We all know U.S. News, and most of us in higher education have a love/hate relationship with the publication. I have been a contributing expert to it on several occasions, so I mean it when I say that I find myself in the odd position of advising applicants not to believe everything you read from the purported experts!
In the article Worst Advice Ever Given to Law School Applicants” (https://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/applying/articles/worst-advice-ever-given-to-law-school-applicants; January 16, 2025), Anayat Durrani outlines bad advice given to would-be law students. While I wholeheartedly agree with most of the statements made by those interviewed, I write to take issue with the first item covered: “Myth: There’s No Harm in Retaking the LSAT.”
The first “expert” interviewed states “While retaking the LSAT can improve your score, it’s far from risk-free. Law schools often see all of your scores, and some may average them or consider multiple attempts as a lack of preparedness.” Okay, first, law schools see all of your scores taken within five years of applying. If you cancel a score, they see that too (and nobody cancels a good score). Second, the vast majority of law schools no longer average scores. That practice was done away with quite a long time ago. Think of it this way - law schools are incentivized to give you credit for the highest score, as that is the number they will report out to the ABA and on which their rankings will hang. Simply put, do not worry about them averaging your scores!
Another “expert” says “Retaking the test also means you're likely to submit your application later. And since most law schools use rolling admissions – reviewing applications as they're received – ‘retaking the LSAT may impact negatively on the timing of action on your application’.” While the person has a point in that retaking the LSAT might cause you to apply later in the cycle, I disagree with the implications of this statement. Yes, most law schools work on a rolling admissions cycle and, yes, applying earlier in that cycle is to your advantage … within limits. I tell my clients that I would rather see them apply in December with a 165 than in September with a 155. Sometimes earlier isn’t better, it’s just earlier. At the end of the day, law schools want to see a higher number, so you are better off retaking the LSAT and applying a little later with the higher score. That is, of course, as long as you are not applying really late in the cycle. If that’s the case, you should still retake the test and apply in the following year’s cycle with the higher LSAT score.
I’ve advised thousands of law school applicants, and over 90% of them have taken the LSAT more than once. It is a tricky, three-headed monster of a test, and it’s very common for applicants to need to revise their test prep strategy and preparation methods. If there is more than a four point gap in scores, I advise writing a very brief explanatory addendum to schools outlining the reason(s) for the score increase.
As with many things, the law of diminishing returns applies and there comes a time when an applicant has hit his or her personal ceiling on the test. In that case, it’s futile to keep going back to the well. But, as in many of the cases I’ve seen, it behooves the client to retake the LSAT. The difference in scores could very well be the difference in where they are accepted. And, one final thing, merit money often chases the LSAT. So, if an applicant is hoping for merit awards from schools (as most are), it is in their best interest to retake the LSAT if they have a reasonable belief that they can score higher.
