Law School Discussion

Show Posts

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 - Yoda, Esq.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14
I'm anti-troop... the job though, not the people.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Marauding Loser
« on: November 06, 2006, 07:59:20 AM »
I agree that this thread sucks.  I move that we take our sorry asses somewhere else.

You must frequent better threads than me, because I thought this was a greatly amusing read. Two not-quite-1L's throwing threats of lawsuits back and forth.

Jolly good show!

General Off-Topic Board / Re: John Kerry on Education
« on: November 01, 2006, 09:25:02 PM »

I would much prefer to live in a country without soldiers than a country without teachers.

Can't I just live in a country and let soldiers and teachers live in peace??

No!!  You have to be for or against.  Either you hate the soldiers or you hate the teachers.

I hate the sith.

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: $$ choices....
« on: October 31, 2006, 04:06:13 PM »
I know someone personally who went to a school in the middle of T1 and wishes he would have gone to a lower ranked school because he believes he would have been ranked higher in those classes.

Just as likely he could have ranked in the same place in a tier 2. Then his situation would have been all the worse.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Christmas Presents!
« on: October 25, 2006, 03:27:23 PM »
What I want: Her naked in a ribbon
What I'll give: Name the price.

My favorite test taker in the room this past June was this very yummy looking blond surfer boy who kept sighing loudly like the fate of the world was in his pencil. At first it threw me off, and then I decided to take it as a smug indicator that he was bombing the test and setting the curve... is that bad?

I had a guy who reeked of spoiled fruit.

It is drastically more distracting than you might imagine.

It never hurts to shoot for the stars, and it helps to test in a consistent range. My point wasn't that you couldn't do it - my point was that there's a big difference between planning where you're going to attend with a 168 and actually getting the 168. Many people see a drop in their score on test day, the pressue will be more intense than in practice, the setting and layout will be unusual to you, and timing will be more strictly enforced. Plus, you can never account for things like 'that guy with the sniffles' who just wasn't around when you were practicing.

Only 10% of test takers score over a 163 (depending on the scale) on actual test day. Just be aware of the difference between what you score on test day, and what score you think you deserve - sometimes it can be a large rift.

So once you actually get your 167+ score, then come back and debate how easy it is to get into the schools. That's my only point.

Come back with your high 160's score and we'll chat.

It appears that Cooley is increasing selectivity, so they will likely rise again next year.

Cooley Admission Formula
UGPA x 15 + Highest LSAT score = Admission Index

For classes in the 2006-07 academic year (September 2006, January 2007, and May 2007) the minimum index is 185, with a minimum LSAT score of 142 required for regular admission.

For classes in the 2007-08 academic year (September 2007, January 2008, and May 2008) the minimum index is 186, with a minimum LSAT score of 143 required for regular admission.

Wow, with all the crud I hear about Cooley, I'm shocked to hear they actually have a minimum LSAT score for admission. Not that 143 is exactly scraping the cream from the top - but still, I'm surprised.

They've been trying really hard to edge out Yale's small lead.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14