Please help me get into a top tier law school.

April 29, 2008 3:39 PM

Any tips on how to up my chances of getting into a top law school? I'm shooting for UCLA or UC Berkeley.

I'd like to focus on Intellectual Property rights with an eye toward representing content creators.

I did my undergrad at UC Santa Cruz majoring in Film Theory and I think my GPA was around 3.5. It was a big department and I didn't form relationships with any professors or TAs there. I've worked for several years at a big entertainment company specifically in their IT department. Everyone loves me at work.

I have an LSAT prep book and will be enrolling in a prep class prior to taking the exam.

I also have a slightly tear-jerking background. I'm an almost fully divorced battered wife returning to school (I'm 25). And I'm also a first-generation college graduate.

Is there anything else I can or should be doing to to increase my chances of being accepted for the 2009 school year?

posted by tinatiga to education (20 comments total)

The main factors for these top law schools, as far as I can tell, are GPA X LSAT + (maybe personal statement). At this point, the absolute best thing you can do to increase your chances of getting into a top school is to ace the LSAT. I'd take the course you signed up for and treat LSAT studying like it's your job. You need to ace it, and you need to ace it the first time.

Boalt Hall's numbers are: For the past several years the average GPA and LSAT score of admitted applicants have ranged from 3.7-3.8 and 167-169, respectively. The ranges are broad.

UCLA's numbers are: Median LSAT: 166, Median GPA: 3.68.

Good luck. You'll know much better about your options once you have your LSAT score. There isn't a ton of flexibility in law school admissions outside their LSAT/GPA range, but a high LSAT score can sometimes compensate for a lower GPA and vice versa.
posted by n'muakolo at 3:47 PM on April 29 [2 favorites]

From all my friends who ended up going to law school (all in California), the one thing that ended up separating which 'tier' school they ended up in were their LSAT scores. So I guess my advice is nail the LSAT.
posted by rooftop secrets at 3:48 PM on April 29

I'm a law student at the moment, and I don't think you can overestimate just how important the LSAT is. A 3.5 is a fairly low GPA for some of the top schools, particularly Berkeley, I think, which emphasizes GPA over LSAT. So, just spend a crazy amount of time making sure you do extremely well on the test. Off the top of my head, seems like you'd need to shoot for a 170 at least at Berkeley.

Anecdotally, Berkeley is more receptive than other top schools to things like background. Other than that, though, it's not really my experience that background or other accomplishments is that important to admission committees, especially at your larger public universities like UCLA.

Finally, I'm a student at a top school and I went through this whole horrible process just a bit over a year ago, so feel free to message me if you have other questions about things.
posted by ecab at 3:50 PM on April 29

Apply as early as you can--before they give your spot to another ex-battered-wife first-generation college student. Seriously.
posted by sondrialiac at 3:52 PM on April 29

From experience: you need to ace the LSAT. As in, 165+ for that kind of school. Personal circumstances/killer statement/awesome extra-curriculars/great relevant experience can mean nothing if your GPA + LSAT combined score isn't even going to get your application looked at. These schools get so many applications that the cut off score can mean the difference between a quick glance and someone actually reading your application. The LSAT prep course is a good start - Good luck!
posted by meerkatty at 4:03 PM on April 29

One tip is to make sure you shoot for other top schools besides those two UCs. You might be surprised at what schools an applicant can get admitted to, while not getting into either of those.
posted by PY at 4:20 PM on April 29

Anything that isn't your GPA or your LSAT score is called a "soft factor." These count much, much less than your GPA or your LSAT score because the only factors about incoming students that count towards a law school's national ranking are GPA and LSAT score.

Some schools care less about increasing their ranking, and thus look at soft factors more. Others look at virtually no soft factors. Which soft factors matter vary among law schools. Soft factors law schools care about include:

- Significant public or community service (sometimes taking care of family can fit into this category if you write about your story particularly well)

- Work experience: have you had a very challenging job? Have you worked in a field (e.g., science, engineering, medicine) that might contribute to your expertise in a particular area of law? Have you worked for a great company (e.g., Google) that is renowned for being great and having great employees? Have you worked abroad for a significant period of time?

- Diversity: this falls into two major categories. First, nearly all law schools are looking for underrepresented racial minorities. Most practice acknowledged widespread affirmative action on the basis of race. Second, many are looking for diversity of experience. This can mean socioeconomic diversity, but can also mean nontraditional students, people with quirky job experience, or other interesting seeming candidates.

- Foreign language fluency: demonstrate (through having been raised multilingual, lived abroad, or worked in a foreign language environment) fluency in a language other than English. Spanish and French are worth a lot less than Chinese, Arabic, and other less common languages.

