Top Law Schools

I was hoping I could get a little feedback on my plan for the cycle before things really kick off. Additionally, I’ve got a few questions about the process I haven’t been able to figure out myself. Thanks in advance to anyone who takes a second to skim this and give me their thoughts.

My stats are a 171 LSAT and a 3.42 LSAC GPA. Probably meaningless but my GPA has an extreme upward trend and I have decent material (boilerplate undiagnosed mental health condition but I think I can tell a story) in an addendum about my 2.4 freshman GPA.

It appears the general opinion is almost nobody has truly “strong” softs, but for my ego’s sake mine are as follows:
(1) 1.5 years of WE at an immigration law firm in a major city, where I spend most of my time working with non-English speaking undocumented immigrants and refugees. I also had a summer internship at another firm serving poor clients, so decently strong PI focus.
(2) a decent amount of writing published in medium-sized outlets and years of experience working both freelance and for my school’s paper
(3) extensive undergraduate research experience and honors, including nearly ten thousand dollars in research grants awarded to me personally
(4) t20 undergrad (I’m sorry my ego needed to list it)
(5) a childhood that was sufficiently sad and abusive to probably make for a good personal statement
(6) very very strong letters of rec

Given the above data, is the below list of safety, match, and reach schools reasonable?

MATCH: (1) Georgetown (2) UCLA (3) Vanderbilt

REACH: (4) Cornell (5) Michigan (6) Duke

HIGH-REACH: (7) NYU (8) UC-Berkeley (9) UVA

LOW-MATCH: (10) USC (11) WUSTL

SAFETY: (12) Notre Dame (13) Wisconsin (14) Illinois (15) UMiami

I’m assuming I’ll get into approximately 1/6 of the reach and high-reach schools, approximately 3/5 of the low-match and match schools, and approximately 4/4 of the safety schools. Are my classifications of the schools and my chances at them roughly accurate? Lastly, does this seem like a well-chosen selection of schools to apply to for optimal results this cycle?

That’s the central question. The ancillary questions I haven’t been able to find an answer to regarding the law school application process are as follows:

Two other schools I was considering applying to are Columbia and UChicago - but looking at the admissions numbers, I’m strongly getting the impression I would just be wasting my time. I also suspect, given their emphasis on GPA, that my application to Berkeley may be pointless. Is this fair?

Given my stats and school preferences, are there any options for ED applications that make sense? LSN seems to think I have a crazy high chance at UChicago if I apply ED, but that seems wrong. NYU would be my dream school and so I’d happily apply ED there if it gave me a real boost, but from what I’ve read ED seems to count for little there.

One of the greatest benefits of my current job is that it’s taken my Spanish from serviceable to slightly more serviceable. Are there any study-abroad options in law school that I could use to keep my Spanish sharp? Use it or lose it, you know.

How much should I vary my personal statement between schools? Can I write a super specific one in certain cases?


Is it true that degrees from outside of the T20 are not nationally portable?

I would love nothing more than to complete a MA in history simultaneous to my JD, or at the very least to take a couple classes relevant to my non-law interests a year (eg I’d love to take some introductory language courses). Is this feasible, and does anyone have any advice about how to work this interest into the admissions process?

I’m somewhat unsatisfied with my LSAT score, and think I underperformed by a couple points for my last take in March. What would the effect on my admissions process be if I were to take the November LSAT after submitting all of my applications? Furthermore, would raising my score to a 173 or 174 at that point drastically change things?

I have two great letters of recommendation already - one from a professor who’s pretty famous in his field and regularly publishes (and has his work reviewed) in outlets like the WSJ, the other from my senior thesis advisor, who just wrapped up his post-doc. Should I bother with getting any more? I could get another one or two from old teachers at university, and could get a more broadly personal or professional letter also.

I’m planning on writing a GPA addendum on how, despite the poor grades I received, I’m incredibly proud of my freshman academic performance, as I had to overcome undiagnosed ADHD (go ahead, roll your eyes now) and other latent mental health issues from childhood abuse and managed to come out on top. I’d also like to emphasize that I never requested or received any accommodations in college nor on the LSAT, despite really struggling with severe ADHD symptoms that I rely on medication and therapy to mitigate. My psychologist has offered to help me sketch this statement out. Does this sound like a potential winner, or am I wildly off base?

