« on: February 26, 2010, 10:03:57 AM »
yes, but most law schools, e.g. UVA, have a grade inflation table for all accredited UG colleges in the US, which helps them adjust every applicant's UGPA to a single measure.
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 - StonewallJacksonFan
« on: February 24, 2010, 09:43:54 AM »
I am 30 and going to law school in the fall. Always dreamed of it, and now the opportunity came around, I am determined to follow it.
They will not care about MFT, unless you get Bs and Cs in it it, in which case it will be a huge minus.
Try to study the crap out of LSAT and do really well - many schools are LSAT whores and will admit you just because of LSAT.
Since you are not getting at biglaw - apply to a bunch of law schools and go to the one that would give you full ride (tuition plus living stipend). E.g. University of Tulsa may give you aid like this. Many T3 and T4 schools will do that for an LSAT >165. But please dont plan to do well - you cant plan that *&^%, just bust your ass studying for it, while not overstadying, like me...
I say go for it.
« on: February 22, 2010, 10:26:51 PM »
you can think quickly on your feet without getting 5 intentionally confusing options of what assumption your client/opponent is making... Several of law school admission deans I talked to said they do not believe that LSAT is a better predictor of law school success than GPA, but they have to pay attention to LSAT because of USNWR.
Lol, I know it is funny and does not mean anything but being able to self-represent yourself in a court of law and avoid paying 4K thanks to one's legal research and writing skills is pleasant nonetheless
« on: February 19, 2010, 05:50:17 PM »
I agree. Probably it is the best predictor there is available right now, but not the best predictor possible. I have been successful in every test I studied for so far but was not very successful in LSAT, despite 3 months of day and night studying for it and practicing. I still got into 86 percentile but that was definitely not what I was getting at. The main reason I did not do well was that I did not have enough time to think. I am a little slower on thinking front than other people, but way more fruitful on the results on this thinking. It was this slow but ingenious thinking that allowed me to reach academic and professional success over my peers similarly to how a proverbial turtle hit the finish line before the hair. So now this quality that has been instrumental in my prior success and will probably be in the future is now a huge disadvantage in a test that is supposed to simulate the conditions of achieving professional success. Putting somebody in a hotbox to resolve arcane logical problems does not predict success in a legal world any more than an ability to quickly count the number of toothpicks that just fell on the floor predict somebody's ability to succeed in mathematics. All in all, it could be the most retarded and most serious math-incapabale person in the group who did the best and quickest job in counting the toothpicks. No disrespect to retarded people but I hope you get my point.