run.

Also FYI scholarship money dries up the later you apply and even if you applied right now it would be considered quite late.

Doubling down on student debt is equally stupid to ignoring it. While acknowledging how paying off student loans can become onerous, you point out the glaring issue at hand. Getting into a school where the median outcome won't cover your total student debt is equally unattractive to putting off school a year to retake and work toward that desirable outcome.

You have an amazing GPA, and if you get your realistic LSAT (based on practice), you can go to a school that will result in a free education where the median outcome is financially desirable.

I can't speak to your career goals, but please play the long game, not the short.

ticklemesilly wrote:OP, you have something that a lot of us with lower GPAs would kill for. The point is while you can never retake your GPA, you can retake the LSAT. Even if it's gonna take a few months of studying and 200 or so bucks, it'll be saving you tens of thousands of dollars in the long run. With a 4.0 and a 170+ LSAT you are looking at admission to a T6 (top 6) law school,
Big scholarships at the T14 (possibly full rides), and the amazing opportunities that come with it. With a 172+, you are also a potential admit for Yale, Harvard, and Stanford. If your whole career is based of off this one decision, it makes a lot more sense to apply next cycle after you retake the LSAT. You will save so much money in the long run.

Ramius wrote:Doubling down on student debt is equally stupid to ignoring it. While acknowledging how paying off student loans can become onerous, you point out the glaring issue at hand. Getting into a school where the median outcome won't cover your total student debt is equally unattractive to putting off school a year to retake and work toward that desirable outcome.

You have an amazing GPA, and if you get your realistic LSAT (based on practice), you can go to a school that will result in a free education where the median outcome is financially desirable.

I can't speak to your career goals, but please play the long game, not the short.

I apologize; I am not trying to come off as if I don't understand my fortune in terms of my GPA. (Granted, one of the reasons I was able to keep it so high was because I had so many AP/CLEP/Study Abroad credits, and I can't help but think that that's extremely obvious, the way LSAC reports transcript data.) I'm also not trying to appear as if I don't understand my ability to get into better schools with an improved LSAT.

The thing is, I'm extremely aware of the fact that the governmental jobs I'm interested in won't make me much money no matter where I graduate from. I'm not convinced it would be important to go to a T6 or T14. Obviously, it'd be nice to go to a more recognizable name, but I don't have my heart truly set on it. If I managed a full ride to Harvard (which I obviously wont, but stick with me for my point) and a full ride to Notre Dame, I would go to Notre Dame. That's my dream school, whatever the reason. Now, if you're telling me there would be a decent chance of getting in there with a full ride, if I only managed to improve my scores even three-to-five points or so... then that's something I obviously need to consider.

But I'm not about to decide to wait the year without even trying to apply now. If I don't have a good option this year, then fine, I'll take a gap year somehow and retake with a bit of actual studying this time. But in the mean time, I really would like to apply to a few schools just to see where my standing is now.

Do either of you have any suggestions on where I could hope to get scholarships right now?

You'd be insane to choose Notre Dame or Boston College over Harvard. The difference in job prospects is absolutely massive, and to the extent top schools require you to take loans they'll pay all of your loans for you if you end up in a government for public interest job.

Again, you can get a full ride right now to mediocre schools that don't give you a great shot at your goals. Or you can retake and waltz into Harvard or NYU and do whatever you want.

You should apply for a retake

Tiago Splitter wrote:You'd be insane to choose Notre Dame or Boston College over Harvard. The difference in job prospects is absolutely massive, and to the extent top schools require you to take loans they'll pay all of your loans for you if you end up in a government for public interest job.

Again, you can get a full ride right now to mediocre schools that don't give you a great shot at your goals. Or you can retake and waltz into Harvard or NYU and do whatever you want.

To clarify, I didn't say I'd choose BC over Harvard, haha. Only ND. Really, though, the T6 schools all seem way too competitive / high pressure for me. I can deal with pressure, but from all I've heard, I'm not sure I'm interested in bothering with it. I'll have to look into that loan repayment option, though; I wasn't aware of that possibility.

My problem (fine, you'll argue I have multiple...) is that I do not know what you mean by 'mediocre schools'. Are we talking bottom half of top 50? 100?

you should NOT be applying with that LSAT.

irishamerican wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:You'd be insane to choose Notre Dame or Boston College over Harvard. The difference in job prospects is absolutely massive, and to the extent top schools require you to take loans they'll pay all of your loans for you if you end up in a government for public interest job.

Again, you can get a full ride right now to mediocre schools that don't give you a great shot at your goals. Or you can retake and waltz into Harvard or NYU and do whatever you want.

