What matters in law school admissions?
March 30, 2007 8:31 PM Subscribe
I'm a recent graduate of a top 50 undergraduate school with a 3.6 GPA, a major in history and a minor in philosophy, and a 170 LSAT. LSAC says I have around a 50% chance of getting into NYU or Columbia, both of which interest me. I know this is just a representation of the number of students with comparable scores that get in. What determines whether I fall on the good 50% or the bad 50%? Is it extracirriculars (I have none), work experience (I have none), or the prestige of the undergraduate school (decent, but not great)? Do I have a good shot at these schools or should I just save my money and aim a little lower?
LawSchoolNumbers.com
NYU
Columbia
It's mostly LSAT and GPA, especially at the "higher end." If you go to that first link and actually click on the names of the schools, you can find the individual outliers and see what's special about them (work experience, diversity, etc.), but as the charts show, it's mostly about where that diagonal line falls between red and green.
On preview, white light is right. Apply to some backup schools, but first apply to where you want to go. That way you won't be left wondering, and besides, $70 application fees are almost insignificant once you start paying for law school.
posted by Partial Law at 8:49 PM on March 30, 2007
NYU
Columbia
It's mostly LSAT and GPA, especially at the "higher end." If you go to that first link and actually click on the names of the schools, you can find the individual outliers and see what's special about them (work experience, diversity, etc.), but as the charts show, it's mostly about where that diagonal line falls between red and green.
On preview, white light is right. Apply to some backup schools, but first apply to where you want to go. That way you won't be left wondering, and besides, $70 application fees are almost insignificant once you start paying for law school.
posted by Partial Law at 8:49 PM on March 30, 2007
Both schools practice affirmative action, so belonging to an underrepresented minority group would help. That's not really anything you can help, though.
There's been endless speculation regarding the factors you mentioned, but except for members of admissions committees, nobody really knows how much they matter. The received wisdom, though, is that extracurriculars matter little at these two schools, work experience matters very slightly, and the prestige of one's undergraduate school matters somewhat more, as does the perceived difficulty of one's major.
I assume you're planning on applying next year, since it's so late in the cycle now that you'd have very little chance (if any) of gaining admission. You should consider taking the LSAT again. You'll want to check this, but I believe that CLS and NYU have both recently (as of the last admission cycle) started considering only applicants' highest LSAT score.
You should particularly consider retaking the LSAT if you had a "split" score--that is, performed poorly on only a single section. If you can spend the time between now and June mastering that section and get your score up to 174, you'd almost certainly be admitted.
Beyond that, take the time to write a original, eye-catching, and charming admissions essay. They like those. You might try to get something interesting lined up for the summer, too, so your resume looks a little less blank.
As for the cost of applying, it pales next to the cost of attending, so don't potentially shortchange yourself out of your dream school because you couldn't scrape together $85.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 8:49 PM on March 30, 2007
There's been endless speculation regarding the factors you mentioned, but except for members of admissions committees, nobody really knows how much they matter. The received wisdom, though, is that extracurriculars matter little at these two schools, work experience matters very slightly, and the prestige of one's undergraduate school matters somewhat more, as does the perceived difficulty of one's major.
I assume you're planning on applying next year, since it's so late in the cycle now that you'd have very little chance (if any) of gaining admission. You should consider taking the LSAT again. You'll want to check this, but I believe that CLS and NYU have both recently (as of the last admission cycle) started considering only applicants' highest LSAT score.
You should particularly consider retaking the LSAT if you had a "split" score--that is, performed poorly on only a single section. If you can spend the time between now and June mastering that section and get your score up to 174, you'd almost certainly be admitted.
Beyond that, take the time to write a original, eye-catching, and charming admissions essay. They like those. You might try to get something interesting lined up for the summer, too, so your resume looks a little less blank.
As for the cost of applying, it pales next to the cost of attending, so don't potentially shortchange yourself out of your dream school because you couldn't scrape together $85.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 8:49 PM on March 30, 2007
seconding white light. the "what if" feeling kind of sucks.
posted by mittenedsex at 8:49 PM on March 30, 2007
posted by mittenedsex at 8:49 PM on March 30, 2007
What determines whether I fall on the good 50% or the bad 50%?
