Chances for Osgoode/Queens?

[RDU]

This is my first post to this website so please excuse me if I'm within the wrong subcategory or misusing the post system! 

I was wondering what are the theoretical chances for Osgoode or Queens? I am writing my LSAT in August and my CGPA is 3.68 and my B2 is 3.82. My recent relevant experiences are... volunteering at an elementary school and aiding children needing extra attention with development. Worked for my city in the parks department for the past couple of years and also mentored university students within my school through a mentorship program (I have reference letters for all 3 experiences and a legal reference as well). I know just from this information alone it is hard to guess anything... but just a stab in the dark would be appreciated! Again many apologies if I am asking this question in the wrong section or anything like that. Thank you :)

[GoatDuck]

A stab in the dark — we need your lsat. Without it, really difficult to tell. Aim for 165+ lsat and you’ll probably be good. 

[RDU]

2 minutes ago, GoatDuck said:

A stab in the dark — we need your lsat. Without it, really difficult to tell. Aim for 165+ lsat and you’ll probably be good. 

Right right got it! If I got lower than a 165 like a 163 162 would that still make me "competitive" with a 3.68?

[CleanHands]

7 minutes ago, RDU said:

Right right got it! If I got lower than a 165 like a 163 162 would that still make me "competitive" with a 3.68?

I mean, are you going to aim lower on the LSAT if someone says yes?

Get the highest score you can. Your question about the difference between a 163 and 165 is very granular and a totally irrelevant hypothetical in the event that you end up scoring significantly higher or lower than that. There's no point asking people to entertain every possible scenario when half of your applicant profile is still to be determined.

You were very polite in your OP and obviously trying not to get dunked on, but on pretty much a weekly basis here someone asks for chances with no LSAT and the answer is always to write the LSAT and get back to us, for a reason.

[RDU]

1 hour ago, CleanHands said:

I mean, are you going to aim lower on the LSAT if someone says yes?

Get the highest score you can. Your question about the difference between a 163 and 165 is very granular and a totally irrelevant hypothetical in the event that you end up scoring significantly higher or lower than that. There's no point asking people to entertain every possible scenario when half of your applicant profile is still to be determined.

You were very polite in your OP and obviously trying not to get dunked on, but on pretty much a weekly basis here someone asks for chances with no LSAT and the answer is always to write the LSAT and get back to us, for a reason.

Noted, thank you so much! 

[CleanHands]

11 minutes ago, RDU said:

Noted, thank you so much! 

I mean, I feel I wasn't too helpful (because nobody really can be to you quite yet) and you've been nice.

So, I'll share this link to an old LSAT that has historically been used as a diagnostic: https://cache.careers360.mobi/media/uploads/froala_editor/files/LSAT-practice-set.pdf

If you are interested in knowing your chances and you haven't gotten a diagnostic score yet, I'd recommend that as the best way to get a sense of it. Write it under timed, realistic conditions.

I will note that when you write the LSAT, the logic games section will be abolished and replaced with a second logical reasoning section. So ignore the first section of this. The good news is that there are two logical reasoning sections and a reading comprehension section left, which are exactly what you will be assessed on (with an additional experimental section that doesn't count towards your score).

This should give you a sense of where you're at, and maybe this comes naturally to you and you don't need to worry about getting a sub-165, and maybe you'll realize you have a lot of work to do before asking about chances.

Good luck!

Edited April 29 by CleanHands

[Yogurt Baron]

Yeah, the whole "aim for a 165" culture tends to annoy me. 165 is the 89th percentile---in order to do better than 89% of people writing the test, you've got to have some level of natural aptitude. "What if I just study really hard?" Those 89% of people are studying really hard too. "Oh, what if I just study really, really hard?" Yeah, that second "really" oughta do it.

Seriously, though - coming in without having written an LSAT and saying, "Hey, what if I'm better at it than 89% of people?" is like saying, "I don't know how tall I am, but can I play in the NBA if I'm 7'4?" And, like, sure you can, but that's a big "if". Best of luck - come back when you have a stronger idea of what you can do, and we'll be able to give better advice.

[CleanHands]

8 hours ago, Yogurt Baron said:

Yeah, the whole "aim for a 165" culture tends to annoy me.

I agree that people shouldn't ask about hypothetical chances with no LSAT score, but I disagree with the way you framed it.

Everyone should aim for a 180 on the LSAT. It doesn't matter that this is unrealistic. It's foolish for people to set arbitrary targets that are anything less than "the best score I can possibly get."

[Yogurt Baron]

1 hour ago, CleanHands said:

I agree that people shouldn't ask about hypothetical chances with no LSAT score, but I disagree with the way you framed it.

Everyone should aim for a 180 on the LSAT. It doesn't matter that this is unrealistic. It's foolish for people to set arbitrary targets that are anything less than "the best score I can possibly get."

Oh, we agree - we're just petting different parts of the elephant.

If you're smart enough to get a 165, there's no "aiming" involved; you'll get the 165. If you, like a majority of people who take the test, your aptitudes top out at a 152 or below, well, "aim" all you want - I'm "aiming" to win the lottery.

The only reasonable approach is to try to get the best score you can get. But some damned smart people take this test. "I am simply going to aim to do better than 89% of them" is needlessly self-abnegating if you do play at that level and is a pipe dream if you don't, and in neither case is it a productive approach.