Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?  (Read 1319 times)

dischord

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1367
    • View Profile
Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« on: January 08, 2008, 05:08:59 PM »
 .
At least I can f-ing think.

Tetris

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2146
  • Michigan Rocks
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #1 on: January 08, 2008, 05:15:18 PM »
I've understood that they ask for SAT scores so they can see if the SAT score "predicted" how well you did at college. If you had a below-average SAT score for your school but performed well they might cut you some slack on your LSAT score. But thats just what I understand.
_______
.|E|R|S.

Slumdog Lovebutton

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3082
    • View Profile
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2008, 05:16:40 PM »
without your numbers and list of schools it's really difficult to tell you whether you should retake or not.
* Columbia Law, Class of 2011 *

LSN

indyguy7484

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
    • View Profile
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2008, 05:18:29 PM »
I don't think it will hurt you as long as your numbers are within range for the schools to which you're applying.  In your case, it's probably going to help since wherever you matriculate can then brag that they have an HYPS grad attending their school.

Was your LSAT score out of line with your practice tests, or generally what you expected?

Edit: I agree with LoveButton that schools/numbers would help.  I imagine you're in the 155-160 range, but it would help to know.

BearlyLegal

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6273
  • And the greatest threat to America is... Bears!!!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Newjoetm
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2008, 05:42:29 PM »
Just joined, so hadn't gotten around to posting LSN numbers or whatever.  But I'll give you a short summary.  LSAT was 163, GPA around 3.6.  Have a few reasonably good softs but it's not like I've cured cancer or anything.  Applied to a range of schools, lowest were Indiana and Colorado but I don't think I'll bother going if those are the only ones I get into.  Have a few outrageous reaches in the list (uh, UT and UCLA come to mind, the most plausible reach I've got is W&L (in part b/c I'm a law legacy there, which I know also doesn't actually help that much, but it's the best I've got to offer anyone . . .).  Where else . . . UMd, Wisc, Emory, BC, etc.

I didn't study that much for the LSAT b/c my diagnostic was a 170, and as I started studying it actually started going down one point at a time, which made me freak out.  Then I didn't sleep for two days before the test and had a panic attack during the LSAT, which actually made me decide NOT to cancel my score or sign up for a retake, since I didn't want to relive that miserable experience.  This is part of the reason that I don't have a lot of real safeties on the list -- I know to what extent I underperformed, so I just don't feel like I would be happy somewhere where my current score is really on the high end of the student body.  So my boss (big partner at firm) and I basically cherry-picked a bunch of places where I might have a small chance of getting in, and where we thought I might be happy.

My concern, though, isn't that I'm thinking of retaking because I'm all HYS or bust --that's not really my style, so I don't want to hear from anyone that retaking is the obvious right choice because there is nothing beyond the T14.  I'm now just getting terrified that I'm not going to get in anywhere at ALL.

As for the SAT/LSAT comparison -- if they're checking how my SAT related to my undergrad grades, I guess I can assume that they'll decide that my grades were low for my SAT score and therefore that they will be even lower in law school than my 163 would indicate?!  @#!*.

And to J.D. -- BC was one of the SAT-asking people, and you nailed it on the undergrad (the "Little Iveys" -- bonus points if you can guess which one of the 3, although I'm afraid to admit on here for fear that someone I know will figure out my actual identity).

163 is actually median at Princeton, the #1 ranked school in the nation. 3.6 is well above the 3.3 Princeton Curve. You won't likely make T14, but please take the drama in stride.

indyguy7484

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
    • View Profile
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2008, 05:44:06 PM »
Even Harvard only averages a 165, I think, so you aren't going to look that bad in comparison, no matter where you went.

