There’s always some anxiety this time of year about the question of retaking the LSAT, and how it looks to admissions officers if they see multiple scores.
Law schools focus on the high score, because that’s the score they have to report for you to the ABA, and, by extension, to the rankings. (Yes, the rankings drive just about everything. 🤯) Even for schools who have opted out of participating in the rankings, they still have to report LSAT data to the ABA, and the ABA makes that information public. And they do care about the optics.
So if you want to take it a second time, that’s fine. If you want to take it a third time, that’s fine too, but in my experience (which is admittedly not a scientifically pure data set), a good number of people who take it a third time see their scores go down again. So if the second score goes up, then you might consider just sticking with what you have and be glad for that score jump and call it a day.
In that context, I also often hear a lot of magical thinking. Sure, maybe the first time you really did have a bad day. The second time, was that a bad day too? Or is that how you’re actually testing on the LSAT? And maybe you’ve maxed out there? Was that third test a bad day too, and you’re just going to keep retaking it without seeing any real improvements?
At some point, you have to accept your performance for what it is. Everyone who scores less than, say, a 174 is certain that “the score doesn’t accurately represent me.” Well, maybe it does, and you’re going to be banging your head against a wall — and push out your timeline quite a bit — if you’re not facing reality.
In fact, for whatever the LSAT is actually measuring (which may or may not be the same as what it purports to be measuring), it tends to do so pretty consistently. With multiple tests, the scores often cluster close together. A two point difference might be worth it, but it might not. You can see how different scores affect the odds in the LSAT/GPA calculator here.
Yup, I did say above that the high score is the one that really matters, so what’s the downside if you take it a third time and the score goes down? In terms of reporting, you’re still good for the high score, that is true. But remember that there are human beings on the other end of the admissions table, and so optics do matter.
Here’s what I meant by that: If your third score goes down, then the second (high) score ends up looking like the outlier, while the two lower scores appear to be validating each other. Those optics aren’t great.
In contrast, if you have only two scores, one lower and one higher, then the people evaluating your application will be more likely to give you the benefit of the doubt, since neither one can really be deemed an outlier when you have only two scores. And if you have a big score jump, pop the champagne, because that's only ever great news.