Chances at a T10? 168 LSAT, 3.75 GPA, not URM Forum

[FGB9891]

Not feeling confident about either my LSAT or GPA. Assuming H/Y/S is off the table but what about the rest of the T-10? Penn is my first choice. Science major in undergrad and have a Master’s + a few years of work experience if that matters.


Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

[dknightisyoung]

I'd say Penn is 50/50. I know people with way worse GPA but slightly higher LSAT get in

[QContinuum]

MyLSN is your friend.


Looks like you have a strong shot at the lower T13. I'd apply to NYU and down. I'd also recommend applying to a few of the stronger T20s.

[FGB9891]

I'd say Penn is 50/50. I know people with way worse GPA but slightly higher LSAT get in

Good to know! LSN seems to hate my chances there so good to know at least someone got in with similar stats.

[QContinuum]

I'd say Penn is 50/50. I know people with way worse GPA but slightly higher LSAT get in

Good to know! LSN seems to hate my chances there so good to know at least someone got in with similar stats.

I think this is one of the cases where the raw data needs to be finessed a bit. There's no objective reason for the apparent dip in your admissions chances at Penn - I guarantee Penn is not more selective than NYU, which is ranked higher. Pair that with the anecdata that Penn is one of the (relatively few) schools that care a lot about applicants writing a Why Penn, and the inexplicable dip makes sense. tl;dr: Write a Why Penn.

Incidentally, the exact same logic applies to UVA, which is also known to highly value a Why Virginia. Write a Why Virginia.

[FGB9891]

I'd say Penn is 50/50. I know people with way worse GPA but slightly higher LSAT get in

Good to know! LSN seems to hate my chances there so good to know at least someone got in with similar stats.

I think this is one of the cases where the raw data needs to be finessed a bit. There's no objective reason for the apparent dip in your admissions chances at Penn - I guarantee Penn is not more selective than NYU, which is ranked higher. Pair that with the anecdata that Penn is one of the (relatively few) schools that care a lot about applicants writing a Why Penn, and the inexplicable dip makes sense. tl;dr: Write a Why Penn.

Incidentally, the exact same logic applies to UVA, which is also known to highly value a Why Virginia. Write a Why Virginia.

Ah, that makes a lot of sense. I did write "Why Penn" which I think has relatively strong rationale (i.e. I live and work in Philly, my fiance got her PhD from Penn so I know the community well etc.)

Fingers crossed

[UVA2B]

Just a bit of caution in those numbers, because while it’s always best to capture data at/around your own numbers, 168-169 can actually be a big gap for LSAT for schools like UVA and Penn, especially when you’re also just under their median GPA medians as well.

That’s not to say you won’t get into either of them, but if you were giving yourself a percentage chance within the Mylsn data, you can probably assume you’re more likely to be in the lower half of results than the upper half of the results. In order to manage expectations, I think that’s just prudent.

I still think “lower T13” is generically a good possibility though.

[FGB9891]

Just a bit of caution in those numbers, because while it’s always to capture data at/around your own numbers, 168-169 can actually be a big gap for LSAT for schools like UVA and Penn, especially when you’re also just under their median GPA medians as well.

That’s not to say you won’t get into either of them, but if you were giving yourself a percentage chance within the Mylsn data, you can probably assume you’re more likely to be in the lower half of results than the upper half of the results. In order to manage expectations, I think that’s just prudent.

I still think “lower T13” is generically a good possibility though.

That's a great point - follow up for you. Say I get dinged by both; if I were to retake the LSAT and pick up a point or two (my average on PTs was closer to 170-171) and reapply next cycle would it hurt me that I'd applied and been rejected before?

[UVA2B]

Just a bit of caution in those numbers, because while it’s always to capture data at/around your own numbers, 168-169 can actually be a big gap for LSAT for schools like UVA and Penn, especially when you’re also just under their median GPA medians as well.

That’s not to say you won’t get into either of them, but if you were giving yourself a percentage chance within the Mylsn data, you can probably assume you’re more likely to be in the lower half of results than the upper half of the results. In order to manage expectations, I think that’s just prudent.

I still think “lower T13” is generically a good possibility though.

That's a great point - follow up for you. Say I get dinged by both; if I were to retake the LSAT and pick up a point or two (my average on PTs was closer to 170-171) and reapply next cycle would it hurt me that I'd applied and been rejected before?

Not in the least. You’d be more likely to see the same result if you didn’t improve your LSAT between cycles or improved your app in some other significant way, but with a better LSAT, they’d likely open their doors and possibly throw some tuition discounts your way if you also write a good Why X. Just based on the data, 169-172 are Penn and UVA’s sweetspots for LSAT, and anything above that is diminishing returns (this is a bit reductive because the LSAT is still understood in the context of the rest of their app and higher LSAT rarely hurts, but if you wanted to put a target LSAT range on those schools, I think that’s a best guess).

