Soup or Stew?

Some books state in their advice that “so-called objective criteria” are somehow just part of a larger application stew..

This is an outright lie. The application process is both iterative and comprehensive. It’s iterative because, for most, the numbers are it: they’re the beginning and end of the application. The numbers (the LSAT and GPA) are those “‘so-called’ objective criteria.” They are no more “just part” of a larger application stew than qualifying for the Olympics is “just part” of competing. It’s difficult to overstate this: to a very great degree, the numbers dictate the result. Do not fight this. The importance of objective criteria is objectively true.

The comprehensive part comes after the numbers meet at least some threshold. (This threshold is not the same as the one advertised; it is higher.) After that, the remaining, subjective parts of your application are not just relevant, they are often dispositive.

Note what this means for you: You still need to prepare a flawless, meaningful application for each law school, because you won’t know just where in the iterative-comprehensive flow your application ends. Well, that’s not quite true: you’ll have a pretty good idea. If it’s a top school, or a Reach school, your application will almost certainly depend upon your subjective qualities. It’s fair to write that, if your stats are anything less than stellar, your subjective qualities will be the deciding factor. Indeed, even if your stats are stellar, your subjective qualities will still be the deciding factor at a top school. (At Yale and Harvard, for example, a surprising percentage of even top-scoring applicants don’t get accepted.) Notably, the same standard applies to law exams, the bar exam, and day-to-day practice: there is no second chance to prepare for your first shot.

This is from the preliminary chapter, “Getting In,” on pages 59-60.