- Being truly interesting: a lot of people think they are unique candidates. They are not. The application committee has read dozens of applications from people who decided they wanted to become lawyers when they saw their grandfathers get cheated out of their pensions because they didn't have adequate representation, or whatever. Every third applicant had an internship in their Senator's office. But if you wrote and published a best-selling book about your grandfather's life, or won a major (read: someone outside of your field would have heard of it) award, or sold your first company for $10 million, that's interesting.

The most important thing about soft factors is that everyone is trying to sell theirs. Any soft factor can be a dud if you don't write about it well in your application. And even the most mundane soft factors can help you if you do a good job of spinning them.
posted by decathecting at 4:30 PM on April 29

LSAT, LSAT, LSAT. I agree with everything ecab said, except that a 170 may not be good enough to get to Berkeley with a 3.5. They're notorious for weighting GPA more heavily than their peer schools. Also, I don't know how flexible you are about geography, but if you're serious about a "top tier law school," you should plan on applying to several of those peer schools (Virginia, Michigan, Texas, etc.). At this level, sometimes admissions committees' behavior doesn't seem to make any sense and you're better off playing the numbers.
posted by Partial Law at 4:38 PM on April 29

Several people I've known have gotten into Berkeley law, Stanford law, or both with GPAs under 3.5, but they were in science/engineering heavy programs in undergrad, did extremely well compared to the rest of their department, were focusing on things like patent law (I have no idea if that makes a difference for applications, though), and got insane LSAT scores. They were still very surprised to get in, but what it came down to was "well, you would have had a 3.9 if you hadn't been an engineer."
posted by devilsbrigade at 4:40 PM on April 29

Echoing sondrialiac, it's very important to apply as early as possible (before Thanksgiving for sure).

Also, without wanting to start a debate on the merits of the issue, if you're an underrepresented minority (black, Hispanic or Native American), consider applying to non-UC schools. UC schools are prohibited by Prop. 209 from employing affirmative action, so you'll have a much better chance at schools of equal rank which do use it. Heck, in general, it's smart to apply widely. Even if you still end up going to a UC school you can use an acceptance at a higher-ranked school to negotiate for scholarship money.

More than anything, however, you need to crush the LSAT. I'll repost some advice I sent to someone else a couple weeks ago:

iI you take the test more than once you are asked to submit all scores, so it’s important to do well on the first try because some schools will average multiple scores rather than taking the highest. Make sure you’re ready before you write.

You can download two practice LSATs (be sure to take them timed) from LSAC at: (http://lsac.org/LSAT/lsat-prep-materials.asp). That should give you an idea of where you’re starting from. If you don’t do well at first, though, don’t get too worried. I managed to improve on my diagnostic score by 20 points by test day.

The hardest section for most people is Logic Games. Fortunately it’s the one on which it’s easiest to improve. The best way to do that is to buy the Powerscore Logic Games Bible. Thanks to that book, I went from 11/24 on the LG section on my first practice test to a perfect LG score on test day.

Depending on how much progress you’re making on your own, you might also want to consider an LSAT prep class. I taught for, and would definitely NOT recommend Kaplan, but I’ve heard very good things about Powerscore.

Finally, in terms of practicing on your own, make sure you’re using real, previously administered LSATs. You can get them from LSAC: (the series entitled “Actual, Official LSAT PrepTests.”)

I know this sounds like a lot of work, but look at it this way: think of all the effort you put in for four years worth of grades. The LSAT is at least twice as important.
posted by ewiar at 4:46 PM on April 29 [1 favorite]

I got in to UCLA and got rejected by UC Berkeley just a few months ago.

I graduated from NYU in 2004 with a B.A. in English and a 3.5 GPA. I got a 172 (99th percentile) on the LSAT last June, had decent extra-curriculars and some excellent letters of recommendation, etc. I applied to both UCLA and UC Berkeley (my application fee to UCLA was waived by the school because of my LSAT score), and only got in to the former.

I'm a bit perplexed at UC Berkeley's rejection, considering that I got in to several better-ranked schools (including my old alma mater NYU, which I'll be attending this fall). I guess this is all to say that, with your GPA, I wouldn't be too confident of getting in with anything less than a 170, but even that isn't a guarantee.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions on the application process; email's in profile.
posted by saladin at 4:47 PM on April 29

I looked into law school for a bit. You might check out northwestern. They have a stated preference for students who have at least one year of work experience after college. In your case, having gone back to school, and currently working in a possibly relevant place (you don't include many details, so hard to tell) may be close enough. They're just looking for students to have a better idea of what they want to do before they jump into law school at the ripe young age of 21-22. And when you apply at other schools that don't have a stated preference for students with work experience or "non-traditional" students, play up the fact that you're a fully grown adult, who knows enough about herself by now to want to go to law school because you know it's a good fit, unlike other candidates ripe out of college who think law is supposedly a good respectable profession, according to those who have actually... worked in the real world.
posted by gauchodaspampas at 4:51 PM on April 29

2L at HYS, so I went through the application process not too long ago.

