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 - intent06
Pages: 1  3 4 5 6 7 ... 163
« on: September 13, 2007, 12:41:09 PM »
I don't care what school you go to, the "curve" is usually some sort of myth until you actually attend the law school. No law school puts on their website, letters of acceptance, etc. what their grading curve is. I mean come on, is that a recruiting tool. Bottom line is this...once you know the curve or what you "reasonably believe" the curve to be, get the hell on the grind. That means knowing the student handbook inside-out and knowing the process and how things work. If not, any claims against the law school may come off as frivilous and unwarranted.
« on: September 13, 2007, 12:23:37 PM »
disagree. I think everyone's UNpleasantly surprised when they realize what LS is all about. And I don't think it's a reflection of lack of due diligence or even laziness. Surely in some situations that's the case. Not to mention there are those folks who only went to LS b/c of their parents and sometimes fail on purpose. Some schools do not have full disclosure prior to matriculation. And there are other schools that never really have full disclosure.
I'm not laying it all on the feet of laziness and partying.. but I am also not turning a blind eye to the fact that there are many blk folk specifically that get caught up in that... I see folks here that are already looking for all of the parties but I haven't seen them at any of the internship fairs or community service sign ups this week.. it's pretty pathetic if you ask me.. it's sad to say but you can pretty much gauge early on what category a person is going to fall into when it comes to academia...
I am also aware that there are some people that require more studying than the norm.. but I just feel that a person needs to be realistic.. if they know that there are some hindrances then they need to be ready willing and able to do whatever they must do in order to "get it".. if that requires befriending the gunner that everyone despises who gets it then so be it.. if it means going to your professors office hours and having one on one time with the TA til you're breathing and dreaming torts or civ pro then so be it..
like I said I firmly believe that some of these schools should be closed.. if the university is going to admit majority "subpar" applicants then there needs to be some sort of program tailored to their needs specifically.. because at the end of the day they still have to compete with everyone else... and under these circumstances they cannot.. and it is unfortunate...
but a person with low skills must take responsibility for taking on this task of law school when they already know coming in what they are dealing with personally on an intellectual level...
Blk, I agree with you for the most part, but I really don't think you can lay this all at the feet of partying and laziness. I know students at my school (a semi-respectable T2) who worked very hard (much harder than I!) and are now on academic probation. Some people have trouble adjusting to the rigors of law school or to the particular demands of their professors. Some people have very low skills coming in. These T4 schools prey on such students instead of doing everything they can to give the folks they admit a reasonable shot at becoming a lawyer. I think it's disgraceful.
Not to be a smartass but I find it hard to believe that a person who is familiar with the higher education "process" (undergrad). Would all of sudden become surprised by law school. I mean I read the thread about the horrors of 1L. Everyone talks about their classes and their reactions to lecture etc.But come on we are all adults here right? You cant honestly tell me that some people believe they will skate through law school at...what.. (on average say what 20grand a year)on a chicken wing and a pray? I am just not buying that. If a person is being serious about their choice to attend law school then they had to at the very least.. reviewed the materials and information on the chosen school, attend a open house, something.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. How can you say that someone is not familiar with the rigors of law school? I mean whether it be through rumor, what your best friend told you, or whatever, you KNOW it's going to be hard work. If it were easy, wouldn't everyone go to law school so they could make major paper? It all comes back to being accountable and responsible. Sometimes students see the light at the end of the tunnel and not the stress you have to go through to get it. Sometimes students just go to the school that accepted them instead of seriously evaluating if this is the career for them. OR sometimes, people just think they are invincible and don't realize the consequences of their actions, or lack thereof, until something negative happens.
Law school and the law is not for the faint of heart or for those that sit around and blame everyone but the "man in the mirror". Now, Cui Bono, I am not personally attacking you, but you aren't addressing something that I think is KEY......is it only the law school that is to blame? Let me stop before I go off on some contributory negligence sh*t...lol
« on: September 13, 2007, 12:12:06 PM »
I'm all for the law school interview!!! Let's face it, everyone is not meant to be a law student OR an attorney. The keyword is accountability and due diligence. I believe I spoke on this last night. Some students work harder on trying to appeal a decision booting them out of law school than they did studying for exams. Due diligence means just that....be diligent in everything that you do. Yes, a 2.0 curve is a mutha, BUT you know your weaknesses, whether that be the club scene, the bar, TV, or whatever. I will tell anyone not to wait until the last minute to do anything.
« on: September 13, 2007, 01:00:31 AM »
I don't know of any such rule that would prevent you from applying to another law school when you've been ousted by another. There is a 1L at school who flunked out of Georgetown (well did very poorly) and she got a fresh start. I think it varies from school to school.
« on: September 13, 2007, 12:54:19 AM »
hmm, couldn't the waiting period be construed as a restriction on trade?
I would not say that because they are not saying you can't apply to law school, they are just saying you can't re-apply to THEIR law school. And also, in their defense they are giving a student who really believes he/she belongs in law school to get their act together.
« on: September 13, 2007, 12:49:07 AM »
Yea my school has a two-year waiting period if you flunk out before you can re-apply.
« on: September 13, 2007, 12:42:42 AM »
Flunking out doesn't say you don't have the capacity to learn...just that you were unable to meet the school's standards of excellence.
I BELIEVE THIS IS THE QUOTE OF 2007!!!! LMAO LMAO!!
« on: September 13, 2007, 12:41:18 AM »
You know honestly I believe things happen for a reason, which is not to say that the law school is not in the wrong. But, you know maybe this is a chance for a fresh start at a better place.
« on: September 12, 2007, 11:52:12 PM »
It is not a valid policy to have and it serves no purpose. There is no justification for it. I mean, most law schools (I wont name names) have inflated grading systems. It's just a way of life, so I need to hear why it's a valid policy.
I don't believe in grade inflation either. But like I said, as long as schools give full disclosure before students sign up, I have no problem with whatever they do.
lol @ full disclosure. That's like a law firm being super honest with a summer associate when they make an offer. "Now we love you and want you here, but you know you are gonna be pulling 80 hour weeks." psssssshhh!!!
« on: September 12, 2007, 11:49:31 PM »
Yea, that Blk is an alright broad...lol, hooked me up something proper like...LMAO
Pages: 1  3 4 5 6 7 ... 163