Much more specifically, I’m wondering what the guidelines are for the Georgetown optional responses. Can you only provide an answer to one of them? I’d love to respond to a few.

Can I write a diversity statement as a white male without being immediately blacklisted? I’d like to share a little on how growing up, after surviving an early childhood surrounded by addiction and abuse, in a non-traditional household (raised as an only child by my grandmother) has formed me as a person. Would this be uncouth?

If it’s okay for a white heterosexual man to write a diversity statement, I’m struggling with how to differentiate between the content I put in my Personal Statement and what I put in the diversity statement - in both I’d like to talk about some of the same themes.

That was a lot, so thank you to anyone who even skimmed a part of it. Any thoughts at all on my school list, school-specific application tips, or a response to even one of my ridiculous ancillary questions would be hugely helpful to me. Love and good vibes to everyone, and best of luck in the months ahead.

Well, that was a lot. I'll try to keep the response shorter.

First, your list indicates that you're approaching this like undergrad admissions. Quit doing that. There is no such thing as a safety school in law school admissions. There are schools that will get you where you want to go (which you haven't defined very clearly) and schools that won't. The good news is that your numbers make you competitive for admission to splitter-friendly T13 schools like UVA and Northwestern, which will make most law-related career plans achievable.

Why did I italicize "law-related" in that last sentence? Glad you asked.

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:I would love nothing more than to complete a MA in history simultaneous to my JD, or at the very least to take a couple classes relevant to my non-law interests a year (eg I’d love to take some introductory language courses). Is this feasible, and does anyone have any advice about how to work this interest into the admissions process?

What do you actually want to do with your JD? An MA in history is neat for people who want to learn about history and has precisely zero value in any other field. This paragraph raised a lot of red flags for me, because it seems to indicate that you aren't sure you want to be a lawyer. And if that's the case, don't go to law school.

And for the rest of your questions (which are secondary to the above):
-T13 schools have national pull. All other schools are regional.
-A diversity statement about growing up in an abusive environment/non-traditional family is fine.
-Yes, you can personally tailor your PS to schools, but you shouldn't be changing it that radically.
-Don't ED anywhere that doesn't offer a guaranteed (and significant) scholarship for ED admits.
-Yes, write an addendum about the ADHD diagnosis, but don't expect it to move the needle much. It should also be much, much shorter than what you're proposing (i.e. I had bad grades, didn't know I had ADHD, found out, grades improved, the end).

But again, your top consideration should be your career goals.

Apply to all of the T14 schools plus Texas, UCLA, USC, Vandy and WUSTL (the primary reasons to apply to WUSTL are (a) they're easily the most generous school in that range when it comes to scholarship aid and (b) they will pretty much admit anyone with a 168+). Maybe add the top school outside that range that is located in the region you want to end up (so if you're aiming for Chicago, then Notre Dame; if NYC, then Fordham; if DC, then GWU, etc.). E-mail admissions offices and ask for fee waivers to help defray the cost.

I'm not sure that Wisconsin, Illinois and Miami really make any sort of sense. It looks like you just picked a few random regional schools for the hell of it...if you're from Miami and really want to end up in Miami then sure, apply there. But don't just apply there because Miami seems like a cool place to go to law school.

It also seems like you're wayyyy overthinking this. Your UGPA and LSAT are your admissions profile. Your LSAT has opened a lot of doors for you (also consider whether you might be able to squeeze out another point or two on the LSAT with a retake, as that could help improve your options in a material way). This is not undergrad admissions. Your personal statement barely matters as long as it is written coherently and doesn't betray some deep-seeded emotional issues or something. Your GPA addendum probably won't matter at all. Your letters of recommendation don't matter as long as they're not terrible (e.g. from your mom). Write a diversity statement if you want. It probably won't matter either way.

You pretty much got it right but you’re thinking too much about this.

