Top Law Schools

Hey Guys -

I have seen the other posts about "168/3.8 - should I retake?" But I think I have some unique circumstances, so I'd like to ask the question again. I took the October lsat and got a 168. I have a 3.75 UG GPA from a top 5 university

As it stands, I think you're a very long shot for all of the schools you mentioned. However, I think you'd get into some low T14 schools. Retakes are also tricky since you'd need a 5+ point increase for most schools in the T14 to take your higher score instead of averaging. Basically, retake if you're confident you could get a 173+.

Retake if you can go up even one point.

Your targets are Michigan, UVA, Duke, Cornell, and Georgetown.

polaris769 wrote:As it stands, I think you're a very long shot for all of the schools you mentioned. However, I think you'd get into some low T14 schools. Retakes are also tricky since you'd need a 5+ point increase for most schools in the T14 to take your higher score instead of averaging. Basically, retake if you're confident you could get a 173+.

STOP POSTING

seriously,

dear newbies, stop lying out of your arses about stuff you don't know because you like dispensing advice. even a point increase can make a difference. you don't know what you are talking about. kthxbye

Lots of science Ph.Ds this cycle. I wonder if this says something about the state of R&D in this country.

To answer your question, two LSATs are fine just as long as you're sure you won't do worse the second time around. Conventional wisdom says that your chances at NYU and U Penn are slim. Chances at the rest are next to nil. Your case is unique, though, so conventional wisdom may not apply.

lollypotter wrote:

polaris769 wrote:As it stands, I think you're a very long shot for all of the schools you mentioned. However, I think you'd get into some low T14 schools. Retakes are also tricky since you'd need a 5+ point increase for most schools in the T14 to take your higher score instead of averaging. Basically, retake if you're confident you could get a 173+.

STOP POSTING

seriously,

dear newbies, stop lying out of your arses about stuff you don't know because you like dispensing advice. even a point increase can make a difference. you don't know what you are talking about. kthxbye

You know it is true that Harvard averages, and only one one point probably won't make that much of a difference either way.

To 31heer: This is not to say you shouldn't retake. If you think you underperformed, you should. As is, you're not looking at bad schools, and you definitely have a shot at CCN - plus, you has very good softs, and who knows. I'd apply to HYS and CCN, along with the "match" schools that others have mentioned, and you may get a good acceptance.

nobody knows whether or not harvard averages. they say they look case by case and there is evidence that goes either way. And he didn't just mention Harvard, or I'd have pointed that out. CCNMVP, scholarship money - it can all change with a higher LSAT.

lollypotter wrote:

polaris769 wrote:As it stands, I think you're a very long shot for all of the schools you mentioned. However, I think you'd get into some low T14 schools. Retakes are also tricky since you'd need a 5+ point increase for most schools in the T14 to take your higher score instead of averaging. Basically, retake if you're confident you could get a 173+.

STOP POSTING

seriously,

dear newbies, stop lying out of your arses about stuff you don't know because you like dispensing advice. even a point increase can make a difference. you don't know what you are talking about. kthxbye

Ok, maybe I should clarify my comments. I never said he shouldn't retake for the chance at scholarship money. However, if say he gets a 172, his average will be a 170, and by applying much later in the cycle, his chances at the schools he listed won't drastically improve (maybe except for Penn, NYU). And as it is, he will probably get into MVDCG anyway. And yes, I gave him overly simplistic advice, but that is what I believe. And so Lollypotter, you think a 1 point increase which is a net .5 point increase would somehow suddenly allow him to get into CCN HYS? Wow, I wish I had your optimism.

IMHO you are doing yourself a disservice if you don't retake and score several points higher. You are obviously capable of it given your MIT PhD.

Thanks for all your advice! I was, like a lot of people, scoring a lot higher on practice exams (between 173-178). My worries are this: 1. If I wait to retake then I will be in the later pool (with all the people who got fired this fall or who just don't want to enter the crappy job market). 2. Although it is likely I will do better, there is no guarantee...

