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.
Topics - denk
« on: June 11, 2006, 03:37:24 AM »
Somewhere in test numbers 33 and 34 and 35, the test makers developed a penchant for putting in one question per game such as:
"Suppose that the condition requiring that X has more options than W is replaced by a new condition requiring..."
These kill me! I've got my main set-up, and I've already put in all my deductions, and then deductions based on deductions, etc. I can't go back and change one! Are they nuts?
What I'd like to know:
1) Anyone else hate these too? How do you cope?
2) Does this question type appear on the much more recent tests?
3) Do I need to somehow differentiate the "given" info from my deductions in my charts? (Maybe colored pencils - crazy!)
« on: June 08, 2006, 11:43:44 PM »
I bought this and disabled the speaker. But now I'm not sure if it meets the LSAC criteria. It looks a lot more simple than the "advanced" power score timer, which is not allowed. This Radio Shack model has three functions: clock, timer 1 and timer 2. LSAC's policy says that a timer cannot be programmable or have "key buttons". As an IT Consultant, I have no idea what a "key button" is.
So how about it - has anyone actually used this timer, or one nearly identical on a test?
« on: June 07, 2006, 03:32:10 PM »
A very short argument on why the LSAT is a "good" test, by yours truly
Like everyone else, I've been thinking about the LSAT while studying for it. I'm taking the test on Monday. I've felt very mixed about it, but now have decided that - more than not - it's a decent test. Here's why.
First, note some important attributes:
- High pressure due to the time limits.
- High pressure due to a mix of predictability and unpredictability. (Will there be a LG that kills you?)
- Large community of study books, classes, groups, forums, etc.
- A large part of the test is learnable in a short period of time - LG and LR.
- The test seems to require some core traits that can only be learned over a long period of time - knowledge of boolean logic, common fallacies, vocabulary, reading skills, etc.
- Scoring that's NOT based on how well you do. Rather, how well you do compared to the other test takers.
- High pressure based on the knowledge of the scoring scale.
Now, in response to realizing all of this, most of us (myself included) have had the impression that the test isn't very valid - after all, if everyone's out there studying for it, then I've
got to study for it like crazy too. Maybe it's just testing how crazy we all are. Or, if everyone can go take classes and get great scores, then's what's the point?
But I've changed my mind. I think the test makes sense. Why? Look at that list I compiled. To me, it looks an awful lot like it could also be describing law school.
Yes, the LSAT is learnable. But if you can get off your ass and learn that kind of stuff on your own - then good for you! You'll do great in law school! Especially on the LR and LG sections: If you're able to learn how to solve these kinds of problems, then you should be able to learn how to solve legal problems for your classes. Another way of phrasing my thesis is that the LSAT is testing your learnability to become a lawyer. I believe that studying and taking the LSAT is akin to an independent study course in legal reasoning.
I've never been to law school - I've only seen it on TV.2.
I'm scoring well on the preptests (90th percentile or better), and so I may be disposed to finding that the test is a reasonable one.
« on: June 05, 2006, 06:59:22 PM »
I took my dog with me on a hike at Lewis and Clark, and saw a woman walking with her German Sheppard, on a leash, into a building. Pretty cool!
Any other examples?
« on: June 05, 2006, 03:05:24 PM »
I believe that this would make law school a much more enjoyable experience. Yale
is the only school I've heard of, though, that does this. Since getting into Yale is, oh, slightly difficult
I was wondering if anyone knows of other schools with similar policies.
« on: June 02, 2006, 03:46:41 AM »
I've looked through the LSAC website, and I was surprised that some basic info isn't simply stated clearly. Can anyone answer these very simple questions?
* Is the test still paper-based and not on a computer like the GRE? (I assume it is, because one is supposed to bring #2 pencils, but I haven't seen this explicitly stated anywhere.)
* What is the situation with scratch-paper for working out problems? Apparently - one cannot bring scratch paper. Is scratch paper provided? Or, are examinees limited to the margin space in a printed test booklet?
* What is considered valid ID - drivers' license only? Expired passport?
I believe that these issues with scratch paper space are very important - I think we should be practicing under conditions as close as possible to the real thing. If we only have 2 sq inches per question of scratch space, then we should start getting used to that now!
« on: May 29, 2006, 12:21:42 AM »
I have a weird situation - a checkered past....
I first did undergrad at one school between '86 - '89, and failed out.
Then, I started undergrad over again at a new school, and graduated in '94 with a 3.3. I did get transfer credit (no grades - transfer credit only) from some classes from the first school.
So now, I really want to ONLY send in my transcript #2 (from the second school), with its much higher GPA. If a human actually reads through my transcript #2, they would see these transfer credits listed. Maybe ask questions - maybe not. I don't know!
Does anyone have any feedback on this kind of situation?
Has anyone been in this situation? Has anyone forgotten or neglected to send in one of several transcripts, and then been dinged by LSAC?
Thanks for any feedback!
« on: May 05, 2006, 09:56:32 PM »
For anyone else who's thinking about Lewis & Clark: The Law Library is a great site, with lots of interesting Podcasts: http://lawlib.lclark.edu/podcast/index.php
The "Open Access Symposium" is particulary interesting and well-produced.
« on: May 05, 2006, 06:55:51 PM »
Thanks for the input everyone.
I'm a transplanted New Yorker now living in Portland, Oregon. L&C has a very good reputation around here, but I have no clue if people even recognize it as a law school anywhere else.