How Important Are My LSAT Scores?

[SilenceSeaAndSky]

Hello,

     I took the LSAT this past weekend and don't feel particularly confident.  However, I want to know what my admission chances are to Top 50 schools considering my other accomplishments:

   1.) I completed an M.A. in Social Sciences from The University Of Chicago in 2006 (with a 3.7/4.0).  For those of you who don't know, receiving a degree from Chicago in social sciences is akin to obtaining one in Physics from MIT.
   2.) I obtained a 3.78/4.0 GPA as an undergrad at Loyola Marymount University, double majoring in Psychology and Classics.
   3.) This past year I worked as a research analyst for The Nielsen Company, the country's leader in market research.

   4.) I have other accomplishments, publications and conferences, but since i have a diagnosed neurological disorder that makes it difficult for me to perform well under stringently timed tests, and I usually don't do well on standardized tests.  I'm 26 and will have letters from professors who lead their field.

   If I receive a 150 to 160, can someone give me an honest assessment as to my chances at everywhere from Chicago to Cornell to Lewis And Clark?  I would think that my Master's achievement would be more impressive than a high LSAT score, as there are many people who score high on the LSAT, but not many who do well in the country's number one graduate program.

[Thistle]

to be honest, absolutely none.

law schools dont care one bit about your masters, which is why your grades there are not even entered into lsac's gpa computation.

check the lsn site and compare your gpa and estimated lsat score to their admittance statistics.

if you have a bona-fide disorder, get an accomodation and retake...although i can tell you that the process of getting said accomodation is extremely difficult.

[nealric]

For better or for worse, law school admissions is a numbers game and the LSAT is a huge part of it.

With a score in the 150s, you have basically no chance at Cornell, but you might have a shot at Lewis and Clark.

Did you study extensively?
If you did not put in at least 100 hours of study, retake for sure.

[booyakasha45]

you're not going to get into a top school with a score under 160, regardless of how impressive you think they think your masters degree is.

good news is: the LSAT is learnable if you're willing to put in the effort.

[tcwhat]

Hello,

     I took the LSAT this past weekend and don't feel particularly confident.  However, I want to know what my admission chances are to Top 50 schools considering my other accomplishments:

   1.) I completed an M.A. in Social Sciences from The University Of Chicago in 2006 (with a 3.7/4.0).  For those of you who don't know, receiving a degree from Chicago in social sciences is akin to obtaining one in Physics from MIT.
   2.) I obtained a 3.78/4.0 GPA as an undergrad at Loyola Marymount University, double majoring in Psychology and Classics.
   3.) This past year I worked as a research analyst for The Nielsen Company, the country's leader in market research.

   4.) I have other accomplishments, publications and conferences, but since i have a diagnosed neurological disorder that makes it difficult for me to perform well under stringently timed tests, and I usually don't do well on standardized tests.  I'm 26 and will have letters from professors who lead their field.

   If I receive a 150 to 160, can someone give me an honest assessment as to my chances at everywhere from Chicago to Cornell to Lewis And Clark?  I would think that my Master's achievement would be more impressive than a high LSAT score, as there are many people who score high on the LSAT, but not many who do well in the country's number one graduate program.

Ostentatious much?

[booyakasha45]

yeah, I was going to ask why someone so accomplished, and intelligent, and amazing couldn't break 160.

[heartbreaker]

Word. OP, don't be obnoxious. LSAT and UGPA are the major indicators adcoms use. Don't think you're better than the system. Study for the test and don't complain about it, because it will get you nowhere.

P.S. MA programs are, in almost every instance, cash cows for universities, and as such, mostly disregarded, no matter how prestigious the school or program.

[SilenceSeaAndSky]

ABC and Twhat,

   This post wasn't meant to be a challenge or to posit my "superiority."  I was trying to present as much evidence as possible so you could give me reliable feedback.  Some people think U of Chicago is just another state school.  But, yes, I'll probably be retaking.   

Heartbreaker:

   I appreciate your assessment.  However, while many Master's programs provide funds to support future and present PhD. programs, that fact alone does not mean that they are disregarded.  If that were the case, so many people out of my program would not have received full fellowships to doctoral programs at Princeton, Berkeley, Harvard etc and other schools that typically accept 10 out of 300 applicants a year.  Also, at many schools, the social sciences are integral to the study of law. 

Tasha:

  No offense, but I don't believe one word of your sweeping statement, "law schools don't care one bit about your master's."  The amount of research and analysis it required is the very skill that law schools are trying to predict.  Does that mean I will get in?  No.  But it doesn't suggest that it's meaningless.  There are many law professors who teach in social sciences- economics, philosophy, etc (think Martha Nussbaum)- and would know that is an impressive feat, since Chicago is the birthplace of American political science. Also, how is it that many top schools deny people who score in the high 170's, and that the book written by the former admissions dean at Harvard claimed that the LSAT could mean little for certain applicants, compared to others who do not have other factors in their favor?

Nealric- Thanks, I will study more.  The rest of you need to expand your perspective and see admissions as some combination of a "holistic process."  I am trying to understand that holism, not your monolithic, impetuous theories.

[SilenceSeaAndSky]

Dennis,

   Physics is inherently more difficult than most or every discipline.  If social sciences are so easy, can you give me any insight into the relationship between culture, language and thought?  Or the relationship between economics, culture, and individualism in Western Europe from 1400 to the present?  Have you read Jurgen Habermas, the theories of Gary Becker, Marilyn Strathern, or Adorno?  People like you do not need to comment on subject matter that is well-respected by individuals far more emminent than you will ever be (think Paul Wolfowitz, Milton Friedman and Ben Bernanke).

[heartbreaker]

   Physics is inherently more difficult than most or every discipline.  If social sciences are so easy, can you give me any insight into the relationship between culture, language and thought?  Or the relationship between economics, culture, and individualism in Western Europe from 1400 to the present?  Have you read Jurgen Habermas, the theories of Gary Becker, Marilyn Strathern, or Adorno?  People like you do not need to comment on subject matter that is well-respected by individuals far more emminent than you will ever be (think Paul Wolfowitz, Milton Friedman and Ben Bernanke).

This is an irrelevant argument for law school admissions. Adcoms DO NOT care about this. They don't care about your major, they really don't. You say that law schools reject people with 170s, but I'm going to tell you flat out, that this is a numbers game. If a school rejects an applicant with a 170, there are reasons for it, that are usually numbers-related (it's HYS, or the GPA is too low) An application with a below 160 LSAT will not be looked at by the type of schools you want to go to. That's just plain truth. You should be proud of your accomplishments, but please don't think they entitle you to attend a top law school.

Wait for your score, if you did as badly as you think you did, then retake.

P.S. I've worked in academic departments, with professors on grad school selection committees, and within the admissions process for top graduate programs. I can tell you exactly what they say about MA programs. In the social sciences, unless an MA is paired with a PhD, it is meaningless.