What I learned about law school admission

Graduate School Law School
61

<p>Folks, my son was age 40 when he was 10 years old. He has a fixed plan of what he wants to do,which is have a full service financial planning firm that does tax returns and tax planning. As part of this , he feels that having a law degree is very beneficial despite my strong objections. Since he is paying for law school with the money he saved up during his life, and with some savings by his grandparents, he is going ahead with his plan.</p>

<p>For what it’s worth, with his CPA background and good networking skills, he is guaranteed a job with a large accounting firm in their financial planning/tax department once he gets his law degree from anywhere.</p>

<p>Fauxnom, he generally applied to schools that had median LSATs for their bottom 25% of within 2- 3 points of his.</p>

62

<p>OP: I’m sorry to have to say it, but I think some of what you said is “vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it relies on a sample that is likely unrepresentative” (besides being without sufficient justification). Sorry - couldn’t resist. </p>

<p>I do want to preface this with a disclaimer: I’m not an admissions officer and have literally ONE law admissions cycle under my belt. </p>

<p>Though I agree that many admissions officers will lie to your face to get you to apply (to increase applications => selectivity => USNWR rank), many of them (along with former deans of admission) are quite open about law school admissions (following their retirement of course) in the printed literature. (Joyce Curll and Anna Ivey come to mind - really terrific books on law admissions.) </p>

<p>Likewise, I am in complete agreement with your statement that the LSAT is king and that it can’t be gamed (well, logic-gamed maybe…har har). I really do believe people generally have an upper limit. I would go out on a limb and say that most people are not going to score more than 15 points above their diagnostic. Sure, it’s been done, but it’s definitely the exception. With intense, focused studying, I would speculate (again, just my own limited observations) that it is not unreasonable to shoot for 10-15 points of improvement over the cold diagnostic score.</p>

<p>However, the idea that all numerically equal GPAs are created equal is just unfathomable to me - are you seriously suggesting that a math major from Penn with a 3.8 is the same (in terms of academic rigor) as a 3.8 in retail and consumer sciences from the University of Arizona? (No hating here - I have two brothers at UA.) This is an extreme example, but the principle holds true: there are some majors that are more rigorous than others, which requires a nuanced view of GPA that is useful for law adcoms. Law schools must weigh this all the time given the sheer number of schools and even larger number of majors/programs. Though perhaps English and history majors are more or less equal, the same cannot be said for those majoring in languages and the hard sciences, or identity politics and engineering. (Anna Ivey speaks very candidly about this very problem in her book, as I recall. Or maybe Curll?) Most law schools receive Common Data Sets along with each application that contextualize the student’s GPA by giving a breakdown of the GPA and LSAT scores by major and class at the given school - if GPAs were equivalent, this would be unnecessary. </p>

<p>Also, to say that extracurriculars/soft factors don’t matter at all is misleading at best. They will not mitigate a dismal LSAT score (barring that you’re the son of the plaintiff in some major civil rights test case or Sasha Obama), to be sure, but they will certainly play a role in the admissions process, even if less so than the LSAT and GPA. Yale could fill its seats with 175+ 4.0+ applicants, but they don’t. (Look at their distribution…) Why? Because they take into consideration soft factors too. Of course your LSAT generally has to be in the ballpark and your GPA does as well, but after that, it’s up to you to make the case to them to accept you. Same goes for personal statements - there isn’t an LSAT point conversion for stellar essays, but I definitely think they can tip the scales more than you suggested, though again, they will not mitigate a truly dismal LSAT score.</p>

<p>I’m no admissions officer, but I really think it would behoove anyone interested in JD admissions to consult the printed literature (Susan Estrich, Anna Ivey, Joyce Curll, and Richard Montauk all have excellent books that touch on similar themes) rather than rely on anecdotal evidence. There’s generally, IMHO, less gaming to be done in law admissions versus undergraduate given the primacy (and indeed difficulty) of the LSAT, but it does help to have a strategy and leverage every [ethical] advantage you have.</p>

63

<p>Re #62: You’re probably correct around the edges, but I think taxguy is basically correct. Soft factors matter for borderline candidates and they matter for otherwise-Yale-caliber candidates, but basically they don’t matter very much. There is some mild adjustment for GPA, especially if your major is particularly atrocious, but that’s not a particularly important part of the process. Admissions officers technically tell the truth – they do technically give every application a holistic review, usually – but it’s best not to infer from that that a low-numbers candidate has a realistic shot.</p>

64

<p>@bluedevilmike: I think Anna Ivey says it very well:</p>

<p>“In practice, about 15 percent of files have numbers so low they warrant only a quick glance to make sure the admissions officer is not accidentally denying a Pulitzer Prize winner. About another 15 percent of files have numbers so high that they warrant only a quick glance to make sure the admissions officer is not admitting a convicted embezzler. The other 70 percent that fall in the middle of the curve take up most of her time. That’s where she scrutinizes the transcript, the resume, the essay, and any other parts of the file.”</p>

