Ask Misfire anything about the LSAT/Law School Admissions

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
Incidently, what was your Undergrad, I think you've said it on here before.

[/ QUOTE ]

I went to Belmont, which nobody has heard of. For the money I should have gone across the street to Vandy.

[recipro]

Have you thought about attending some random T14, and trying to transfer to Stanford after your 1L?

I know what you mean about wanting to retake the LSAT though. I received a 173 without much studying (my studying consisted entirely of doing four practice tests), and I know I could have done a lot better quite easily. (For starters, if I'd known the room wouldn't have a wall clock, I could have gotten to 176 easily by bringing a watch/timer.) 173 is a frustrating score--good enough to get into a ton of places, but not necessarily good enough for HYS...

[Card08]

Hello Misfire,

Thank you very much for setting up this post.

I'm a junior at Stanford with a fairly strong GPA (3.8+). What kind of score should I be shooting for to get into HYS type of program? Which testing prep service would you recommend (I understand you have a little bit of self-interest in play here)?

Will the schools consider ethnicity at all? I'm listed as Hispanic FWIW.

-Card

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a junior at Stanford with a fairly strong GPA (3.8+). What kind of score should I be shooting for to get into HYS type of program?

Will the schools consider ethnicity at all? I'm listed as Hispanic FWIW.


[/ QUOTE ]

For the law schools at HYS, a 3.8 isn't stellar (about the 25th percentile), but the fact that it's a 3.8 from Stanford is a big plus as most schools will adjust your index # based on what school you went to and what your major was. A mathematics or engineering major with a 3.8 from Stanford will be seen MUCH more favorably than a business or sociology major from Belmont. (I'm stealing all of this from How to Get Into the Top Law Schools by Richard Montauk, BTW.)

Obv you should be shooting as high as you can go on the LSAT. I can't say a 17x will get you in here or there, but I'm gonna take a leap and say if you're not hitting top 2% at least on practice tests, you're probably not ready for those schools. I have heard being hispanic will work in your favor both for admissions and scholarships/grants. Someone recently told me that Stanford was one of the most favorable schools for underrepresented minorities. Has this been your experience as an undergrad?

[ QUOTE ]
Which testing prep service would you recommend (I understand you have a little bit of self-interest in play here)?

[/ QUOTE ]

It only works in my self interest if you come to Nashville and take my classes. That being said, I really like Princeton Review's Hyperlearning course and materials. You get 6 proctored diagnostic exams, 20 3-hours classes, and a metric buttload of homework. Do your research on the teachers, though, because some offices have to take what they can get to make classes run. Be sure you get a pro with a good track-record. Ideally at TPR you'd want a coach who is "master-certified". I'm not quite there yet.

I've also heard lots of praise for PowerScore and Testmasters, but I have no personal experience with them.If TPR isn't available or you're just not comfortable with the instructors, maybe check them out. (I wasn't too impressed with PowerScore's retail books, FWIW, but the classes may be different.)

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
Have you thought about attending some random T14, and trying to transfer to Stanford after your 1L?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've thought about it, but I think that might hurt me more than help. I've also considered teaching GMAT in Dubai or somewhere to beef up my cultural well-roundedness. If I get rejected I'll have to think more about this.

[ QUOTE ]
I know what you mean about wanting to retake the LSAT though. I received a 173 without much studying (my studying consisted entirely of doing four practice tests), and I know I could have done a lot better quite easily. (For starters, if I'd known the room wouldn't have a wall clock, I could have gotten to 176 easily by bringing a watch/timer.) 173 is a frustrating score--good enough to get into a ton of places, but not necessarily good enough for HYS...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup. It's top 1%, but its the bottom of the top 1%. Sheesh. I really really really really really wish I had taken a class first. Until I trained to teach, I had no idea how little I knew about the test. Now I'm better equipped, but do I really want to take another 10-12 practice tests to prepare?

[Dave D]

[ QUOTE ]
Have you thought about attending some random T14, and trying to transfer to Stanford after your 1L?

I know what you mean about wanting to retake the LSAT though. I received a 173 without much studying (my studying consisted entirely of doing four practice tests), and I know I could have done a lot better quite easily. (For starters, if I'd known the room wouldn't have a wall clock, I could have gotten to 176 easily by bringing a watch/timer.) 173 is a frustrating score--good enough to get into a ton of places, but not necessarily good enough for HYS...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah also this is a really bad idea because honestly any top 20 school is going to have the same caliber of students. Ie its going to be really really hard, and to transfer you generally need really really good grades. The LSAT and the admissions system in general is bad at actually putting smarter people at better schools, the "smartness" gradation is very very slight from school to school. It's NOT like undergrad when you can say to yourself "well I'll just go to x state and get straight As and transfer." Law school prety much attracts the best and brightest from everywhere, which means it takes the kid from x random school who was really smart and didn't slack.

Just my 2 cents from someone who went to a good undergrad and isn't at the greatest law school. This school is tougher than undergrad, and these students are, as a whole, smarter than the kids I competed with at Wake.

[fslexcduck]

jesus man that is seriously eye opening that you got waitlisted at so many places with a 3.85 and a 173. where is your undergrad degree? did your recommendations suck?

i got a 174 with a 3.9 and assumed i was a lock most everywhere with probable at the big 3. guess i'd better actually spend some time writing my personal statement!

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
jesus man that is seriously eye opening that you got waitlisted at so many places with a 3.85 and a 173. where is your undergrad degree? did your recommendations suck?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm only officially waitlisted at 3 places. No rejections yet (fingers crossed). My undergrad was Belmont University (where? exactly.). I got recommendations from the two professors I had the most classes with (economics and music business), a neighbor of mine who is a professor and Pulitzer nominee who has known me since i was 11, and a former employer who has known me for 6 years and thinks I hung the moon. I got to read one of the professor's letters and the employer's letter, and both were very strong.

[ QUOTE ]
i got a 174 with a 3.9 and assumed i was a lock most everywhere with probable at the big 3. guess i'd better actually spend some time writing my personal statement!

[/ QUOTE ]

I assumed the same. Penn suprised me (especially since they sent me an application fee waiver). Harvard and Columbia not so much. You just never know. I didn't think I had a snowball's chance at NorthWestern because I declined their interview.

[damaniac]

Related to law school and the law, but not a question for Misfire.

Overheard two 1L's talking, apparently worn out from the grueling experience that is law school.*

"Yeah, the work sucks now, but once you land that big firm job, it'll all be worth it."

Ah, to be young and naive again!

* This is sarcasm. Law school isn't really that time consuming. It took me 3 days to stop putting any effort into reading background facts and such on cases. Just get the main details and the why of each rule and you'll pretty much be fine.

[Card08]

Thanks Misfire. That's around what I expected to hear. I am definitely shooting for 170+...however feasible that may be. I believe the bit about Stanford law school being more inclined to seek out underrepresented minorities. I have several friends in the Hispanic pre-law society (I'm not a member) who want to continue here through grad school. Stanford seems to always go out of its way to cater to minority groups.

If I decide to not go top 10, I am sure I could still go to Texas as that is my home state.

BTW, do these pre-law societies and extra-curriculars really have any weight in law-school admissions? What about legacy considerations (I had a cousin that went to Harvard...I am quite sure this doesn't mean shi*).