[FGB9891]

Just a bit of caution in those numbers, because while it’s always to capture data at/around your own numbers, 168-169 can actually be a big gap for LSAT for schools like UVA and Penn, especially when you’re also just under their median GPA medians as well.

That’s not to say you won’t get into either of them, but if you were giving yourself a percentage chance within the Mylsn data, you can probably assume you’re more likely to be in the lower half of results than the upper half of the results. In order to manage expectations, I think that’s just prudent.

I still think “lower T13” is generically a good possibility though.

That's a great point - follow up for you. Say I get dinged by both; if I were to retake the LSAT and pick up a point or two (my average on PTs was closer to 170-171) and reapply next cycle would it hurt me that I'd applied and been rejected before?

Not in the least. You’d be more likely to see the same result if you didn’t improve your LSAT between cycles or improved your app in some other significant way, but with a better LSAT, they’d likely open their doors and possibly throw some tuition discounts your way if you also write a good Why X. Just based on the data, 169-172 are Penn and UVA’s sweetspots for LSAT, and anything above that is diminishing returns (this is a bit reductive because the LSAT is still understood in the context of the rest of their app and higher LSAT rarely hurts, but if you wanted to put a target LSAT range on those schools, I think that’s a best guess).

OK so does this sound like a strange plan? If I were to study and retake the next feasible LSAT (March 30 I believe) that would be too late for this round I assume, but would I know my score before having to make a decision this cycle? Then if I scored the same or lower I'd just take the best offer on the table but if I ticked up a few points I could hold and just reapply next cycle. Sound feasible or am I just over-complicating it?

[UVA2B]

Depending on LSAT turnaround time, you might have to eat a seat deposit in that plan if you decided to reapply. But if you’re willing to sacrifice that $500 (which isn’t unreasonable IMO) for better options next cycle without immediately foregoing this cycle, I think it’s reasonable.

I could obviously be missing something, but nothing comes to mind that would be a problem beyond the seat deposit problem.

[FGB9891]

Depending on LSAT turnaround time, you might have to eat a seat deposit in that plan if you decided to reapply. But if you’re willing to sacrifice that $500 (which isn’t unreasonable IMO) for better options next cycle without immediately foregoing this cycle, I think it’s reasonable.

I could obviously be missing something, but nothing comes to mind that would be a problem beyond the seat deposit problem.

First of all thanks for hanging with me on this, it's much appreciated. Agreed that losing a deposit is no big deal in the grand scheme of things. But would I be safe to assume that I would alienate any schools that did accept me? For example say I'm in at Georgetown and Cornell and out everywhere else. I reapply the next year with a new score. I'd be banking on the fact that I get in somewhere between T1 - T12 because there's no way a school would admit you again after you turn them down once, yeah?

[UVA2B]

Depending on LSAT turnaround time, you might have to eat a seat deposit in that plan if you decided to reapply. But if you’re willing to sacrifice that $500 (which isn’t unreasonable IMO) for better options next cycle without immediately foregoing this cycle, I think it’s reasonable.

I could obviously be missing something, but nothing comes to mind that would be a problem beyond the seat deposit problem.

First of all thanks for hanging with me on this, it's much appreciated. Agreed that losing a deposit is no big deal in the grand scheme of things. But would I be safe to assume that I would alienate any schools that did accept me? For example say I'm in at Georgetown and Cornell and out everywhere else. I reapply the next year with a new score. I'd be banking on the fact that I get in somewhere between T1 - T12 because there's no way a school would admit you again after you turn them down once, yeah?

Nope. GULC and Cornell handle thousands of applications every year, and admissions officers don't hold grudges when people don't accept their admissions offer. Admissions is almost entirely transactional from the school's perspective, even though many students impart so much emotion into their interactions with admissions. That's not too say admissions doesn't connect with you and make you interested/excited about their school, because they are pros at that, but it's more that if you passed their test once, deciding to step back and take the test again won't offend them or make them think differently of you when you apply again. They'll review your old app with your new one, but when you have a different app (such as with a new LSAT), they'll understand it for what it is: you reapplied. Admissions are simultaneously performing two jobs, and they need to do so delicately. They are scrutinizing applicants for qualifications to be sure. But they're also the face of recruiting. They know they are balancing those interests for the school.