I would be really happy with Penn, NYU or Columbia. I don't need Harvard or Yale

I am leaning towards doing this: Applying as is and seeing what happens. If I don't like the results, I can retake the LSAT in the spring, get a job as a scientific advisor in a law firm and apply for the following year. Is it bad to reapply a second year? Other thoughts?

My only thought is that next year will be a far worse cycle than this one.

Do we all think that admissions committees believe only the numbers?!?

Whoa, are you flame? Calm down.

The reality is that the LSAT matters.

in the same boat (though without the PhD).

A word of advice from a t20 admissions officer that was transferred over to me:

Don't worry about somehow bothering people with the retake. Simply worry about whether you can boost that score up. As Mallard said above, you should have no problems if you're getting a doctorat degree from MIT. Best of luck.

Personally, I have resolved to juggle my life, work, and get that final LSAT score to click. Once you are sufficiently prepared, it is a matter of having confidence and a clear head the day of.

The big question in my mind is this: Is it better to apply early with a score a few points lower than later with a score a few points higher?

31heer wrote:The big question in my mind is this: Is it better to apply early with a score a few points lower than later with a score a few points higher?

IMO, a December score = no; a February score = yes. Go ahead and put in the applications now, and have them push back the review of your application until the December score arrives. Most regular decision offers don't go out until after that anyway. If you can't retake in December, I'm afraid it's now or next year.

31heer wrote:Can admissions people really be that blind? The difference between a 168 and a 172 is FOUR questions on the LSAT. A PhD from MIT shows a lot more. I have spent a great deal of time looking through posts on this site, and it seems that everything is about numbers, numbers, numbers. I didn't take a LSAT course or get tutoring (no $$$)... Is it fair to compare a self-taught 168 to someone who's mommy and daddy paid out huge sums to have them groomed for LSAT day??? I mean, what is the LSAT supposed to show? You're ability to use logic? I think an engineering PhD can prove that.

Do we all think that admissions committees are stupid enough to believe only the numbers?!?

Welcome to the world of standardized testing, it's not 100% accurate and involves luck and a set of test taking skills but it's the best they have for assessing general reasoning skills (not specifically math skills or knowledge of biology).

That being said, I think the PhD will definitely help you in the sense that some better schools may not really average. Averaging is a better predictor if there is not much of a jump becasue the jump may just have been happenstance. However, I'd guess that with a PhD they may be more willing to accept a slightly higher score on face value. Plus, if they like everything else about you then you don't want to get rejected just becasue they didn't want to report your LSAT score. In my opinion, the bottom line is that you should worry about averaging a little less than the normal applicant because you have another credible academic accomplishment other than gpa and LSAT.

But, then again, what do I know?

OP, anyone who tells you that you don't have a great shot at a T6 is giving you faulty information. Your T5 UG coupled with a PHD from MIT, makes you a lock for 1 of the T6. You have what are called "super softs" and I would argue that your PHD from MIT gives you the equivelant of URM status not considering your ridiculous GPA and solid 168. Apply to the T14 and I'm sure you'll end up with no dearth of options.

I don't know much about IP law but I would look into how well you could place without a t-6 or even t-14 degree. You could try to get a scholarship to George Mason or the like and rely on an MIT PhD to get you in the door at great firms. I'm far from an expert on IP but you may want to look this up and see if it would be worth it.

Agree with on_ne_sait_jamais. I would be very surprised if you didn't get into a top 10. Years of academic rigour, research publications show you can do well in a challenging environment. I work with a lot of top school PhDs and I know that. Plus, your 168 LSAT shows that you can think logically (shockingly a PhD can do wonders to make you lose those skills).

?

lollypotter wrote: Oh, go away.

He did. Until you necro'd an 18 month old thread.

khanvalescent wrote:

lollypotter wrote: Oh, go away.

He did. Until you necro'd an 18 month old thread.

Haha wow... I came into this thread to give the OP some help since he has identical stats as me. Then I noticed that the thread was a year and a half old. Apparently lollypotter came back to finish a VERY old score?

Wait a sec - I'm lollypotter and I was in bed this morning.I didn't write that post.

Barely post on TLS anymore. Am deleting it and changing my password. Which until now was password.

Telling the admins as well.