Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Lowest acceptable score?  (Read 5338 times)

laughing hard

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2007, 01:03:12 AM »
My 168 was in June--I was averaging about 176 in the weeks before that test.

There were a couple of reasons that that specific test wasn't good for me: part of it was just nerves. I missed a couple of LR questions that were really obvious as soon as I took a second look at them, and the new reading comp hurt--that passage cost me three questions alone. Plus, the curve was crazy, to say nothing of the fact that taking the June test sucks in general.

I spent 15-20 hours a week starting around the middle of August making sure that my timing was still good... I felt confident going into the September test.

If you're thinking about putting it off until next year, I'd seriously recommend considering the February test instead of the June one. We didn't even get started until almost two, plus you have the whole morning to freak yourself out.
UCLA Law Class of 2011

kormybear

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 143
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #11 on: October 09, 2007, 01:06:39 AM »
I'll retake if i got under a 163.  This is my first time taking it though, and I won't start applying till next fall.  So even if I get a 165 or so, i might take it again in June to get that 170.   For most of the schools i want to go to, a 165 should do the trick, so we'll see.

killblues

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2007, 01:12:17 AM »
My 168 was in June--I was averaging about 176 in the weeks before that test.

There were a couple of reasons that that specific test wasn't good for me: part of it was just nerves. I missed a couple of LR questions that were really obvious as soon as I took a second look at them, and the new reading comp hurt--that passage cost me three questions alone. Plus, the curve was crazy, to say nothing of the fact that taking the June test sucks in general.

I spent 15-20 hours a week starting around the middle of August making sure that my timing was still good... I felt confident going into the September test.

If you're thinking about putting it off until next year, I'd seriously recommend considering the February test instead of the June one. We didn't even get started until almost two, plus you have the whole morning to freak yourself out.

Hrm, I thought June was the one in the afternoon?

Google says:

2008

    * Saturday, February 2, 8:30 AM
    * Monday, June 16, 12:30 PM
    * Saturday, October 4, 8:30 AM
    * Saturday, December 6, 8:30 AM

That's why i was thinking of taking June instead of February :)

laughing hard

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #13 on: October 09, 2007, 01:24:47 AM »
The June test is the afternoon one, but that isn't necessarily an advantage. It's hard to stay focused (especially on the last couple of sections, which invariably count) when the test drags into the late afternoon.

Combine that with the fact that you probably won't sleep particularly well the night before, and that you have all morning to worry about the test ahead of you...

I don't know what works for you. I've done both, and I really preferred the morning one! ;)
UCLA Law Class of 2011

beni

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #14 on: October 09, 2007, 01:31:31 AM »
To spite LSAC? ...but you'd be dropping one hundred-whatever dollars right in their pocket...?

Yeah, it seems dumb huh?  At least if I have a 178 in my pocket I'll feel a little better about not getting accepted to Yale.

Lindbergh

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 4358
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2007, 02:04:27 AM »
165, although if I get 165-169, I might apply to some schools with that, and then go for a higher score in Dec for my reaches.

However, since I can't even remember the first two sections due to the distraction in my testing room, I would be surprised if I break 162.

What were the distractions?

chunkylover53

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #16 on: October 09, 2007, 02:08:10 AM »
i am hoping for 90th percentile or better (whatever score that ends up being this test- 163/164?). i will grudgingly settle for my lowest score if it is 160+ but we will see how my mood is after the score release. all we can do now is hope for the best!

BlueGreen

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
  • [insert vague quote here]
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #17 on: October 09, 2007, 03:06:13 AM »
"I'm sorry sir, you can't return an item out of spite"

*giggle* i love that episode
HLS class of 2011
LSN

studymaster

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #18 on: October 09, 2007, 09:33:44 AM »
So I'll buck it up and pay another $130, as clearly, despite any experiences I have had or knowledge I may possess, the most important thing in showing I can succeed in law school is a 169 on a four hour test.

Yes, despite your sarcasm, this is right. WHen you figure a way for admission commmittees to see the knowledge in your head, or to evaluate the experiences in such as way as to eb as predictive of 1L grades as the LSAT, then you have a right to gripe. As long as this is the best method, save the whining for people who care.
It is whispered that soon, if we all heed the call, the piper will lead us to reason.

just dot

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3416
  • I just want to be wonderful.
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest acceptable score?
« Reply #19 on: October 09, 2007, 09:45:58 AM »
So I'll buck it up and pay another $130, as clearly, despite any experiences I have had or knowledge I may possess, the most important thing in showing I can succeed in law school is a 169 on a four hour test.

Yes, despite your sarcasm, this is right. WHen you figure a way for admission commmittees to see the knowledge in your head, or to evaluate the experiences in such as way as to eb as predictive of 1L grades as the LSAT, then you have a right to gripe. As long as this is the best method, save the whining for people who care.

Hey, hey.  Be nice.  MBW is an awesome lady and she has a point, anyway.  The reason they rely so heavily on the LSAT is probably less because it is actually indicative of performance in law school and more because it is an easy way to categorize people to make the selection process easier; and ultimately make it possible to rank the schools against one another.

I know that personally I test very well.  I will probably score higher on the LSAT than others who will outperform me in law school.  I test well.  Others don't.  Big deal.  I think her point was well taken that they will weigh a four hour test more heavily than years of experience that are clearly far more indicative of what she can and will accomplish.
To put it bluntly, I seem to have a whole superstructure with no foundation. But I`m working on the foundation.