You are very unlikely to get into Berkeley with a 3.5 GPA. (Sorry.) It's notorious for requiring high GPAs over high LSATs - much more so than any other T14 school. You can see a chart that displays self-reported statistics for this year's admission cycle. (Because the data is self-reported, there are likely to be some abnormalities, but by and large, the numbers are correct - this is a web site used by law school applicants to keep track of their applications, etc., and most of them don't skew their statistics too much.) There are hardly any acceptances and many, many rejections at and below the 3.5 GPA line.

The difference between Boalt and UCLA is pretty significant, by the way, so you should not put them into the same category. That is, if - as per your post - you intend to get into a "top" school, Boalt would be in that category while UCLA would not be.

You have a lot of time, so you need to focus on the LSAT. It is a test that can be learned; it just takes more time for some people than others. You said you are enrolling in a prep course - great, but make sure to avoid Kaplan, and go for either Blueprint or Testmasters (if you are in California).

Different people will tell you different things about how much the "soft factors" matter in your application. Boalt is one of very few schools that does really seem to take them into account; however, again, it's unlikely to bump you up enough to overcome the 3.5 GPA, unless you do tremendously well on the LSAT. I've talked to several admission officers at my school, and I can tell you that in their estimation, about 95% of the application is your LSAT/GPA (with the LSAT score weighed much more heavily than GPA - say, 65-35). Soft factors are good for fringe applicants but not much else.

And re ewiar's suggestion to apply to non-UC schools because UC schools are prohibited to practice AA under Prop. 209 - a sensible suggestion but one that is not borne out in reality; all law schools, UCs included, effectively continue to practice affirmative action - they simply do not refer to it as such. Boalt, for example, says that it takes a "holistic" approach to reviewing application, and relies on proxies like asking applicants to disclose parents' median income, whether the family has ever received public assistance, in what neighborhood the applicant went to high school, etc. - basically, other factors that may correlate (crudely) with race.

Feel free to MeFiMail if you have any questions, and good luck.
posted by detune at 5:09 PM on April 29

I graduated from UC Santa Cruz with a B.A. in Film Theory (big ups to Profs. Stamp, Limbrick and Guftason) and another one in History in 2007. Everyone is right about the LSAT being huge in your situation because a couple of points are enormous on this test. I got a 162 and wound up getting rejected from almost everywhere I applied.

But do not let that stop you! You've got a shot, and you can wind up with some great prospects if you do your research right and apply to just about every school you can think of. I did, and I'm pretty jazzed about what my relatively near future holds. Like others have said, feel free to MeFiMail me about the experience.
posted by Doublewhiskeycokenoice at 6:26 PM on April 29

Yes, it is truely LSAT + GPA. Apply to at least 1 school where you are in the 25th percentile for both, apply to a school where you're in the 75th percentile for both.

Internships, letters of rec etc. do help, but are really soft. Also, "sad stories" don't count for much. I used to tell my LSAT students - unless you life story has already been optioned for a TV movie, it isn't going to help you. This only ever applied to a Lost Boy from Sudan.

Plus, don't focus on particular schools. Look at what schools have the best programs for what you want to do. Maybe University of Omaha has the country's best IP program.
posted by k8t at 9:00 PM on April 29

BTW, the law schools aren't technically averaging LSATs anymore. They're taking the best score HOWEVER they do see both and that could factor in.
posted by k8t at 9:02 PM on April 29

IMHO, getting into a top tier school requires this if you're not naturally gifted in test taking, as an LSAT instructor:

Before any of this. Go to Kaplan, ask to take a free practice test. See how you do on it, with just your prep book. If you're hitting the 160s already, you have a shot at getting up to 170. I'm not saying that it is impossible to go from the 150s to the 170s, but it is much tougher. If you're below the 160s and you still want to go to law school, start looking at schools on the index that take a 3.5 GPA and 5 points above whatever you score on the practice test.

First, as others have mentioned, 3.5 is not going to cut it for Boalt Hall. UCLA maybe. But for UCLA you're going to need a 170+ LSAT. Also, sign up for a relevant community college course or 2 for the summer and get a 4.0. This will up your GPA a bit and show that more recently you can do well in an academic setting.