You have a shot (not great for CCN) at all but HYS. Just apply to all of the T-14 plus regional power houses (UCLA/Texas and so on) and then decide.

As someone in therapy and on medication for ADHD myself, I have to caution you about talking about ADHD. Honestly too many people think it’s a fake condition and a lot of our symptoms present as just laziness/carelessness to people who lack awareness of the condition.

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:I was hoping I could get a little feedback on my plan for the cycle before things really kick off. Additionally, I’ve got a few questions about the process I haven’t been able to figure out myself. Thanks in advance to anyone who takes a second to skim this and give me their thoughts.

My stats are a 171 LSAT and a 3.42 LSAC GPA.

That is really all that matters.

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:Probably meaningless but my GPA has an extreme upward trend and I have decent material (boilerplate undiagnosed mental health condition but I think I can tell a story) in an addendum about my 2.4 freshman GPA.

"Probably meaningless"

Yep.

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:I’m planning on writing a GPA addendum on how, despite the poor grades I received, I’m incredibly proud of my freshman academic performance, as I had to overcome undiagnosed ADHD (go ahead, roll your eyes now)

I also have ADHD and didn't ask for or receive accommodations. It's not a huge selling point and I wouldn't bank your personal statement on it.

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:Does this sound like a potential winner, or am I wildly off base?

The latter.

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:Can I write a diversity statement as a white male without being immediately blacklisted? I’d like to share a little on how growing up, after surviving an early childhood surrounded by addiction and abuse, in a non-traditional household (raised as an only child by my grandmother) has formed me as a person. Would this be uncouth?

a) do not write this diversity statement
b) should probably make this your main personal statement
c) would veer away from using words like "uncouth" - use functional words that appear in spoken conversation. that is the easiest way of effectively communicating.

Wow! Thank you so much to everyone for the fantastically helpful comments - and for tolerating such a prolix OP! Let me try and respond to what I can from the replies - once again, THANK YOU.

cavalier1138 wrote: First, your list indicates that you're approaching this like undergrad admissions. Quit doing that. There is no such thing as a safety school in law school admissions. There are schools that will get you where you want to go (which you haven't defined very clearly) and schools that won't. The good news is that your numbers make you competitive for admission to splitter-friendly T13 schools like UVA and Northwestern, which will make most law-related career plans achievable.

What do you actually want to do with your JD?

Great feedback - this definitely helps clarify things. I'm a little unsure, however, of what you mean by "there is no such thing as a safety school in law school admissions. There are schools that will get you where you want to go (which you haven't defined very clearly) and schools that won't." You're right that I myself am unsure of where exactly I "want to go." I'm just not sure how critical attending a T14 is to my legal aspirations, as I'm completely undecided whether I want to try for Big Law or not. Right now, that path seems less interesting than other practice areas, but that's an uninformed opinion, because I've never worked at nor been exposed to the reality of working at some crazy V100 or whatever. Essentially, I want to keep the Big Law option open, and ideally figure out through a summer internship whether it's right for me. That being said, the practice areas I already am fascinated by through my prior internship and current work experience are full of extremely successful attorneys with degrees from T2 and T3 institutions. Indeed, some of the richest attorneys in my city graduated from the local T4. Because of that, attending a T50 and getting tons of scholarship money at times appears really attractive to me. Does that make any sense?

cavalier1138 wrote: An MA in history is neat for people who want to learn about history and has precisely zero value in any other field. This paragraph raised a lot of red flags for me, because it seems to indicate that you aren't sure you want to be a lawyer. And if that's the case, don't go to law school.

I was hoping I might take advantage of my last ever stint in a university setting to grab all the learning I could. History is my greatest love and passion, and it would be an incredible experience to pursue any further education in that field. Getting a PhD in that subject was the only other career option I ever seriously considered besides becoming a lawyer. Ultimately for many, many, many reasons (among them the near certainty I could never secure an attractive TT position in my moribund research area), it became obvious that my career would be in law. I understand how difficult pursuing a JD and an MA at the same time will be, but I am very interested in hearing from anyone regarding how feasible such a mission is and what sort of compromises it might require.