Shinjuku

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #6 on: January 08, 2008, 05:46:49 PM »
your LSAT compared to your school's average, regardless of prestige, has very little to no effect on your apps.

i'd be more concerned with the difference between your LSAT and the law school's median.

also, your SAT will have basically no effect as well.  the schools that ask usually just do so for informational purposes, not as a tie-breaker or anything.
BLS '11

My LSN

BearlyLegal

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6273
  • And the greatest threat to America is... Bears!!!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Newjoetm
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #7 on: January 08, 2008, 05:54:43 PM »
Just joined, so hadn't gotten around to posting LSN numbers or whatever.  But I'll give you a short summary.  LSAT was 163, GPA around 3.6.  Have a few reasonably good softs but it's not like I've cured cancer or anything.  Applied to a range of schools, lowest were Indiana and Colorado but I don't think I'll bother going if those are the only ones I get into.  Have a few outrageous reaches in the list (uh, UT and UCLA come to mind, the most plausible reach I've got is W&L (in part b/c I'm a law legacy there, which I know also doesn't actually help that much, but it's the best I've got to offer anyone . . .).  Where else . . . UMd, Wisc, Emory, BC, etc.

I didn't study that much for the LSAT b/c my diagnostic was a 170, and as I started studying it actually started going down one point at a time, which made me freak out.  Then I didn't sleep for two days before the test and had a panic attack during the LSAT, which actually made me decide NOT to cancel my score or sign up for a retake, since I didn't want to relive that miserable experience.  This is part of the reason that I don't have a lot of real safeties on the list -- I know to what extent I underperformed, so I just don't feel like I would be happy somewhere where my current score is really on the high end of the student body.  So my boss (big partner at firm) and I basically cherry-picked a bunch of places where I might have a small chance of getting in, and where we thought I might be happy.

My concern, though, isn't that I'm thinking of retaking because I'm all HYS or bust --that's not really my style, so I don't want to hear from anyone that retaking is the obvious right choice because there is nothing beyond the T14.  I'm now just getting terrified that I'm not going to get in anywhere at ALL.

As for the SAT/LSAT comparison -- if they're checking how my SAT related to my undergrad grades, I guess I can assume that they'll decide that my grades were low for my SAT score and therefore that they will be even lower in law school than my 163 would indicate?!  @#!*.

And to J.D. -- BC was one of the SAT-asking people, and you nailed it on the undergrad (the "Little Iveys" -- bonus points if you can guess which one of the 3, although I'm afraid to admit on here for fear that someone I know will figure out my actual identity).

163 is actually median at Princeton, the #1 ranked school in the nation. 3.6 is well above the 3.3 Princeton Curve. You won't likely make T14, but please take the drama in stride.


164 and 3.41. But 41% of candidates score above the 95th percentile.

It looks like my numbers are a bit dated. Still, it's not that far off. The numbers for "Little Ivies" are surely a little bit below big P. I am betting on this kid's school having a 161 median LSAT and a 3.2ish median GPA.

People forget that the LSAT is a competitive test.  ::)

indyguy7484

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
    • View Profile
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #8 on: January 08, 2008, 05:58:09 PM »

It looks like my numbers are a bit dated. Still, it's not that far off. The numbers for "Little Ivies" are surely a little bit below big P. I am betting on this kid's school having a 161 median LSAT and a 3.2ish median GPA.

People forget that the LSAT is a competitive test.  ::)
[/quote]

Yeah, I think the freakishly high LSAT average around here makes people way too insecure about their scores.

BearlyLegal

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6273
  • And the greatest threat to America is... Bears!!!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Newjoetm
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Undergrad Prestige HURTING Chances?
« Reply #9 on: January 08, 2008, 06:05:47 PM »
Good guess, J.D.  Well done.

I realize I must sound like a bit of an a-hole, so sorry -- I didn't mean to come off like a total stress case.  But I think it feels bad when you start thinking that you've overestimated your chances of acceptance at your list of schools, no matter what your numbers.  Plus, this is a far cry from the experience I had applying to undergrad (having only applied to one school with good numbers).

My fears are slightly assuaged -- until tomorrow when I start coming up with ways in which adcoms are psychoanalyzing my personal statement in order to find character flaws that will serve as grounds to reject me.

And for the record -- median LSAT is 165, median GPA is 3.35 (I think . . .), and 38% above the 95th percentile.  Princeton can suck it.
I lul'd a little bit.

So you are below on LSATs and above on GPA. You ain't no slouch, and it sound like you have Biglaw WE. You'll do fine. You may not get in everywhere, but your school will certainly not *hurt* you.