You are being admitted (or not admitted) as part of a class. What this means is that your chances of getting in also depend on who else is applying. You may be "interesting" because of your gender, your location, some element of your background you're not telling us here.
Given all that, the best you can do is apply and see. To me, 50% though sounds pretty good. A flip of a coin? If that's where you want to go, then, yes, apply!
posted by vacapinta at 8:51 PM on March 30, 2007
You are being admitted (or not admitted) as part of a class. What this means is that your chances of getting in also depend on who else is applying. You may be "interesting" because of your gender, your location, some element of your background you're not telling us here.
Given all that, the best you can do is apply and see. To me, 50% though sounds pretty good. A flip of a coin? If that's where you want to go, then, yes, apply!
posted by vacapinta at 8:51 PM on March 30, 2007
What matters most (in order, and the space counts)...
1. LSAT
2. GPA
3. Undergrad school
4. Work experience
5. Everything else: gender, race, extracurriculars, etc.
The only exception to all this is knowing someone of importance involved in the selection process. They can get you in as long as all the above is respectable, if not great.
posted by JPowers at 9:00 PM on March 30, 2007
1. LSAT
2. GPA
3. Undergrad school
4. Work experience
5. Everything else: gender, race, extracurriculars, etc.
The only exception to all this is knowing someone of importance involved in the selection process. They can get you in as long as all the above is respectable, if not great.
posted by JPowers at 9:00 PM on March 30, 2007
Why not? When I applied I spent so much money on it a few more schools really wouldn't have mattered, but if you have need I believe you can get fee waivers.
posted by wuzandfuzz at 9:02 PM on March 30, 2007
posted by wuzandfuzz at 9:02 PM on March 30, 2007
I would add to the numbers advising wide applications with inclusion of your choice schools. (I once had an advisor who refused to write me a letter if I didn't apply to at least ten graduate programs in my area.) But if your process is anywhere similar to either that experienced by many of my former students or that employed by humanities grad student selection committees, the real question concerning your acceptance is of the quality of your letters.
posted by zeugitai_guy at 9:03 PM on March 30, 2007
posted by zeugitai_guy at 9:03 PM on March 30, 2007
"...the real question concerning your acceptance is of the quality of your letters."
As I understand it, reco letters are only even read when they are on the fence about someone. Unless it is from somebody of massive importance to the school, I don't think they play much of factor at all.
posted by JPowers at 9:08 PM on March 30, 2007
As I understand it, reco letters are only even read when they are on the fence about someone. Unless it is from somebody of massive importance to the school, I don't think they play much of factor at all.
posted by JPowers at 9:08 PM on March 30, 2007
I'm going to have to disagree, JPowers. Race can be a very significant admission factor, if the applicant is black, Hispanic, or Native American.
See Richard Sander's recent paper on the subject. If the OP is black, Hispanic, or Native American, he or she should have no trouble at all getting into NYU or CLS.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 9:11 PM on March 30, 2007
See Richard Sander's recent paper on the subject. If the OP is black, Hispanic, or Native American, he or she should have no trouble at all getting into NYU or CLS.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 9:11 PM on March 30, 2007
The 2007-08 cycle is just about over, so I'm assuming you'll be applying for admission in the fall of 2008.
If you are a recent graduate, I would suggest that you either find a job or do Teach for America or Peace Corps in the intervening year. I would disagree somewhat with JPowers in that I felt my work experience was weighed FAR more heavily than the prestige of my undergraduate institution. Schools convert your LSAT/GPA into an index number particular to each school, some giving more weight to LSAT, some vice versa. None of the schools I talked to gave extra weight to GPA according to undergrad institution.
There will be plenty of people with great numbers competing with you for the same seats - if your grades and LSAT are all you have to go on, do some volunteering or get an interesting job this year. Seriously, the best advice I have is differentiate yourself from ALL the overachievers applying.