Perhaps your red flag is foisted even higher now, but it shouldn't be. I understand "are you sure you want to be a lawyer" is the standard and necessary warning for anyone considering law school, but it bugs me a little bit because I think I've done everything I can at this point in my life to answer that question. During a summer interning in one practice area and 15 months working full time in another, quite different field, I have consistently felt that legal practice is a fascinating and worthwhile way to make a living, and that I can't gosh darned wait until I have my JD so I can finally dive into the profession.

cavalier1138 wrote:
And for the rest of your questions (which are secondary to the above):
-T13 schools have national pull. All other schools are regional. Right, right. However, a few months back I was discussing my school list with a partner at a V10 firm, and I expressed my worry that I may not be able to secure admission to the two or three T13 schools they primarily recruit from. He acknowledged the reality of my concern, but then mentioned UCLA ("and other schools of its caliber") as slightly less selective places that have sufficient national cachet to recruit very well in his very large market far from Southern California. Do you think this is a reasonable generalization, and might it extend to other schools in the T20?
-A diversity statement about growing up in an abusive environment/non-traditional family is fine. Got it, thanks
-Yes, you can personally tailor your PS to schools, but you shouldn't be changing it that radically. Got it, thanks
-Don't ED anywhere that doesn't offer a guaranteed (and significant) scholarship for ED admits. Are there any schools that you think I should think about an ED application for given this criteria? And also, right now I think I would jump at NYU sticker in an instant. Would that be a mistake?
-Yes, write an addendum about the ADHD diagnosis, but don't expect it to move the needle much. It should also be much, much shorter than what you're proposing (i.e. I had bad grades, didn't know I had ADHD, found out, grades improved, the end). Ok, thank you. I'm thinking about focusing on the necessity of that shock experience my freshman year - ie, writing that I'm actually grateful I nearly failed out of college, because without that experience I could have never matured into the student, and person, I am now. How does that come across to you?

But again, your top consideration should be your career goals. Please see above re: career goals. I definitely want to keep the option of Big Law open, both because that 1st year associate salary cannot be ignored and because, lacking any exposure to that practice area, I can't know if I want to be in it or not yet. It seems very strange to to me base my whole admissions process around the pursuit of a job I don't even know if I want yet.
But seriously man, I am SO GRATEFUL for the response

ProbablyWaitListed wrote: Right, right. However, a few months back I was discussing my school list with a partner at a V10 firm, and I expressed my worry that I may not be able to secure admission to the two or three T13 schools they primarily recruit from. He acknowledged the reality of my concern, but then mentioned UCLA ("and other schools of its caliber") as slightly less selective places that have sufficient national cachet to recruit very well in his very large market far from Southern California. Do you think this is a reasonable generalization, and might it extend to other schools in the T20?

The T20 and Fordham are doing pretty okay now, but we're at a high-water mark that has no guarantee of persisting. And even now you're looking at a 40-50% conversion rate from those schools. The jump from GULC to Cornell - reliably getting a firm job with middling grades - really is a big deal if you might be interested in biglaw.

hoos89 wrote:Apply to all of the T14 schools plus Texas, UCLA, USC, Vandy and WUSTL (the primary reasons to apply to WUSTL are (a) they're easily the most generous school in that range when it comes to scholarship aid and (b) they will pretty much admit anyone with a 168+). Maybe add the top school outside that range that is located in the region you want to end up (so if you're aiming for Chicago, then Notre Dame; if NYC, then Fordham; if DC, then GWU, etc.). E-mail admissions offices and ask for fee waivers to help defray the cost.

Once again, great advice. Thank you SO MUCH! You've really helped me out. Few questions: should I apply to literally all the T14? I was never planning on sending in applications to HYS, and now that I'm getting deeper into things it's seeming more and more clear to me that I'll be wasting my time if I apply to Chicago and Columbia. Do you disagree?

