This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Oddibemcd
Pages:  2 3 4 5 6 ... 19
« on: December 14, 2007, 10:08:04 PM »
My friend was in an identical situation: Freshman year of D's, F's, and a lot of screwing around followed by nearly straight A's starting eight years later. It didn't work out for him the way I thought it would. He had a 166 LSAT, and didn't get in to any of the T1's he applied to, and was even dinged by a couple T2's.
I think you can throw all the upward trending out the window. If you are a white male, then all they will see is the sub 3.0 GPA. If you are below the medians, then accepting you does nothing but hurt the school in the rankings. You have to bring something special (URM, amazing softs) to the table in order to offset the numerical hit you are asking the school to take by admitting you.
This is bogus.
I had a 3.6 GPA before LSAC, 3.2 after ( I had 3 F's on my transcript from my frosh year). I took two years of from school, sorted out my poo, and returned with pretty much a 4.0 since.
I scored a 164 on my LSAT and I was admitted into every school I applied to ranked 34 and below, and waitlisted at several 19-34 (two of which dinged me, two accepted me and one I'm attending).
Take care with your GPA addendum and your personal statement. Make sure you explain the reasons for the F's, own it, and show that you've dug yourself from that whole, maturity, progressed, etc.
Of course, if your grade trend sucks and/or you have no valid way of explaining those F's it may turn out differently.
My advice - look forward to a world of waitlists.
Not bogus - I didn't just make this up...
I stand by my assertion that if you are below the median GPA then you are a liability to that school in the rankings. You have to bring something else to the table in order to justify acceptance. This could be a higher LSAT, work experience, exotic URM-iness, or even outstanding maturation and growth between your two attempts in undergrad that could bring a unique perspective to the classroom.
My friend's experience is only an example that fits within my general argument. Keep in mind that he had no excuse for his F's, and worked as a used car salesman and a real estate agent during his time off - possibly the two smarmiest professions. Certainly apply to the T14, I have no idea if an AdComm will see your life experience as sufficient to overcome your substandard freshman GPA.
TITCR: Upward trending and the fact that you have done well are all overshadowed by the fact that you will have a low GPA. This is anecdotal, but I talked to other people in the same situation last year and it was the same response. If you are a white male, you are two numbers...GPA and LSAT. The only people that are getting a bump are URM's and legacies.
My first foray into UG ended up with a 1.5. Like you, when I went back I was carrying a 3.97. After forwarding my transcripts I had a 3.27. Along with a 171 I got into exactly two schools ranked 10-14. I would first advise that you get an LSAT score before worrying too much. You pull a 163, the question is moot.
If you break 170, then think about cramming as many credits as you can to bring the GPA up. If you can get a 170+ with a GPA over 3.25 you have a much better shot at cracking the T-14 and even there it's a lower one. I believe there is one guy in my class who had a GPA below 3...he came in with great work experience (patents and stuff.)
It's nice to hand hold, but with a GPA under 3 your options are limited.
« on: May 29, 2007, 07:32:18 PM »
Eh, I still think that the Bible can be taught in a secular manner.
And my high school literature was predominately pro-Jewish and pro-African American culture. The 'Christian' texts we read were inflammatory stuff like John Edwards' revival sermons and fundamentalist extreme ideas like in "The Scarlet Letter."
Are you suggesting that The Scarlet Letter actually espouses "fundamentalist extreme ideas"?
Well, it's not as if Hawthorne changed his name to distance himself from the Puritan past...
« on: May 15, 2007, 04:33:56 PM »
I know we have at least one big-time gunner coming to Duke with us. Serious non-trad, which is not automatically bad....I certainly don't mean to suggest that. But this guy was rough, he got asked to be quiet by the professor during the mock class...and said "Well that was a bad example but..." Right after the kid sitting rihgt next to him spoke.
If you're on here non-trad gunner....please chill out...
I'm a non-trad (I'll be 28 when I start LS and worked for a fortune 500 company for 7 years) and I was a non-trad for undergrad, going to school when I was 24. I never understood the mentality of the show-off people who were my age or older. I looked at the experience as a chance to get to know girls who I wouldn't run into anywhere else, why piss them off? I had one woman in my class (who was older than me) who refused to address the prof by anything other than his first name. The whole class rebels against that. Meanwhile, I was more mature than most of the other guys in the classroom and I had a ton more disposable income. I had experiences I wouldn't have had if I was an annoying feminine hygiene product, but I guess that's just me.