<p>(Ivy Guide to Law School Admissions, 15.)</p>

<p>That’s a lot of people! Perhaps she’s restricting her statements to top schools, but even so, they are telling. That 70 percent is where most of us fall and, consequently, why the details matter so much. However, perhaps it would be more useful to restrict the generalization to top schools? Regardless, the message is true: leverage all of your advantages and have the strongest application possible. I just don’t he should suggest to potential applicants that soft factors are totally irrelevant simply because they are not weighted as heavily…</p>

65

<p>Ivey’s from University of Chicago, right? As of 2007 they admitted 16.2% of applicants. So if she’s admitting 15% based on numbers alone, that means she’s spending most of her time plucking 1.2% out of 70% of the pool.</p>

<p>Granted the admissions rate is probably dropping over time, but you get my point.</p>

66

<p>I am in agreement with post number63. Let me repeat what I said in post one:</p>

<ol>
<li>Some “soft” factors might have a slight effect on admission. Examples might be designations such as CPA, CFA etc. Other decent soft factors are superlative grad school grades, awards from employers ( with proof), written published books etc. Even with these, they only have marginal benefits. Your overall GPA and LSAT should be enough to make you competitive,which means near the median of accepted applicants. They won’t make up for low LSATs. Again the LSAT and GPA are kings and everything else is almost irrelevant. Say that five times. This includes work experience. Now if you were applying to a very top law school, these factors might give a slight edge at best. However, since I don’t have experience at the very top law schools, I can’t measure the effect of strong soft factors. </li>
</ol>

<p>However, for the lower tiered schools, I will stand by what I said.</p>

67

<p>taxguy, I have no opinion on the soft factors in the admissions process, but I do think that your son’s skills, as evidenced by his soft factors, will stand him in excellent stead in establishing a thriving business of the type he is aiming at.</p>

68

<p>Consolation, I absolutely agree. However, that isn’t the point regarding law school admission, which is they are very LSAT and GPA oriented…period. The soft factors only fill in the margins in order to distriguish between two similar candidates. I don’t think there is as much “holistic admission” for law school as folks seem to think. I certainly don’t think it is as holistic as you would find for undergraduate school.</p>

69

<p>I applied and was accepted to top law schools. My grades as an ug were in the 2 point range. My grades in supplemental business programs after college were 4.0 at a 4th tier college, classes I took at night for business knowledge. My LSAT scores were just about as high as they could be. I had experience in a boutique area of law in my job and was considered an expert at that time. I was nearly 30 years old. I worked with top law firms and lawyers in a major city and got recs from many of them, unsolicited. I didn’t think I had a chance of getting into any but the easiest admitting programs, but got accepted to every single law school to which I applied and even got some small grants to help me. I know others who have experience the same thing for med school and other prof schools as well. Maturity and outside factors can mitigate a bad ug gpa. But I was told that the very high LSAT was essential and key to my experience.</p>

70

<p>CP, May I ask what your LSAT score was and what law schools we are talking about?</p>

71

<p>taxguy - thanks for the thread. interesting discussion here.</p>

72

<p>I agree about admissions but not about employment. It’s true if the law student wants a high paying corporate job – T14 all the way.</p>

<p>But my D was criminal appellate work and is heading toward a degree in public law. Her CUNY schooling is proving perfect to bring her the internships and experiences she wants. I don’t want to list the public interest institutions recruiting her to protect her privacy, but she will eminently employable, just not at the kind of salary most lawyers dream of.</p>

<p>And the icing on the cake is that for instate students CUNY’s tuition is under $11K so she doesn’t need a shiny corporate job to pay back her loans.</p>

73

<p>I applied and was accepted to a bunch of Chicago law schools including UofC, Northwestern, Loyola, Depaul, IIT, and UMD, American, UBalt. That was back in the dark ages when the scores were on a 200-800 scale and I believe got a 770. No idea how that figures in the new scale.</p>

74

<p>So even then, the LSAT was very crucial and overweighed your lower GPA? A 770 would equate toa 177 under the new scale. However, the exam was very different then.</p>

75

<p>mythmom – thanks for providing important balance and perspective. Not all law students aim to make the mega-bucks! Quality of life matters, too…having time for one’s family and all that good stuff. :slight_smile: I think my son figures that, as long as he can support a family in reasonable middle-class comfort, he’ll be fine. </p>

<p>Have no earthly clue what his LSAT scores will be. He did well on his SAT I but not off the chart. He did REALLY well on his SAT IIs. So, I guess it depends whether the LSAT is closer to the SAT I or to the SAT II. But, in any event, as long as he can get into a pretty decent law school (not necessarily T14), we won’t worry. This is all very premature anyway…</p>