Lots of relevant topics over at Law School Discussion. For what it's worth, I had slightly higher GPA and slightly lower LSAT and will be starting at a T20 come August.
Best of luck!
posted by non sum qualis eram at 9:43 PM on March 30, 2007
If you are a recent graduate, I would suggest that you either find a job or do Teach for America or Peace Corps in the intervening year. I would disagree somewhat with JPowers in that I felt my work experience was weighed FAR more heavily than the prestige of my undergraduate institution. Schools convert your LSAT/GPA into an index number particular to each school, some giving more weight to LSAT, some vice versa. None of the schools I talked to gave extra weight to GPA according to undergrad institution.
There will be plenty of people with great numbers competing with you for the same seats - if your grades and LSAT are all you have to go on, do some volunteering or get an interesting job this year. Seriously, the best advice I have is differentiate yourself from ALL the overachievers applying.
Lots of relevant topics over at Law School Discussion. For what it's worth, I had slightly higher GPA and slightly lower LSAT and will be starting at a T20 come August.
Best of luck!
posted by non sum qualis eram at 9:43 PM on March 30, 2007
Are you required to write a personal essay, statement of intent, that sort of thing? If so, I'd think this could make a significant impact.
posted by treepour at 10:12 PM on March 30, 2007
posted by treepour at 10:12 PM on March 30, 2007
You are going to be spending a lot more in the end, so why not just take the risk?
posted by Ironmouth at 10:17 PM on March 30, 2007
posted by Ironmouth at 10:17 PM on March 30, 2007
Watch lawschoolnumbers.com - seconding that.
Have a good internship or volunteer work that makes you seem like a better person.
Retake the LSAT and get a higher score.
posted by k8t at 10:41 PM on March 30, 2007
Have a good internship or volunteer work that makes you seem like a better person.
Retake the LSAT and get a higher score.
posted by k8t at 10:41 PM on March 30, 2007
If you have a 50% chance of getting into one, then you have a 75% chance of getting into one of two, and a 87.5% chance of getting into one of three, and so on.
posted by delmoi at 10:51 PM on March 30, 2007
posted by delmoi at 10:51 PM on March 30, 2007
I'm a recent graduate of a top 50 undergraduate school with a 3.6 GPA
Schools are looking at your GPA, LSAT, statement... the school you went to doesn't really matter unless it's a top 5....maybe top 10.
posted by ASM at 2:22 AM on March 31, 2007
Schools are looking at your GPA, LSAT, statement... the school you went to doesn't really matter unless it's a top 5....maybe top 10.
posted by ASM at 2:22 AM on March 31, 2007
The most important thing to remember is that in terms of outcomes, there is fairly little to distinguish the "next eight" law schools, and, as Delmoi implies, you must apply to all of them -- NYU and Columbia, of course, but also Michigan, Chicago, Penn, Duke, Virginia and Boalt. Chicago might put up more Supreme Court clerks than Penn and Columbia might land a few more people at Wachtell or Munger Tolles than Duke, but in terms of where the vast majority of graduates are at 5 and 10 years into their career, very little difference.
The second most important thing to remember is that Harvard and Stanford (but, alas, not Yale) regularly admit people with your academic numbers, even if not members of underrepresented minorities, and all of the "next eight" regularly reject them. Thus you also ought to apply to Harvard and Stanford and also two or three safety schools (from the Georgetown / Cornell / UCLA / Northwestern division).
It won't be cheap, and it will be time consuming, to apply to all of them but this ain't the place to economize on either time or money.
After you've done the above, then you should candidly assess your strengths and weaknesses in terms of top school applications.
Your strengths is your LSAT. 170 is good. Your weakness is your lack of non-academic experience (extracurriculars or work experience). Your undergraduate transcript is probably a push in terms of quality of grades and competitiveness and grade-inflation tendency of your school and major.
You address the weakness of your non-academic experience by writing a great essay which shows (not, God forbid, tells) the story of you as a mature person who has made a well-considered decision to go to law school and who is likely to make what a law school admission committee will see as great use of a law degree. Remember that law schools want to produce stars: partners at big law firms, district attorneys and attorney generals, U.S. senators, federal judges, founders of influential community organizations, tenured law school professors, Fortune 500 executives, etc.
