<p>Again, my statement was made in reference to top schools (T25 or so). After extensive checking by myself and other applicants, I am quite confident that with the exception of NYU all top schools evaluate based on the higher score.</p>
<p>Evidence? Take your word for it?</p>
<p>Or call them yourself? I'm not sure what sort of evidence you're looking for but I'm definitely not going to go onto all of their websites and copy/past information, particularly since most of them probably don't have it posted and I also don't have the time/interest.</p>
<p>Either way, if you don't believe me you're always free to check for yourself. I'm just offering what I've learned since I just got through applying to law schools and had two scores. It is of no consequence to me whether you believe it or not. ;-)</p>
<p>
[quote]
since most of them probably don't have it posted
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Then, how would you know?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I also don't have the time/interest.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Then, please refrain from making assertions you can't back up--or don't have the interest to back up.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is of no consequence to me whether you believe it or not. ;-)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Exactly; at least you admit it willingly. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Then, how would you know?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You've misunderstood. Most schools do not provide that information in writing on their websites. It is acquired usually only by contacting them over the phone. Therefore, it would be useless for me to try to find such information on their websites. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Then, please refrain from making assertions you can't back up--or don't have the interest to back up.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This part of your post is now irrelevant.</p>
<p>Just trying to be helpful, not looking for an internet chat spat. I have plenty of arguing to look forward to in the fall.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Again, my statement was made in reference to top schools (T25 or so). After extensive checking by myself and other applicants, I am quite confident that with the exception of NYU all top schools evaluate based on the higher score.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is incorrect. I will try to find my previous post on this topic where I listed specific information about many of the top law schools.</p>
<p>This is a link to a previous thread on taking the LSAT more than once:</p>
<p>thanks for the link...hmm, it seems like some schools evaluate by using the higher score, whereas others average the two. I don't really care which schools do what since i'm not applying for years. glad we're allowed to take it more than once though...the thought of only be able to take it once and being stuck with the score scares me.</p>
<p>I wonder...</p>
<p>I have a 3.53 UGPA from a top 100 US university. However, I majored in art. However x 2, it's one of the top 100 or so art programs in the US, and I did a BA, not a BFA - plus I did a good variety of liberal arts, math and science classes on the side. </p>
<p>I also have an MBA with a 3.93 GPA from a competitive MBA school. </p>
<p>Will my undergraduate major having been in art put me at a disadvantage? It was a rigorous art program, but I'm not sure if law schools recognize things like that. I also have good non-art academics, and the MBA... thoughts?</p>
<p>In general, I don't think applicants with undergrad degrees in fields such as art, music, or theater have much to worry about in terms of having law schools look down upon their majors. Your specific program being rigorous or not probably won't make much of a difference, but you shouldn't be penalized. Also, you should know that while the MBA will be an added bonus, the GPA won't bear an impact.</p>
<p>sallyawp - that is all very surprising considering the common information on law school applicant discussion boards is that, since the new ABA policy of allowing schools to only report the highest score, schools only really evaluate you based on the highest score with the exception of NYU. It seems that is incorrect.</p>
<p>brand, my post that I cited quotes straight from the relevant sources. </p>
<p>I think that the discussion boards you frequent might just have a lot of wishful thinking going on. There isn't a law school out there saying that you can't take the LSAT more than once, but a lot don't seem convinced that it is a good idea or that the scores from multiple administrations will have any predictive value.</p>
<p>Anyone considering taking the LSAT more than once and then applying to T14 law schools should know that they will likely have to offer a good explanation of the reason why the test was taken more than once. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that lack of preparation, just wanting to give it another try and I had nothing to lose would not be answers that would make them happy. </p>
<p>The safest course is still to study, do whatever preparations you feel are necessary and then sit for the LSAT one time.</p>
<p>oh my gosh, that's so much pressure...is performing significantly worse than you did in your practice tests a good reason? I would imagine it is, but I don't know what these top schools would think...even if I don't screw up, I think I would be tempted to retake it, just to see if I could get a higher score, but I realize that's not a good reason.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wildflower said: Then, how would you know?</p>