Currently, it seems like my school list should be all schools NYU through WUSTL, then toss in the strongest regional school of ND/Fordham/GWU/XXX based on where I plan to practice. That's 15 schools - my ideal number of applications. How does that sound to you?

notinbiglaw wrote:You pretty much got it right but you’re thinking too much about this.

You have a shot (not great for CCN) at all but HYS. Just apply to all of the T-14 plus regional power houses (UCLA/Texas and so on) and then decide.

As someone in therapy and on medication for ADHD myself, I have to caution you about talking about ADHD. Honestly too many people think it’s a fake condition and a lot of our symptoms present as just laziness/carelessness to people who lack awareness of the condition.

hoos89 wrote:I'm not sure that Wisconsin, Illinois and Miami really make any sort of sense. It looks like you just picked a few random regional schools for the hell of it...if you're from Miami and really want to end up in Miami then sure, apply there. But don't just apply there because Miami seems like a cool place to go to law school.

You think I wouldn't have a chance at a full-ride, or close, at Wisconsin and Illinois? Should I only consider attending those schools if I am ruling out a Big Law career? Even then, wouldn't I still have a Big Law opportunity if I could finish top 10% (I know, I know, easier said than done) at those schools? And haha fair enough re: Miami, pero me encanta Club Story

hoos89 wrote: Your LSAT has opened a lot of doors for you (also consider whether you might be able to squeeze out another point or two on the LSAT with a retake, as that could help improve your options in a material way)

Yeah so I'm considering retaking in November, but I'm not sure if it's a wise decision. Basically my LSAT progression was as follows: I took the LSAT basically cold in June 2018 to "force myself to get serious about law school" (yes I am a very stupid and arrogant boy). I scored a 165, and so reloaded for September 2018. I studied harder for this test, but still nothing crazy, worked through a couple books (I think Powerscore? can't remember), and took around 8 or 9 practice tests. I scored a 169, which was a motivating improvement, but I knew I needed some more points.

To make a very long story short, I got incredibly incredibly sick while still working a full-time job, so all things LSAT got shelved until late December 2018, with the March 2019 LSAT the earliest option I felt I could really study for. This time I went in: really hit blind review on all missed questions, took around 16 or 17 fully simulated practice tests with experimental, and even hired a PowerScore tutor for five sessions at some outrageous (like $150 or $200 a pop) price. I felt like I was making great progress, but as I approached the test date, it was clear my progress wasn't gonna be sufficiently fast or consistent. My last five or so PT's before the test date alternated between 175 and 171 like clockwork, and my overall PT average was like a 172.7 or something. I remember predicting a 172 the night before the test. My 171, then, was completely unsurprising, especially because I suspect the experimental RC was my best section. I suppose all this is relevant just because it shows my score wasn't a result of some test day catastrophe, but more an issue with my preparation.

I'm a little frustrated and disappointed with capping out at 171, so of course in the back of my mind, I've been considering submitting all my applications by mid-September and then going all in for one last LSAT in November.I know 1,000,000% I'm capable of scoring in the 172-174 range, and might be able to break 175 on a lucky day. But I also know for certain that getting myself back to that level of LSAT aptitude will absolutely fucking suck and make me miserable, and I'm not sure I can drag myself through another 3 months of studying hard as a mfer 30 hours a week while working 45-50 intense hours at a law firm. Additionally, I'm uncertain of the effect of a pending November LSAT on my submitted applications. In the absolute best case scenario - that I score a 174 in November that is reported to schools in December - how much does my life change? Will it bring me into consideration for really serious money/awards at Gtown/UCLA, or make me an actually competitive applicant at NYU?

hoos89 wrote:Your personal statement barely matters as long as it is written coherently and doesn't betray some deep-seeded emotional issues or something. Your GPA addendum probably won't matter at all. Your letters of recommendation don't matter as long as they're not terrible (e.g. from your mom). Write a diversity statement if you want. It probably won't matter either way.

Ok, ok, I get all this. But then how do schools differentiate between applicants with similar stat profiles? I'll see one n-URM 172 3.35 get admitted up and down the lower T14, but then see a 171 3.44 barely make it off the waitlist at USC. What's going on to produce these differential outcomes besides essay and letters of rec?

notinbiglaw wrote: You have a shot (not great for CCN) at all but HYS. Just apply to all of the T-14 plus regional power houses (UCLA/Texas and so on) and then decide.

