I think it's a bit hard to say because we have no way of knowing whether or not the folks admitted ED would have been admitted regardless. Like, even with ED, they're not going to admit a candidate who doesn't catch their eye, and it's not as though they don't have plenty of strong candidates in RD, you know.

Now, I imagine there could be. ED gives a school confirmation that you will attend, so they don't need to worry as much about their yield, especially if you have some quality that might be deemed competitive. I think the biggest beneficiaries of a possible ED boost would be people above both medians and splitters.

Typically they're narrative, focusing on one or two formative experiences and connecting them to your desire to pursue law school.

My best advice is to write a straightforward, reflective story that talks about what inspired you to go to law school. And whatever you do, don't turn it into this verbose, ornate mess. I remember last year Yale sent out example PS to some folks, and the LSA subreddit bashed them because they felt the writing was mediocre. I read through them again a few weeks ago and found that they were quite solid; the real problem is that many people confuse style with substance.

I think Dean Andy, an administrator at Georgetown, put it best: your lsat and gpa set the bar, and your sifts determine if you clear it. What you need to understand is that top schools have many people with stats that could help them lock in their medians. What will differentiate them is factors such as essays, WE, and other softs. I think when people dismiss softs, they’re being overly cynical.

I don’t necessarily think there is such a thing as a universally strong soft. The tier list we use was actually created by a Redditor. A strong soft likely depends mostly on how it contributes to the overall cohesiveness of your application. If you want to go to law school for immigration law, for instance, working for a non-profit that helps connect immigrants to legal services will likely be a strong soft.

@bawstonlaw hey man, t14 medians are high as the clouds. I know my gpa is absolutely on the higher end, but it’s a different ballgame than it was even a few years ago.

@ionicinstinct to clear things up, I went to a school that pumps people into the t14, and having read many of their essays, you’re vastly overestimating their writing ability.

It’s definitely something they consider. I think an important fact to consider is that first-gen students made up about 30% of the total applicant pool last year; however, if you look specifically at folks who scored between 170-180, which contains the median of almost every single elite school, only 10% of those applicants were first-gens. There’s an easy to see disparity there.

Additionally, when schools release their class profiles each year, one of the stats they often display front and center is the percentage of first gens.

I don’t think it’s a sizeable boost; you probably aren’t slipping into Duke with a 3.4 and a 154 because you’re a first-gen. But I could see it being significant enough to help out a splitter of other on the edge applicants.

This will make this cycle quite interesting for admissions officers. Part of your apps will still have LSAC GPA calculated the old way, and part of your apps will have a new little note.

@CooperButtari It says only for transcripts submitted from today forward, which means that if you've already submitted them, your LSAC GPA will still be calculated the old way

I think the first thing that's important to understand is that schools give out way more acceptances than they have spots. This is because of their yield, ie. the amount of students who actually accept an offer. Some schools - such as Yale - have extremely high yield, almost 100%, and so they typically only send out a few more offer than there are spots in the class. Most T14s do not have that kind of yield - the average is probably 30-40% - so many of them will send out a total number of acceptances that are double or even triple the number of people in the class. Even if one considers that people get into multiple t14s, someone did an analysis of lsd a while back and found that the vast majority of people get accepted to only one or two, iirc. My point here is that there are more A's going out than the 4.5k number you brought up.

Low GPA, I agree that it's not 60%, but the LSA vibe that everyone has 4.0 and a 175 is a delusion. I can also promise you that a 170 in no way indicates competency, as I've known plenty of people who got that score but were, say, terrible writers. It's also important to understand that a significant amount of those scores are probably KJDs, and while I think the tax can be overstated, I do think there's a measurable impact that a lack of work experience can have on an application.

I also want to note that a high score has never been a guaranteed acceptance to a school. Plenty of people for years and years have been rejected even though they had high stats.

The only school I can think of off the top of my head that does this is Michigan. If it's something a school wants, they'll definitely say so on their application pages.

The general vibe that I've gotten from these addendums is that they should be short and factual. Something like "I tried a new study program" or something like that is probably fine.

@LSATTAKER I see what you’re saying, but being a reverse splitter is more difficult still. There’s far more high gpas than there are high lsats. Keep cracking at the test, and if you need anything, dm me. I have an official score of 175 and I won’t charge you money or any of that bull.

A bit surprised you haven’t found anything more recent. I’ve only ever heard great things about them, and had wonderful interactions on Reddit. They also put out so much content that helps make everything more accessible, even for those of us who have trouble affording the fees. If you have the money, I definitely think they’re a solid option

You’re not struggling with a 3.84, even though a lot of LSA spaces act like you’re DOA without a 4.0.

As for the credits and the W, they shouldn’t factor into your gpa if there was no grade given

@businessgoose I wouldn’t emulate everything I say, as I tend to take a less regimented approach to things that doesn’t always work for everyone. For instance, I didn’t really consistently study for the test, as I figured I would burn out, and so I instead would do tiny bursts, where I would would study for about two hours a week for a week or two, then often not touch anything for another few weeks. I do think that taking these breaks helped my brain to really process the information and turn it into a subconscious process.

As for test day, I typically do a center, weekends, afternoon. Big bottle of water, but don’t drink a ton during the exam because then you’ll have to use the bathroom. I think my biggest advantage is that I don’t really have test anxiety. I might get some butterflies before the exam, but when I actually step in, my body enters a focused state.

My biggest advice is to not second guess yourself. Especially on the real thing m, it is so easy to get to in your head. I used to be like that, but I worked on it and resolved to not do it on the actual exam. In a weird way, it worked out; as you can see above, I talk about choosing some answers that I thought could be incorrect, but also noted that past me probably saw something present me isn’t remembering. I was obviously correct in that regard, and I think it’s a good lesson in trusting your instincts

@PatriciaG13 I’ve been staring at the screen in disbelief. I feel like they must have screwed something up and given me the wrong score. I got a 175, which is also higher than I’ve ever scored on any PT

@APBookninja I feel the exact same way. I had 3 lr and one RC, and the LR I’m still quite confident on. The RC alone almost certainly tanked my score