<p>I just got my LSAT score back, not too happy but I was wondering where I could actually get in with it.</p>
<p>College: University of Notre Dame
Major: Econ and History
GPA: 3.694</p>
<p>I also had had a 3.606 GPA for one year at Boston College, making my combined GPA somewhere around 3.66 (two years at Notre Dame)</p>
<p>LSAT: 161</p>
<p>should I retake even to have a chance at getting into schools like GW, BC, BU, Fordham, maybe UNC? I really would love to go to UChicago or Georgetown but I know those are way out of range with my score right now. Do most schools average your two scores? This probably wouldn't be an issue for me because I don't think I could get any worse than a 161 if I took it over again, but I am just interested to know. </p>
<p>look for the lsat/gpa link people are posting in the other chances threads for a sense of your likelihood of admission at the various places.</p>
<p>most schools at this point take the higher of 2 LSATs, but some average, and some average unless the second score is a certain amount higher. There have been threads about it on this board so you might want to do a search, or look at the websites of/contact individual schools</p>
<p>depends on what you were scoring on the PTs leading up to the LSAT. if you were averaging 165-170 then i’d say definitely retake. furthermore, if you feel like your method of learning the material could have been improved or that you didn’t put in 100% of the effort before, assuming that for a retake that you will, then retake.</p>
<p>as for your question about averaging multiple LSAT scores, i highly doubt that they do. anything more than a 3-4 points increase on a second retake, assuming that you won’t retake a third time and increase by such small amount, will be beneficial, as long as that represents your ceiling, imo. what will be detrimental to you is if you score a few points lower than your lsat on the 2nd retake or fail to increase you score by at least 2 points. if either of the two happen, it’ll just display bad judgment on your part.</p>
<p>I was scoring 163-164 on most practice tests and as high as a 167 on one of them…I am confident if I took it over again I would score no lower than a 163…the testing conditions at my center were pretty bad as well, and I didn’t feel confident when I came out of the test center. There’s almost no way my score would go down if I took it again.</p>
<p>ckmets- this is coming from a parent, so take it with a grain of salt-
a 161 is a very decent grade, but it probably won’t get you into Fordham, GW, BU etc.
So if that is your goal, I think a retake is in order.</p>
<p>As you scored 163/164 in practice tests, your actual score of 161 is not too far off base. Many people score a bit lower on the LSAT than their practice tests due to nervousness.</p>
<p>You might want to re-evaluate your study methods. Did you give it your all?? Did you do loads of past LSAT exams for practice?? Did you use the powerscore bibles?? Will lots more self study or a private tutor help?? Only you can answer those questions.<br>
Some people will score within a certain range no matter how long and hard they study.</p>
<p>But I definitely feel that if you think you can do better- give it a second shot as your present score may not get you where you want to be.
Good luck-</p>
<p>When you FIRST started studying, what were you scoring? And, if you don’t mind my asking, what was your SAT score? This might give us a better idea for what LSAT score you should have been expecting.</p>
<p>^My apologies for reviving an old thread, but are you saying that there is a (slight) correlation between a person’s SAT score and LSAT score? If so, I’m in deep trouble! Is it possible to do well on the LSAT but perhaps not as “great” on the SAT?</p>
<p>There is a correlation, and unfortunately it’s not all that slight. However, it is always possible to be the outlying data point. In other words, yes – you might prove to be the exception here.</p>
<p>Haha, thanks! I’m still a bit uneasy about the correlation though because even though I got into Brown and Amherst, my ACT test score was in the bottom 25th percentile–for both schools. I’m a good writer and can read very well, but I’m a pretty slow reader. I sometimes find myself rereading passages and my mind getting off topic during those standardized tests. I didn’t really have much guidance throughout the undergraduate admission cycle so do you (or any one else) have advice on improving reading speed and comprehension? I think that’s my big weakness on those tests.</p>
<p>Also, while I’m EXTREMELY grateful and thankful for Brown giving me the opportunity to study there, I sometimes find myself attributing my acceptance to just pure luck. Only 107 in my ACT range was accepted and only 47 people were accepted with my range of class rank : <a href=“Undergraduate Admission | Brown University”>Undergraduate Admission | Brown University;
I’m very honored to have been given the chance to study there—I just wish this whole admission process was not based on test scores; it’s really stressful!</p>
<p>Well, two things. First, the same factors that helped you overcome weak scores in undergraduate admissions will help you out (although perhaps less so) in law school admissions as well.</p>
<p>Second, if you want to improve reading speed, just practice reading. A lot. Make sure you’re able to outline passages in things like The Economist or the Wall St. Journal or something, and just keep doing that habitually.</p>
<p>Cool! I’ll definitely give that a try—even though I’ve never picked up a copy of The Economist in my life ;)! Haha, I’ll try that outline method too–I would have never thought to do that actually…thanks very much for the advice!</p>
<p>It might help you to take a course at Sylvan. I[m not pushing them, but someone I know read slowly. It affected his verbal SAT score. He took a course the summer between high school and college. It really helped him.</p>
<p>It isn’t just luck. You have a highly desirable profile to undergraduate schools, and law schools will evaluate your soft factors similarly. There’s no need to worry too much.</p>
<p>@jonri: I’ll look into that. Thanks! Depending on the price though, I may just utilize the resources at Brown; they’re free—so that’s always a plus! I’ll definitely look into both though!</p>
<p>@bluedevilmike: That really means a lot—seriously. I’ll be sure to work even harder in college now that I know how important numbers really are. I’ll look at it as a clean slate and, well, just try my best! I have two more questions though: 1) When you say “outline passages in The Economist” do you mean summarizing the theme/main ideas of the passages? What am I actually looking for or trying to accomplish by outlining? 2) This is an ignorant question (I only just started looking at the law school threads), but have you already went through the entire law school process? Your knowledge on the subject is very extensive…I’m just curious. Thanks again for everything!</p>
<p>Go paragraph-by-paragraph; outline the pieces of information you’d need to reconstruct the passage mentally. A three-word summary per key point is usually sufficient; this happens once (sometimes twice) per paragraph. And no, I just finished my first year of law school.</p>