« on: May 15, 2007, 04:20:06 PM »
I'm going to Ithaca to find an apartment in a week or so. Second deposit was just sent in and I'm starting to get a little excited about the change in lifestyle.
Hope that Civ final went well.
« on: April 24, 2007, 03:30:03 PM »
You say start slow - like 5 minutes running? 10 minutes jogging? 2 minutes running then 1 minute walking repeated for 30 minutes? I've heard a bunch of suggestions, but I've also heard miracle stories of sedentary, overweight people turning their lives around and running marathons. HOW do they improve - where do they start?
Well, start slow - not short. It's better with 30min walking than 10min jogging. If you're able to, do a mix of jogging and walking perhaps, relax when you get too tired, but never stop always keep moving. Any form of exercise should be at least 30minutes long, it takes your body some time to get started on burning calories.
Depending on where you are in your training, I'm not sure this is the wholly credited response. I have had success with high intensity interval training, but I tend to think it is more effective for people that are close to the shape they want to be, rather than those who are just starting out.http://www.musclemedia.com/training/hiit.asp
. When I was in good shape, this was a great break up from the monotony of jogging. There are studies (that the article cites) that show that HIIT can burn more fat than simple cardio.
« on: April 22, 2007, 08:42:37 PM »
I will be at Cornell next year! I am currently an undergrad in Cornell's School of Arts & Sciences so here's to 7 years in Ithaca!
People who rag on the weather up here should have been around today. This weekend was a great example of living in a place that actually has seasons. Can't wait to be in Ithaca for autumn too.
« on: April 17, 2007, 01:09:57 PM »
I'm another future Cornellian. Sent in my check on Friday.
« on: April 17, 2007, 01:06:06 PM »
Me too. And it feels so nice to have finally made a decision.
I'll stack on this...Cornell.
« on: April 13, 2007, 12:37:27 PM »
I called today (after fighting the temptation for so long) and was told that it would still be another 7-10 days. So, all of us may not know by the end of today. My Cornell deposit is going in anyway, I have little faith in Penn.
« on: April 10, 2007, 10:11:15 PM »
I don't fight against because I like rap.
And that is the same justifcation, white people use when the justify the idocies of Howard Stern.
Rappers give fictionalized accounts of anonymous people.
Those fictionalized accounts are not of anonymous people. If specification is the issue, then by NOT specifying, wouldn't you, by default, include the general population of women? If Strom Thurmond says, "I hate n*ggers," should I not be offended because he didn't say my name specifically?
We live in white dominated society. And equally, we live in a male dominated society. We, as blacks, justifiably, find grievance when a member of the white consortium makes a remark that is racially offensive. So how in the same breath, as black men, can we expect women to sanction misogynism from the male-dominated rap game?
White men demean all types of women for the almighty dollar. Any look at a billboard or magazine attests to this. White women are demeaned daily.
AS IF that gives us a free pass to do the same thing.
My argument isn't based on intellectual rigidness. It is directed at intellectual hypocrisy. And I should clarify, not all rap music is misogynistic. Some rap music is thoughtful and artistic, but radio doesn't play that.
The variables may differ, but what Imus did to those women equates to what mainstream rap music consistently does to all women.
I like this post, very well reasoned.
I also like Mos Def and Talib Kwali, two hip-hop artists that don't rely upon mysogynestic and offensive lyrics.
For me, the big disparity between the two groups are their relative positions. While Imus is a shock jock, he also holds some for of legitimacy within powerful institutions. If Oprah called the Penn basketball team a bunch of pasty-ass crackers, the outrage would be even greater. However, most rap artists exist at the mercy of the record label. While a few have managed to broaden their scope, their sphere of influence remains well-defined (namely African-American youth who generally do not vote and do not possess large disposable incomes.)
Thus, the actions of those who hold greater influence over the American populace should face more scrutiny, because more damage can occur because of racist and sexist statements.
The one question that I have is that if 6 of the 14 players on the Rutgers are caucasian (or at least appear to be to my untrained eye,) was Imus insulting them as well?
Pages:  2 3 4 5 6 ... 19