Get enrolled in a prep course NOW. There still may be spots for the June test, but classes will start soon. I'd recommend Kaplan because I work for them and have for years AND you can repeat the class for free. Big secret - repeating the class is MAGIC. The 2nd time you take it, you are building on skills you've already gotten once. The other "secret" is once you are 1/2 way through the class, start taking 2-3 tests a week. Spend 2X the time reviewing the test. Kaplan has awesome analysis software that shows you patterns of error. Start with the 30s. Save the 50s for the 2 weeks before the test. This is going to require a lot of spare time. Live at the Kaplan Center.

People on the semester system usually take the June test. It is the busiest test date. (People on the quarter system often take the October test.) Downside: June is the 1st test of the cycle, so you don't get to look at the previous tests. They almost always repeat RC passage types, often LG types and the number of LR questions remains the same throughout the cycle, with a variation of 1-2 questions. But if you do well in June, you can spend your summer taking community college courses and working on your statement of purpose.

If the June test is in the 165-167 range, retake for October. Like I said, with Kaplan, you can repeat the class for free. This works wonders. Also, go to the law forum in the fall though and tell them your 160-something score and that you're retaking in October. At the forum offers ARE ON THE TABLE. Then re-take October, aiming for a 170+.
posted by k8t at 9:24 PM on April 29

Plus, don't focus on particular schools. Look at what schools have the best programs for what you want to do. Maybe University of Omaha has the country's best IP program.

This is not good advice. Go into the best school that you get into (if it's one of the T14 schools); otherwise, go to the best school located in an area where you want to practice (so, e.g., UCLA if California is where you want to work). Law firms doing the hiring really could not care less whether a particular program is ranked highly at a school if the school ranking is not within their hiring parameters. To give just one example, Stetson is ranked #1 in the nation for its Trial Advocacy program. I can guarantee you that BigLaw is not breaking down Stetson's doors in recruiting litigation associates.

Also, again, I really do caution you against enrolling in Kaplan, despite k8t's advice. Unless this has changed in the last year - and k8t, please correct me if this is no longer the case - but Kaplan does not use real LSAT questions in their course. This is a huge, huge flaw. The LSAC spends a lot of time developing the LSAT questions, then it spends a lot of time actually testing them via experimental sections on the LSAT, thus ensuring that they are scaled correctly, are of appropriate difficulty, and do not contain any flaws. Kaplan sort of writes its own questions willy-nilly without going through all the heavy lifting. The problem, of course, is that when you actually take the LSAT, you'll be answering LSAC's questions - not Kaplan's.
posted by detune at 8:03 AM on April 30

Kaplan's always used real questions for classroom, homework, tests, everything. In fact, there are no "fake" questions at all in the LSAT program (not the case with GMAT and GRE).
posted by k8t at 8:47 AM on April 30

Also, sign up for a relevant community college course or 2 for the summer and get a 4.0. This will up your GPA a bit and show that more recently you can do well in an academic setting.

This will do not do either of those things. Your GPA is calculated by LSDAS and you can't change it once you have a Bachelor's degree. Anything past that is considered "graduate work" and will not be factored into the GPA that gets reported to schools.

While it's theoretically possible it might look good for you to have some more recent academic experience, I doubt it would be anything more than a very small soft factor, at best -- after all, you've only been out of undergrad a few years, and I can't imagine anyone seriously saying, "Well, she had a 3.5, but her 4.0 in 6 hours of summer school at Podunk Valley Community College convinces me she'd do well in law school."

I think a lot of answers in this thread should be helpful though -- LSAT will certainly be key. Your grades really will hurt at Berkeley thanks to their not counting LSAT as much as most schools... but at UCLA, a good LSAT could certainly make up. The site detune linked (LawSchoolNumbers.com) will help you figure out what you need, but for the current cycle, it looks like you'd want at least a 168, and likely higher to be comfortable. The problem is, there are so few applicants below 3.5 that it's kind of a crap shoot -- you get people with 3.2/168 admitted and 3.58/174 rejected. The process can be awfully random, so you'll want to make sure to find some true safety schools to apply to (unless you decide that the expense/effort is only worth it for a top school, which would be a justifiable, if uncommon, decision. And while UCLA may not be in quite the same class as Berkeley, I'd still call it a "top" school, especially in California).

Anyway, best of luck. I just finished this stuff myself and will be starting law school in the fall, so I'll echo the others and would be glad to help in any way.
posted by SuperNova at 2:03 AM on May 1