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 - midjeep
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9  11 12 13 14 15 ... 133
« on: December 15, 2006, 02:31:28 PM »
Too many factors to consider to answer your question and it might depend on the person. Some people can read the entire book, attend every class, and study nonstop and still only get a C. Others can barely show up to class, never read, and just study commerical outlines and practice tests and rock an A. It will depend on the class, professor, and you personally. The hardest thing about 1L is finding the perfect studying tactics. Reading will only help you in class, for most classes the reading does nothing for exam purposes.
For example, the typical law school text book will have an intro page about some legal concept and then will follow up with a case. Then there will be a "notes" section that will comprise of legal scholars posing different views on what the case is about and the rest will be open ended questions with no answers. Depending on your prof, you may get asked these questions in class or he/she will answer the questions posed during lecture. Most of the time, the professor will ask their own questions or issues and express their own scholarly opinions about the topic. Most classes you will not need to know the case law...just the black letter law (so that is where the reading might be pointless). Classes like Con Law will require you to know the case law, so that would be the kind of class you would read for. There might be some "major" caselaw you will need to know so reading the case might be important, but the professor will probably let you know what part of the case is relevant now and for exam purposes.
Short answer - reading everything and anything the professor assigns will not guarantee you an A or the top of the curve. Personally I read one thing and it goes in one ear and out the other. I do read everything the professor assigns, but I spend most of my time preparing outlines and reading supplements on stuff I don't understand. Just go into law school thinking that you will read everything and adjust as you feel necessary.
« on: December 15, 2006, 02:16:44 PM »
The schools in your LSN account are definitely a "reach" (american and brookln might be considered a match). For safety schools, pick a region you dont mind living in for a couple of years after school. A safety school for will be 3rd or 4th tier. However, do not not apply to your reach schools.
I applied to one safety school that was 3rd tier, 4 "match" schools that were 2nd tier, and 7 schools in the top 30 and 2 schools in the 30-50 rank range.
My results: the 3rd tier waitlisted me, 2 of the match schools waitlisted me and the other two rejected me, 2 of the 7 top 30 schools waitlisted me with the rest rejected me, and both schools in the 30-50 range accepted me. If I listened to the calculators and the majority of folks on here I would have only applied to 2nd and 3rd tier schools w/o considering the others.
If I was in your shoes I would only apply to 1 or 2 lower tier schools and spend the bulk of my time and money on the higher ranking school. While you will not get as many acceptances as if you applied for more "safety" schools, remember that you can only go to ONE school in the end. After the first day of law school, no one gives a damn about how many or what law schools you got into.
« on: December 15, 2006, 02:02:35 PM »
is it possible that a better lsat would be useful even for those schools you are already admitted to? for example, more money? lsat might be a major pain but if 50,000 dollars are on the line?
But there is a risk that your score wouldnt get higher and you might lose out on scholarships that might get awarded later in the admission cycle. Some schools don't finalize scholarships until April. If you are concerned about getting more scholarship $$$ call the schools you have already been accepted at and ask what you can do to qualify for more money. While most schools will probably not flat out and say that an increase in the LSAT score (since most schools claim that the LSAT is not the end all for all their decisions
), some schools will divulge additional info about LSAT ranges for particular scholarships.
Regarding the waitlist situation, if you are waitlisted at a school you want to attend it is probably good that you retake the LSAT BUT you need to see how the school's waitlist works. Some schools, like Vandy, will rarely go to their waitlist and when they do it is at the very last minute. Other schools, like GULC, go through the list many times.
« on: December 13, 2006, 07:48:39 PM »
Don't let members of this or any other board intimidate you. This is a self-selected group that in no way reflects the majority of law school applicants applying to top 50 law schools. Most people here are obssessed with their intellectual image and are looking to the only place where people might actually care about what law school they are going to.
I am a 2L at SMU and had similar issues before applying. I didnt go to an Ivy and I worked all through undergrad AND participated in a number of extra-curriculars. My gpa was slightly higher at a 3.7 but my LSATs stunk at a 150 and 158 (back then schools averaged the score so I had a 154). I was mainly interested in schools in the south and got accepted at SMU and Baylor; additionally I was WLed at George Mason, W&L, and Vanderbilt. All in all, just apply to where ever you want to go and dont think that every single law applicant will have a 175+, 4.0 at an Ivy who speaks 20 languages and spends weekends at the local YMCA teaching inner-city kids how to use sign-language. Good luck, Iknow how much the application process sucked.
« on: December 12, 2006, 11:00:45 PM »
Look to east of I75 when looking for a place...generally rent will fall between $500-$800/month. My apt complex is very pet friendly...they even have xmas day photos for pet owners and their pets in the common room and it is across the street from a vet clinic.
The SMU Law students are different than the SMU undergrads but there are a lot of similarities. Many of the students here come from money and have job guarentees from their family or family's connections. You will see many BMWs, Benzs, and Range Rovers in the law school parking garage. There are a bunch of ex-frats and soroity types here too, but not as prelevent as I thought there would be. Most students here are from TX and OK, and mostly though conservative are not too bad generally. All that said, this school is pretty much a high school...there are clicks, there is drama, and there is gossip. However, that is the case for most if not all law schools, but that is something to keep in mind.
I like SMU overall but I think the administration is run by a closeted twit who seems to only work here for an extra bullet point on his resume. The rest of the staff seem to purposely try to be as inefficient as possible regarding the most simplest of tasks. I only rant because this school is private with excess tuition rates that doesn't reflect the kind of service that is provided. Although I am impressed with the faulty here as well as the potential job placement this school "should" offer (I think the next few years will be more difficult for law students to find jobs in the DFW area).
« on: August 24, 2006, 09:01:25 AM »
I am not very big on raising my hands in classroom discussion. Should that in anyway hurt my performance on law school exams? I do go to classese and pay attendtion and do the readings.
For the most part no. Some profs I had had a 10% class participation requirement. All it meant is that you had to be prepared if you were ever called on. Your classes are too large for the profs to except you to actively participate without solicitation. I did have a class this summer that actually required daily participation, but there were only 18 students in that class.
« on: August 22, 2006, 02:36:55 PM »
Selfless bump...hey at least i'm honest
« on: August 20, 2006, 09:57:32 PM »
There is no right or wrong way to brief a case. During your first classes, you should have lots of content in your brief b/c you don't know what the profs are looking for (if you can remember all the specifics in the case, then brief what you need). For example, in Civ Pro you will almost always need to know how the case got into what court (since this what civ pro is all about). Some profs LOVE facts, others want you to be well versed in all dissents and concurrences (especially con law). Eventually the briefs will get shorter, with info that is actually useful.
« on: August 17, 2006, 07:35:04 PM »
When the law schools pull your application from LSAC, there will be a notice on there indicating that you are scheduled to retake the LSAT. However, some on here in the past have had experiences where the school either didn't care or didn't get notified that the student was going to retake the LSAT. In either event, you should simply add an addendum to your application indicating that you are planning to retake the LSAT and WHY you are retaking the LSAT. If you know you will kill it the second time, let the ad comm know why the first score was a fluke.
« on: August 16, 2006, 04:39:03 PM »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9  11 12 13 14 15 ... 133