Thanks for the encouragement and reinforcement. I've known since my freshman year I screwed myself out of a shot at HYS - no tears shed there. Re: CCN, I'm considering not bothering applying to Chicago and Columbia. I just see no way either school admits me. As for NYU, it'd be my dream school (honestly, I prefer Gtown and UCLA to the rest of the lower t13). Should I consider applying ED there?

notinbiglaw wrote: As someone in therapy and on medication for ADHD myself, I have to caution you about talking about ADHD. Honestly too many people think it’s a fake condition and a lot of our symptoms present as just laziness/carelessness to people who lack awareness of the condition.

Facts.

dyemond wrote:

ProbablyWaitListed wrote: Can I write a diversity statement as a white male without being immediately blacklisted? I’d like to share a little on how growing up, after surviving an early childhood surrounded by addiction and abuse, in a non-traditional household (raised as an only child by my grandmother) has formed me as a person. Would this be uncouth?

a) do not write this diversity statement
b) should probably make this your main personal statement
c) would veer away from using words like "uncouth" - use functional words that appear in spoken conversation. that is the easiest way of effectively communicating.

Why should I not write this diversity statement? Is it then the case that diversity statements only work when they're based in either racial or gender or sexual identity politics? That's obviously not some sort of political gripe from me or whatever, it's the year 2019 and all that. I just want to confirm that only certain groups can write them and that I should steer clear.

The Lsat Airbender wrote:
The T20 and Fordham are doing pretty okay now, but we're at a high-water mark that has no guarantee of persisting. And even now you're looking at a 40-50% conversion rate from those schools. The jump from GULC to Cornell - reliably getting a firm job with middling grades - really is a big deal if you might be interested in biglaw.

Great point - I'm sure once the economy contracts the number of viable law schools will with it.

Two things: what does a 40-50% conversion rate? And damn, is Cornell really that markedly superior in placing people than Georgetown? God I'd rather go to school in D.C. than Ithaca...

This is a fun tool to play around with. The "large firm score" is the percentage of recent graduates who went on to either a federal clerkship or a firm with 100+ attorneys and is therefore a reasonable measure of how viable biglaw (i.e., a six-figure income) is from a given school. Bear in mind, of course, that this is a deliberately flattening measure that ignores regional differences and the quality of outcomes within the "biglaw+fedclerk" bucket.

https://www.lstreports.com/compare/cornell/gulc/ucla

EDIT: my bad, you actually have to do the math yourself on adding the big-firm percentage to the federal-clerkship percentage.

(I may have time to add more in a bit but mostly I wanted to say that there is nothing wrong with using the word uncouth.)

I was a splitter myself. I got in Chicago but not NYU/Columbia. I know other splitters that got in NYU/Columbia but not Chicago.

I think it just comes down to where they stand on GPA/LSAT mix when they come across splitters’ applications.

Cornell had a 2018 BigLaw placement metric of 75% (compare to NW at 76%, Duke at 77%, and UVA at 83%). Georgetown meanwhile had a 2018 metric of 60% (compare to Vandy at 63%, UT at 57%, UCLA at 48% and WUSTL at 52%). That's the difference between being on the edge of striking out from BigLaw at median at the T20, while having a very comfortable buffer at the T13.

(This is also why IMO it makes more sense to lump Georgetown in with the T20 than the T13 - hard to justify categorizing Georgetown as being a cut above Vandy. It's also why the "T13" is a thing - there really is a cliff-edge drop in placement power between #13 and #14 that you don't see within the T13.)

In terms of schools to apply to, I'd recommend applying to NYU, Penn (write a Why Penn), Michigan (write a Why Mich), UVA (write a Why Virginia), Duke, and NW. I'd also recommend applying to Georgetown, Vandy, UT, UCLA and WUSTL (feel free to exclude UCLA if you're not particularly interested in practicing in CA). Berkeley and Cornell are idiosyncratically picky about GPA, so it doesn't hurt to apply but don't get your hopes up.