To clarify, I didn't say I'd choose BC over Harvard, haha. Only ND. Really, though, the T6 schools all seem way too competitive / high pressure for me. I can deal with pressure, but from all I've heard, I'm not sure I'm interested in bothering with it. I'll have to look into that loan repayment option, though; I wasn't aware of that possibility.

My problem (fine, you'll argue I have multiple...) is that I do not know what you mean by 'mediocre schools'. Are we talking bottom half of top 50? 100?

I promise you, the schools outside of the T14 are more competitive than the schools within.

And the only difference between you and someone at Columbia is literally 6 more questions right on the LSAT.

It'll be harder to get scholarships now than if you apply earlier. There is only so much money to go around. Use the prelaw-->search function on mylsn.info to get an idea of what kind of scholarships/chances you are looking at right now. But any school below T20 is long to be considered regional so keep in mind if you choose one of those your job prospects will be limited to whatever area you went to school with very limited mobility.

i can't believe HYSCCN with $$ is on the table and you're asking about what TT schools you could get money from

irishamerican wrote:

Nathanael wrote:Either this is a flame or you have seriously horrible judgment. Definitely leaning towards flame.

Funny, the judgement seems decidedly less horrible when considering that taking a year off would mean student loans would kick in and I'd be struggling to make ends meet. Not to mention, trying to get decent employment with my lack of experience and a useless degree in History would be more stressful than it would be worth.

So the answer is to rush off to law school to accumulate more debt? I know you said you want a full ride, but even if you managed that, then you are still looking at 3 years of living expenses.

Clearly, you think there is some alternative to languishing in poverty, as you mention a gap year abroad in your post. With a 4.0 and a bit of creativity, even in a useless major, there are jobs out there if you look. Not wanting to take on the stress of looking for a job is a joke, do you think good employment outcomes will be easy to get out of law schools like Notre Dame or Boston College? You say you don't want the pressure at a T6 school, but you should realize that the pressure is actually much higher at lower ranked schools where people are competing just to attain any kind of gainful employment.

Anyways, rushing off to grad school is a sign of very poor judgment alone, especially law school.

I'm still leaning towards flame though, for the record. The whole "yeah, never really prepared, just took 2 practice tests really quick and got 172's, but whatever" bit is too obnoxious for real life.

runinthefront wrote:I promise you, the schools outside of the T14 are more competitive than the schools within.

And the only difference between you and someone at Columbia is literally 6 more questions right on the LSAT.

Do you lack ambition

But are they an easier competition to stand out in?

Believe me, I'm well aware of how easy it could have been if I hadn't been too drugged to properly understand one of the passages on the LSAT. I can kick myself about it, or I can accept that it happened and that my score really isn't that bad of a score. I'll consider everyone's advice to just retake it, but I do not understand the harm in seeing what the options are now, before shelling out a few hundred more dollars and rearranging my plans for the next year.

To your final question, I suppose that would depend on your definition of ambition. I have no desire to be world-renowned and command a six-figure salary; I only want to make a difference in the world and have a good personal life outside of work. Like I said, I'm interested in Criminal or Children's Advocacy. I'm not the kind of person who cares about being #1 or going to #1.

Nathanael wrote:So the answer is to rush off to law school to accumulate more debt? I know you said you want a full ride, but even if you managed that, then you are still looking at 3 years of living expenses.

Clearly, you think there is some alternative to languishing in poverty, as you mention a gap year abroad in your post. With a 4.0 and a bit of creativity, even in a useless major, there are jobs out there if you look. Not wanting to take on the stress of looking for a job is a joke, do you think good employment outcomes will be easy to get out of law schools like Notre Dame or Boston College? You say you don't want the pressure at a T6 school, but you should realize that the pressure is actually much higher at lower ranked schools where people are competing just to attain any kind of gainful employment.

Anyways, rushing off to grad school is a sign of very poor judgment alone, especially law school.

I'm still leaning towards flame though, for the record. The whole "yeah, never really prepared, just took 2 practice tests really quick and got 172's, but whatever" bit is too obnoxious for real life.

Fair play. I know that either option has the possibility of increasing debt. I have the means to support a small amount of debt; I said I could take a gap year abroad because I could afford it, if I absolutely killed my savings and lived on nothing. Doable and possibly worth the experience, actually. My reluctance to look for a job with my major has less to do with the stress of locating one and more to do with the stress accumulated from hating that job every single day, and being forced to stay in an awkward limbo of life. I'm not a fan of limbo, and I'm /really/ not a fan of the alternative jobs I could possibly snag in the meantime. 4.0 gpa or not, the only experience I have is at a restaurant and as a nanny.

