LSAT Policies for 2006-07 Cycle (due to change in ABA policy)

[spud1987]

It doesn't really seem like many know about this change (especially outside of LSD) so I doubt there will be many retakers for this cycle.  We'll know by October for sure when they release the number of test takers for the Sept LSAT.  If the number is much higher than usual then we can assume there were many retakers.  Also, even if there are a lot of retakers it doesn't mean the medians will drastically increase.  LSAC says that the average retaker only increases by around 2 points. 

[LawJedi]

William and Mary will take your highest score, per an e-mail I received from the assistant dean of admissions.

[spud1987]

William and Mary will take your highest score, per an e-mail I received from the assistant dean of admissions.

Thanks, I'll add it to the big board.

[stc34]

Where did you all hear about this change in policy? I can't find it on abanet or on lsac.org.

[spud1987]

It was a decision made at an ABA meeting at the beginning of June.  I can't find any info on the ABA or LSAC site.  The policy change really did take effect because Michigan's site references the policy change while explaining their LSAT change. 

[stc34]

It was a decision made at an ABA meeting at the beginning of June.  I can't find any info on the ABA or LSAC site.  The policy change really did take effect because Michigan's site references the policy change while explaining their LSAT change. 

So from now on they only have to report the highest score? So it's in their interest to look at the highest score, right?

[spud1987]

Yep that's right.  Before they requested the average score.  So an applicant with a 3.9 and a 166 was on the same level as an applicant with a 3.9 and a 162/170.  Because of the change that 162/170 applicant is on the same level as a 170 taker.  Some schools (Mich) said that they will still look at the average but take the higher score.  GULC said that they will look favorably upon those who took the LSAT once.  So a 3.9 170 will probably be more appealing than a 3.9 162/170. 

[stc34]

Yep that's right.  Before they requested the average score.  So an applicant with a 3.9 and a 166 was on the same level as an applicant with a 3.9 and a 162/170.  Because of the change that 162/170 applicant is on the same level as a 170 taker.  Some schools (Mich) said that they will still look at the average but take the higher score.  GULC said that they will look favorably upon those who took the LSAT once.  So a 3.9 170 will probably be more appealing than a 3.9 162/170. 

Well I was still on the fence as to whether I should wait a year, and start law school in fall 2007 or just go right now.  I'd decided to wait, and I guess this makes that a better decision than I thought (I have a 155 and 165).  Instead of deferring should I shoot for some other schools?

[spud1987]

I would definately apply to some schools this cycle.  A 165 looks a lot better than a 160.  Depending on your GPA you could get into many schools in the 15-25 range and maybe even a T14. 

[RainbowBrite]

Yep that's right.  Before they requested the average score.  So an applicant with a 3.9 and a 166 was on the same level as an applicant with a 3.9 and a 162/170.  Because of the change that 162/170 applicant is on the same level as a 170 taker.  Some schools (Mich) said that they will still look at the average but take the higher score.  GULC said that they will look favorably upon those who took the LSAT once.  So a 3.9 170 will probably be more appealing than a 3.9 162/170. 

Well I was still on the fence as to whether I should wait a year, and start law school in fall 2007 or just go right now.  I'd decided to wait, and I guess this makes that a better decision than I thought (I have a 155 and 165).  Instead of deferring should I shoot for some other schools?

There was a poster in my math class in high school that, despite being ridiculously cheesy, I always liked. It said "shoot for the moon and you might land among the stars". Wow that was so many years ago. I now feel old despite only being a senior in college...

Anyway my point is that you should aim for some schools in the upcoming cycle where your 165 fits into their range, but keep some backups (ie ones that would take you with 155). You might just find yourself pleasantly surprised by a big enveloppe from a school you previously thought you would never get into. If you are genuinely thinking about applying / reapplying to schools in the upcoming cycle that says (to me at least) that you wouldn't really be happy going where you were accepted, and that is a good enough reason to apply to more schools! Law school is a substantial investment - do whatever it takes to go somewhere that you will be happy.