76

<p>I don’t know how they input my GPA back then as a non traditional student who took courses after undergraduate years. My UG GPA was terrible, but the courses I took thereafter were all A’s. But, yes, the LSAT was considered crucial back then also.</p>

<p>I have a friend who was accepted to Georgetown Law from UMiami with a good but not great gpa. She had a near perfect LSAT score on the same scale 200-800 scale. Her boyfriend, now her DH, was not accepted with a great GPA from Dartmouth but scores that were about on the border line for GT acceptance. But he got in the subsequent year, by moving to DC and hanging around the law school and reapplying.</p>

77

<p>I wish CC would allow edits anytime. Sadly, I forgot one major factor for admission. Most law school admissions are rolling admission. This means that the earlier you generally apply , the better your chances become. It logically follows that the later you apply, the harder it gets. This may not be universal but it is true for many schools. </p>

<p>Also, if you have already received a rejection, and suddenly find out that you did much better on a later LSAT,generally law schools won’t reconsider your application. You will have to wait until the next admission cycle ( which is the following year) for the new LSAT scores to be considered. Likewise, if you apply to a law school while telling them that you are taking the upcoming LSAT, they will wait for the latest scores before making a decision. Once a decision is made, it is usually final, although I have seen a few law schools allow for an appeal if made within 30 days of the decision.</p>

<p>Also ALWAYS check with “Law School Predictor.” This is a tool that you can find using Google that will give you a pretty good estimate of your chances for admission at most law schools. You need to know your GPA and LSAT score. I have found this tool to be fairly accurate. The only exception is that some lower tiered schools such as Florida Coastal and NOVA, Widener et. al. have an summer qualification program as an alternative admission for lower LSAT applicants. These programs give an intensive 6 week law school course and admit about 30%-50% of the students from these alternative programs to the law school. The calculator doesn’t factor in those types of schools,which are fairly few in number.</p>

<p>Even worse, these alternative admission programs don’t give law school credit since the student isn’t officially admitted to the law school. This is not due to the schools being cheap but rather due to the ABA requirement that law school credit can only be given to admitted students.</p>

<p>One notable exception to this is Ohio Northern. They have a summer program for kids that have high GPAs but lower LSATs. However, with this program you are officially an admitted student. Thus, their summer program does qualify for law school credit.</p>

<p>My suggestion is to opt out of these alternative programs that are simply qualifying for law school admission since they are simply cash cows for the universities sponsoring them. The only reason to accept them are:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>You REALLY want to go to that particular law school and it was the only choice since you didn’t get in via regular admission, OR</p></li>
<li><p>You didn’t get accepted into an ABA accredited law school, and the alternative admission program was your only choice. Even then, I probably would reconsider law school and suggest retaking the LSAT.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>My final point (until I can think of other omissions) is that some non-ABA accredited law schools might be a good alternative IF you practice in the state that the law school is located. An example would be Mass College of Law that is NOT accredited by the ABA. However, if you go there and pass the MASS bar, you can practice in Mass and some other states and eventually become able to practice in most states via reciprocity. These non ABA accredited schools are much cheaper too. I normally don’t recommend these because you are limited as to where you can practice and your credits don’t transfer to an ABA school if you ever want to transfer.</p>

78

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, most states that admit practicing attorneys through a reciprocity program require that an attorney must have attended one of a list of “accepted” law schools. Law schools that have not been accredited by the ABA are often omitted from these “accepted” lists. (Reciprocity means that after practicing law for some period of time, often 5 years, an attorney may be eligible for admission to a state’s bar without sitting for the bar examination.)</p>

<p>In addition, not all states offer reciprocity, and of those that do, often they offer reciprocity only to a limited number of other jurisdictions. </p>

<p>Therefore, a practicing attorney who attended a law school that was not accredited by the ABA may not be eligible for reciprocity in another jurisdiction and may not be eligible to sit for the bar in that jurisdiction, leaving no way for that attorney to practice law there.</p>

79

<p>Sallyawp, yes you are correct; however, Mass College of Law notes that if you attend their school and pass the Mass bar, you can practice in Conn and West Virginia immediately and can practice in many other jurisdictions with a 3-5 year wait.</p>

<p>See: [Massachusetts</a> School of Law at Andover](<a href=“http://www.mslaw.edu/About_Accreditation.htm]Massachusetts”>http://www.mslaw.edu/About_Accreditation.htm)</p>

<p>Perhaps It would be more correct to say “that by attending there, you can practice in some other states after a wiating period or by petition to the state Supreme Court.”</p>

<p>However, as I noted, “I normally don’t recommend these…(non- ABA accredited schools)”</p>

80

<p>

</p>

<p>No, you can take the bar exam in those jurisdictions. It’s not reciprocity; you still have to take the exam.</p>