Obnoxious? Perhaps. But I've already made it clear that my money is on those 172s being flukes. Yeah, looking at the questions I missed on the Dec test made it VERY clear to me that I wasn't thinking clearly on test day, but even if I had been, there's always a chance of just not understanding a part. I imagine a retake would look more like a 168 or 170, and I question the importance of those extra few points.

Post removed...

ticklemesilly wrote:It'll be harder to get scholarships now than if you apply earlier. There is only so much money to go around. Use the prelaw-->search function on mylsn.info to get an idea of what kind of scholarships/chances you are looking at right now. But any school below T20 is long to be considered regional so keep in mind if you choose one of those your job prospects will be limited to whatever area you went to school with very limited mobility.

That's extremely useful information; thank you ever so much! I will most certainly keep that in mind, though I was already trying to narrow down the region to where I'd be willing to spend 3+ years anyways (the Northeast, really). I'll definitely check out that site you suggested.

runinthefront wrote:i can't believe HYSCCN with $$ is on the table and you're asking about what TT schools you could get money from

HYSCCN with $$ are not on the table. There's a /chance/ that CCN could be, sure, but after a great inconvenience and likely without $$. My gpa and (potentially) a lsat score are all that I have going for me. I have no real diversity, and no real soft factors.

gamerish wrote:

irishamerican wrote:If I managed a full ride to Harvard (which I obviously wont, but stick with me for my point) and a full ride to Notre Dame, I would go to Notre Dame.

Jesus christ

Exactly; He does have something to do with that decision.

irishamerican wrote:

Nathanael wrote:So the answer is to rush off to law school to accumulate more debt? I know you said you want a full ride, but even if you managed that, then you are still looking at 3 years of living expenses.

Clearly, you think there is some alternative to languishing in poverty, as you mention a gap year abroad in your post. With a 4.0 and a bit of creativity, even in a useless major, there are jobs out there if you look. Not wanting to take on the stress of looking for a job is a joke, do you think good employment outcomes will be easy to get out of law schools like Notre Dame or Boston College? You say you don't want the pressure at a T6 school, but you should realize that the pressure is actually much higher at lower ranked schools where people are competing just to attain any kind of gainful employment.

Anyways, rushing off to grad school is a sign of very poor judgment alone, especially law school.

I'm still leaning towards flame though, for the record. The whole "yeah, never really prepared, just took 2 practice tests really quick and got 172's, but whatever" bit is too obnoxious for real life.

Fair play. I know that either option has the possibility of increasing debt. I have the means to support a small amount of debt; I said I could take a gap year abroad because I could afford it, if I absolutely killed my savings and lived on nothing. Doable and possibly worth the experience, actually. My reluctance to look for a job with my major has less to do with the stress of locating one and more to do with the stress accumulated from hating that job every single day, and being forced to stay in an awkward limbo of life. I'm not a fan of limbo, and I'm /really/ not a fan of the alternative jobs I could possibly snag in the meantime. 4.0 gpa or not, the only experience I have is at a restaurant and as a nanny.

Obnoxious? Perhaps. But I've already made it clear that my money is on those 172s being flukes. Yeah, looking at the questions I missed on the Dec test made it VERY clear to me that I wasn't thinking clearly on test day, but even if I had been, there's always a chance of just not understanding a part. I imagine a retake would look more like a 168 or 170, and I question the importance of those extra few points.

Do you realize that sitting down and scoring above a 170 on an LSAT without preparation is nearly unheard of? Admittedly, a lot of people on this website take it to extremes, but most competitive applicants study at least a month for the LSAT. If you honestly scored a 172 twice with no preparation, even 2 weeks of dedicated study could get you to consistently scoring in the top percentile.

There is no reason to think you would be limited to a 168 or 170, and even if you were, your options would be so much better with one of those scores.

.

Nathanael wrote:Do you realize that sitting down and scoring above a 170 on an LSAT without preparation is nearly unheard of? Admittedly, a lot of people on this website take it to extremes, but most competitive applicants study at least a month for the LSAT. If you honestly scored a 172 twice with no preparation, even 2 weeks of dedicated study could get you to consistently scoring in the top percentile.

There is no reason to think you would be limited to a 168 or 170, and even if you were, your options would be so much better with one of those scores.

I figured it was more in the "not to be expected" category than the "nearly unheard of" category, but I understand your point. I test well, and logic puzzles are honestly my definition of a fun pastime.

My reasoning for thinking the score would be limited to such is that I'm aware the statistics for increasing your lsat score during a retake are not good. That, and I'm factoring in the likelihood of me being so busy with theses this semester that even taking it in June would not give me much time to prepare anyways.

wolfie_m. wrote:This is dumb. Do not go to a law school because of some notion that it's the most "Christian."

Can't a girl make a smart-assed comment?