<p>Brand_182 replied: You've misunderstood. Most schools do not provide that information in writing on their websites. It is acquired usually only by contacting them over the phone. Therefore, it would be useless for me to try to find such information on their websites.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Look, as you have realized by now, you were wrong. I did not misunderstand anything. As you have seen in the link provided, most top schools do indeed provide information on their websites. It is simply a matter of looking, even if that means going to the FAQ. Therefore, it would not have been useless for you (or anyone else for that matter) to research before making unsupported assertions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wildflower said: Then, please refrain from making assertions you can't back up--or don't have the interest to back up.</p>
<p>Brand_182 replied: This part of your post is now irrelevant.</p>
<p>Just trying to be helpful, not looking for an internet chat spat. I have plenty of arguing to look forward to in the fall.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Again, you probably can see that 'that part of my post' is indeed quite relevant. I don't say it to flatter myself. I do believe this forum serves an educational purpose and it has (or ought to have), therefore, a commitment to truth.</p>
<p>I never questioned your intentions--and I was actually inclined to believe you were trying to be helpful. 'Trying' being the operative word. My issue was not with you per se, I was simply trying to clarify things. I was not 'looking for an internet chat spat'. I am afraid you misunderstood the directness of my questions with a tone that, simply, was not there.</p>
<p>But considering you do have plenty of arguing to look forward to: try taking an epistemology class before you graduate; heck, perhaps even a class in metaphysics. In law school, try to take a class on the law of evidence. </p>
<p>Also, you may want to consider reading this now: 1) "Naturalized Epistemology and the Law of Evidence" by Brian Leiter, co-authored with Ronald Allen (Virginia Law Review); and 2) "Beyond the Hart/Dworkin Debate: The Methodology Problem in Jurisprudence" by Brian Leiter (American Journal of Jurisprudence). They should be free here: SSRN</a> Author Page for Brian Leiter</p>
<p>This advice presupposes, however, that you were not simply using the "oh, the law schools don't have that information available anywhere on their website" to, well, be lazy. So, if that wasn't just a cop-out; I hope this post is helpful for you. Good luck. :)</p>
<p>I'm at NYU as well, and I've heard that the law school is tougher on NYU undergrads, but who knows. It doesn't hurt to send in an app though. Maybe if you go give John Sexton a huge hug he'll let you in :)</p>
<p>No, undergrad rigor and major do not matter. </p>
<p>I should have attended an easier university and majored in a liberal arts instead of a major that screwed me multiple times with Bs, so that I would actually have had a shot at HYS. <em>shakes head with regret</em></p>
<p>Top10, is that really your attitude? Is that really all you took from your four undergrad years? That they could've been better spent at an easier school just so that you might have a shot at HYS? I mean, come on, if you're at a T10 school, you'll be fine in the job market. To kick yourself for attending a school that you presumably preferred on its own merits to other schools just because your GPA might have taken a relative hit is silly. If I wanted to, I could've attended my local state school on a full ride and likely still gotten into HLS. As it is, though, I'm thankful that I got the chance to attend the school I did, surrounded by brilliant professors and students alike, even if that does mean some thousands of dollars in debt.</p>
<p>I'm at UCLA majoring in Global Studies (actually pre-GS because I can only apply in my jr year) with a potential minor in Public Affairs. After looking at the requirements for Global Studies, it seems to me that it is as challenging or more challenging than Political Science. I'm afraid that law schools will think of GS has a fluff major because it's difficult to tell what it's about just from the name. Do you guys think that GS is a competitive major for a potential law school student?</p>
<p>crnchycereal...well when my undergrad GPA was quite far below HYS 25th percentile GPAs and below even Berkeley's 25th GPA then yes, I think I should have at least majored in something else, if not gone to a crappier school. So yes, that is my attitude.</p>
<p>EKS.. Political Science is also a fluff major, not just Global Studies. The two are comparably "fluffy." Trust me, law schools do not care.</p>
<p>Top10LawSchool1L, so your ENTIRE undergrad experience can be distilled into a number? Did you enjoy your major? Did you enjoy your school? Did you take meaningful and lasting memories out of your experience there? I mean, if your answer to any of those questions is yes, then I still feel your attitude here is sort of sad. Why in the world would you be willing to trade down in these regards just so you might climb up a few rungs on the law school rankings ladder? In the end, your employment opportunities and academic experience will be much the same, so the only reason I could imagine you yearn so deeply for HYS is because of the shallow prestige.</p>