You address the middling nature of your undergraduate record with some terrific professor recommendations. Pick the professors with whom you had a great rapport, or, absent that, pick the professors who gave you your highest grades. Visit them at their office hours to refresh the connection.
posted by MattD at 5:40 AM on March 31, 2007 [1 favorite]
The second most important thing to remember is that Harvard and Stanford (but, alas, not Yale) regularly admit people with your academic numbers, even if not members of underrepresented minorities, and all of the "next eight" regularly reject them. Thus you also ought to apply to Harvard and Stanford and also two or three safety schools (from the Georgetown / Cornell / UCLA / Northwestern division).
It won't be cheap, and it will be time consuming, to apply to all of them but this ain't the place to economize on either time or money.
After you've done the above, then you should candidly assess your strengths and weaknesses in terms of top school applications.
Your strengths is your LSAT. 170 is good. Your weakness is your lack of non-academic experience (extracurriculars or work experience). Your undergraduate transcript is probably a push in terms of quality of grades and competitiveness and grade-inflation tendency of your school and major.
You address the weakness of your non-academic experience by writing a great essay which shows (not, God forbid, tells) the story of you as a mature person who has made a well-considered decision to go to law school and who is likely to make what a law school admission committee will see as great use of a law degree. Remember that law schools want to produce stars: partners at big law firms, district attorneys and attorney generals, U.S. senators, federal judges, founders of influential community organizations, tenured law school professors, Fortune 500 executives, etc.
You address the middling nature of your undergraduate record with some terrific professor recommendations. Pick the professors with whom you had a great rapport, or, absent that, pick the professors who gave you your highest grades. Visit them at their office hours to refresh the connection.
posted by MattD at 5:40 AM on March 31, 2007 [1 favorite]
you probably should NOT retake the LSAT. most every school of consequence averages all of your LSAT scores, so the best you could do would be a 175 (if you got a perfect score). you also might do worse on them, which would bring down your current score/standing.
posted by noloveforned at 7:06 AM on March 31, 2007
posted by noloveforned at 7:06 AM on March 31, 2007
You can call up your college's pre-law advisors and ask to see the grids for your school. They will show you everyone who applied from your school, identified by GPA, LSAT, major, and race, and whether they got in at each of the schools they applied to.
posted by phoenixy at 9:06 AM on March 31, 2007
posted by phoenixy at 9:06 AM on March 31, 2007
Columbia is known for really emphasizing numbers. If you look at their admissions graph on lawschoolnumbers.com, the demarcation line between accepts and rejects is very distinct.
To answer your question about what most schools look for after GPA/LSAT, I think the most important thing you can work on is your personal statement. I happen to think that your resume is slightly important, but that's not really something you can work on at this point. Of course, you could always take a year or two off and do something really interesting.
My numbers were very similar to yours (I'm a 1L at a t10), and I got in to NYU and rejected by Columbia. I'd definitely recommend giving them a shot, as well as any other school you might like to go to. You have a chance to get in almost anywhere, and you never know what might happen..
Good luck!
posted by soonertbone at 9:22 AM on March 31, 2007
To answer your question about what most schools look for after GPA/LSAT, I think the most important thing you can work on is your personal statement. I happen to think that your resume is slightly important, but that's not really something you can work on at this point. Of course, you could always take a year or two off and do something really interesting.
My numbers were very similar to yours (I'm a 1L at a t10), and I got in to NYU and rejected by Columbia. I'd definitely recommend giving them a shot, as well as any other school you might like to go to. You have a chance to get in almost anywhere, and you never know what might happen..