The Lsat Airbender wrote:
https://www.lstreports.com/compare/cornell/gulc/ucla

Super helpful link for me, thank you very much for sharing.

nixy wrote:(I may have time to add more in a bit but mostly I wanted to say that there is nothing wrong with using the word uncouth.)

Agreed!

notinbiglaw wrote:I was a splitter myself. I got in Chicago but not NYU/Columbia. I know other splitters that got in NYU/Columbia but not Chicago.

I think it just comes down to where they stand on GPA/LSAT mix when they come across splitters’ applications.

Interesting. So you think I should take the time to apply to CCN? But I'm not even sure I can consider myself a splitter at any of those schools - my GPA is not above any of their 75ths. Also, on the very slim chance I were to be admitted to a CCN school, should I just assume I'm going to be paying sticker?

QContinuum wrote:Cornell had a 2018 BigLaw placement metric of 75% (compare to NW at 76%, Duke at 77%, and UVA at 83%). Georgetown meanwhile had a 2018 metric of 60% (compare to Vandy at 63%, UT at 57%, UCLA at 48% and WUSTL at 52%). That's the difference between being on the edge of striking out from BigLaw at median at the T20, while having a very comfortable buffer at the T13.

(This is also why IMO it makes more sense to lump Georgetown in with the T20 than the T13 - hard to justify categorizing Georgetown as being a cut above Vandy. It's also why the "T13" is a thing - there really is a cliff-edge drop in placement power between #13 and #14 that you don't see within the T13.)

Damn, great data, thank you for providing. Should I be assuming that the vast majority (>90%) of the top half of the class at UCLA, UT, and WUSTL are choosing the BigLaw route? And at those lower t14 schools you listed, UVA, Duke, NW, Cornell, what other career options are opened to students with the top half of GPA's? Are there any non-BigLaw, non clerkship paths that are considered "desirable"?

QContinuum wrote: In terms of schools to apply to, I'd recommend applying to NYU, Penn (write a Why Penn), Michigan (write a Why Mich), UVA (write a Why Virginia), Duke, and NW. I'd also recommend applying to Georgetown, Vandy, UT, UCLA and WUSTL (feel free to exclude UCLA if you're not particularly interested in practicing in CA). Berkeley and Cornell are idiosyncratically picky about GPA, so it doesn't hurt to apply but don't get your hopes up.

Great advice, thank you. I knew Berkeley was probably out of the picture for me because of their GPA emphasis, but I didn't realize this extended to Cornell as well.

Question: Currently, I'd like to have all my applications filed by October. I am then considering sitting for the November LSAT to try and get back the 2-3 points that I missed from my PT average on my last LSAT. Are there any issues with this plan?

Others have addressed your main questions about biglaw potential and the need to apply to top schools. But I want to briefly come back to this:

ProbablyWaitListed wrote:I was hoping I might take advantage of my last ever stint in a university setting to grab all the learning I could. History is my greatest love and passion, and it would be an incredible experience to pursue any further education in that field. Getting a PhD in that subject was the only other career option I ever seriously considered besides becoming a lawyer. Ultimately for many, many, many reasons (among them the near certainty I could never secure an attractive TT position in my moribund research area), it became obvious that my career would be in law. I understand how difficult pursuing a JD and an MA at the same time will be, but I am very interested in hearing from anyone regarding how feasible such a mission is and what sort of compromises it might require.

It's not so much that pursuing a JD and an MA would be difficult; it's that it would be pointless. When you do a joint program like that, it usually just involves you taking a year away from your JD program to focus on your other graduate studies, then returning to finish the JD. Unless you have a bunch of extra money you want to set on fire, you would be better served by buying some history books for leisure reading during breaks and after law school.

And although it's clear that you're interested in a legal career, I'm still concerned about the way you're discussing history. It sounds like you're much more interested in that field, and if that's the case, I have the strong feeling that you'd burn out and spend a bunch of time regretting not pursuing your real passion.