[FGB9891]

Depending on LSAT turnaround time, you might have to eat a seat deposit in that plan if you decided to reapply. But if you’re willing to sacrifice that $500 (which isn’t unreasonable IMO) for better options next cycle without immediately foregoing this cycle, I think it’s reasonable.

I could obviously be missing something, but nothing comes to mind that would be a problem beyond the seat deposit problem.

First of all thanks for hanging with me on this, it's much appreciated. Agreed that losing a deposit is no big deal in the grand scheme of things. But would I be safe to assume that I would alienate any schools that did accept me? For example say I'm in at Georgetown and Cornell and out everywhere else. I reapply the next year with a new score. I'd be banking on the fact that I get in somewhere between T1 - T12 because there's no way a school would admit you again after you turn them down once, yeah?

Nope. GULC and Cornell handle thousands of applications every year, and admissions officers don't hold grudges when people don't accept their admissions offer. Admissions is almost entirely transactional from the school's perspective, even though many students impart so much emotion into their interactions with admissions. That's not too say admissions doesn't connect with you and make you interested/excited about their school, because they are pros at that, but it's more that if you passed their test once, deciding to step back and take the test again won't offend them or make them think differently of you when you apply again. They'll review your old app with your new one, but when you have a different app (such as with a new LSAT), they'll understand it for what it is: you reapplied. Admissions are simultaneously performing two jobs, and they need to do so delicately. They are scrutinizing applicants for qualifications to be sure. But they're also the face of recruiting. They know they are balancing those interests for the school.

Gotcha. I wasn't thinking it would be an emotional decision necessarily, just that I know they're concerned about their yield as well and if you turn them down once they'd be likely to think you'd turn them down again. But if it's not a problem then all the better!

[FGB9891]

Not feeling confident about either my LSAT or GPA. Assuming H/Y/S is off the table but what about the rest of the T-10?


Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

[QContinuum]

Not feeling confident about either my LSAT or GPA. Assuming H/Y/S is off the table but what about the rest of the T-10?


Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

I don't think there's much more to be said that hasn't already been said above. Refer to my initial reply with MyLSN data indicating your chances at each school in the T20. Also refer to UVA2B's caveats regarding that data.

[Vianco]

MyLSN is your friend.

Looks like you have a strong shot at the lower T13. I'd apply to NYU and down. I'd also recommend applying to a few of the stronger T20s.

Can this really be considered an accurate representation when you're including data from 2015 and 2016? A lot of schools in the T14 have increased their median GPAs, and this is especially important for someone with a 3.75 GPA. For example, Cornell's median GPA in 2016 was a 3.73. Cornell's median last cycle was 3.82 and 3.73 was their 25th.

[Wild Card]

T14, yes.

T10, no way, unless you're a Michigan, Virginia, or California native.

[eck456]

Depending on LSAT turnaround time, you might have to eat a seat deposit in that plan if you decided to reapply. But if you’re willing to sacrifice that $500 (which isn’t unreasonable IMO) for better options next cycle without immediately foregoing this cycle, I think it’s reasonable.

I could obviously be missing something, but nothing comes to mind that would be a problem beyond the seat deposit problem.

First of all thanks for hanging with me on this, it's much appreciated. Agreed that losing a deposit is no big deal in the grand scheme of things. But would I be safe to assume that I would alienate any schools that did accept me? For example say I'm in at Georgetown and Cornell and out everywhere else. I reapply the next year with a new score. I'd be banking on the fact that I get in somewhere between T1 - T12 because there's no way a school would admit you again after you turn them down once, yeah?

Nope. GULC and Cornell handle thousands of applications every year, and admissions officers don't hold grudges when people don't accept their admissions offer. Admissions is almost entirely transactional from the school's perspective, even though many students impart so much emotion into their interactions with admissions. That's not too say admissions doesn't connect with you and make you interested/excited about their school, because they are pros at that, but it's more that if you passed their test once, deciding to step back and take the test again won't offend them or make them think differently of you when you apply again. They'll review your old app with your new one, but when you have a different app (such as with a new LSAT), they'll understand it for what it is: you reapplied. Admissions are simultaneously performing two jobs, and they need to do so delicately. They are scrutinizing applicants for qualifications to be sure. But they're also the face of recruiting. They know they are balancing those interests for the school.

Gotcha. I wasn't thinking it would be an emotional decision necessarily, just that I know they're concerned about their yield as well and if you turn them down once they'd be likely to think you'd turn them down again. But if it's not a problem then all the better!

I did it with a school in the T-10 and they re-accepted me the second time around. I wouldn’t stress over it, especially if you have a good reason you can say you reapplied (I wanted one more year at work, family stuff, questions about location and couldn’t commit, etc). Wasn’t an issue at least w the school i reapplied to