Good luck!
posted by soonertbone at 9:22 AM on March 31, 2007
I had a 3.1 GPA from Haverford College and a 168 LSAT score. I applied to NYU early - they turned me down cold. I then applied to 23 schools for regular admissions. Tons of them turned me down. But, bizarrely, Duke accepted me. Duke was the highest-ranked school I applied to after NYU and I just threw them an application to avoid the 'what if' factor. The moral of the story is that it's worth it to spend the money on a couple longshots.
posted by pokeydonut at 11:54 AM on March 31, 2007
posted by pokeydonut at 11:54 AM on March 31, 2007
noloveforned, it's a little more complicated than that. It would certainly be bad to score lower than 170 on a second try, but if the OP felt he or she could do better, particularly better than CLS's 75th percentile LSAT score, I think it would help his or her chances considerably.
The reason for this is recently changed ABA reporting requirements that ask only that each admit's highest LSAT score be reported. USNews, which produces the influential law school rankings, uses the same LSAT/GPA data as the ABA, since they believe law schools won't fudge numbers given to the ABA. Consequently, from the perspective of rankings, it's better to admit a student who got a 170 and then a 174 on the LSAT than one who got a 173.
This is undoubtedly tempered with other concerns, but if the OP is confident he or she can break 170, it can only help, particularly for such a borderline applicant.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 1:52 PM on March 31, 2007
The reason for this is recently changed ABA reporting requirements that ask only that each admit's highest LSAT score be reported. USNews, which produces the influential law school rankings, uses the same LSAT/GPA data as the ABA, since they believe law schools won't fudge numbers given to the ABA. Consequently, from the perspective of rankings, it's better to admit a student who got a 170 and then a 174 on the LSAT than one who got a 173.
This is undoubtedly tempered with other concerns, but if the OP is confident he or she can break 170, it can only help, particularly for such a borderline applicant.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 1:52 PM on March 31, 2007
Erm, it's a crapshoot. Apply to a lot of schools, and apply early, and you'll have some options. My numbers were VERY close to yours (GPA a bit higher, LSAT the same, coming from a small liberal arts school, traditional age white male) and it really turned out to be hit and miss. Here's what I ended up with:
Yale: rejected
Harvard: rejected
Stanford: rejected
Boalt: waitlisted
Columbia: waitlisted
Cornell: waitlisted
Northwestern (didn't interview): waitlisted
Michigan: accepted, no $
UCLA: accepted, $$
USC: accepted, $
ND: accepted, $$
U of MN: accepted, $$
Pepperdine: accepted, full ride
Lewis and Clark: accepted, full ride
I picked ND since the cash allowed me to get out of LS without any debt and it places well from coast to coast. Lots of schools (including ND) I applied to on fee waivers, so keep those in mind. Apply to lots of schools, and with your numbers you'll have lots of options.
posted by craven_morhead at 4:27 PM on March 31, 2007
Yale: rejected
Harvard: rejected
Stanford: rejected
Boalt: waitlisted
Columbia: waitlisted
Cornell: waitlisted
Northwestern (didn't interview): waitlisted
Michigan: accepted, no $
UCLA: accepted, $$
USC: accepted, $
ND: accepted, $$
U of MN: accepted, $$
Pepperdine: accepted, full ride
Lewis and Clark: accepted, full ride
I picked ND since the cash allowed me to get out of LS without any debt and it places well from coast to coast. Lots of schools (including ND) I applied to on fee waivers, so keep those in mind. Apply to lots of schools, and with your numbers you'll have lots of options.
posted by craven_morhead at 4:27 PM on March 31, 2007
I graduated from Columbia a couple of years ago, and I can confirm that they are really focused on an applicant's LSAT and GPA numbers. That said, I think you definitely in the running with what you have under your belt. A good friend of mine happened to apply really late (during the summer, I think), and was accepted. You might give the admissions office a call and ask whether they think they may have additional room for Fall 2007--it can't hurt.
Also, you should know that CLS accepts a LOT of 2L transfers, just in case you don't make it in the first time round.
Good luck!
posted by Admiral Haddock at 4:38 PM on March 31, 2007
Also, you should know that CLS accepts a LOT of 2L transfers, just in case you don't make it in the first time round.
Good luck!
posted by Admiral Haddock at 4:38 PM on March 31, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by white light at 8:41 PM on March 30, 2007