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 - eric922
« on: November 09, 2012, 08:20:05 PM »
Livinglegend gave you some good advice, however I am of the opinion that given enough time and work a person can always score higher on the LSAT. It is a learnable test, in my opinion. Also, most schools only take your highest score so taking it twice isn't that big of a risk anymore. As to a prep course if you had gone with any other company but Kaplan I would be very wary of advising you to take another one, however I've read so many horror stories about Kaplan that I really think they may have hurt you rather than help you. If you can afford another one I'd suggest looking into Powerscore or Testmasters. Also, what areas did you struggle on the most you think? If it was logic games or logical reasoning that is actually good as they are the most learnable parts of the test. I'd suggest buying the Powerscore Bibles for those two sections and working through them.
« on: November 03, 2012, 01:39:49 PM »
I've always been a supporter of labor unions and I'm thinking I might like to go into labor law representing unions and workers and I was just wondering if anyone knew of any schools that had strong programs geared toward that?
« on: November 02, 2012, 07:57:28 PM »
Well most law schools only look at your highest score so I'd say retake. Honestly I don't know of many schools that would take you and I'm not sure you'd want to go if they did. My advice is study hard and retake it. As for what schools would take you. Try putting your numbers into lawschoolpredictor and see what comes up.
« on: November 02, 2012, 01:28:07 PM »
With a 3.4/165 you can into plenty of law schools, and even get full scholarships at many.
Retaking the LSAT is a calculated risk. Unless you have some very specific, identifiable reason which leads you to believe that you'll perform better the second time around, I'd be careful. There is a big difference between a 165 and a 170, and you could easily go a down a few points, too.
Honestly, I think the LSAT is a reality check for a lot of people. We all like to think that we're smarter than a standardized test would indicate. When we get a disappointing LSAT score we think "Oh, that's wrong. I must have had a bad day. I can do better." Maybe, maybe not. The fact is, your LSAT score doesn't just represent your individual aptitude. It measures your aptitude against thousands of other takers, and there are lots of very smart people in the world.
My view is that absent some catastrophic event on test day, the LSAT is fairly accurate at defining the outer parameters of the taker's abilities. I don't mean that to sound critical towards you personally, it's just my opinion. Try to objectively evaluate your performance, and assess the overall probability of acheiving a higher score.
Most of what you say is true, but he did indicate he was going through a bad time during his studies so that may very well have hurt his score. I actually do disagree on one thing. I don't think the LSAT measures your aptitude. It isn't an IQ test. It measure logical thinking and that can be learned. I think it is a learnable test, but the question Seg815 will have to answer is does he think he will have the time to devote to studying so that he can learn it better?
« on: November 02, 2012, 01:01:19 PM »
Honestly if you think you can do higher, I'd say retake it. Your GPA is really low for lawschoos so a high LSAT is needed to boost your numbers. So if you think you could even get it up to a 165 I think it would probably be worth it. For instance I'm an undergrade at UT Knoxville and I have their law school stats in front of me and honestly I don't think you can consider it a safety. The median LSAT is 160 so you are 2 points above that, but the median GPA is 3.60 so over an entire point higher than yours. The lowest GPA they list is 3.30 which is the bottom 25 percentile I think. So you could get in there, but I highly doubt it would be with a scholarship and I doubt it's even a sure thing.
« on: November 02, 2012, 12:52:09 PM »
Honestly if you are pretty confident you can get a 170 I'd say go for it. It may be a lot of work, but it will open a lot of doors for you both in terms of school and scholarships. Your GPA isn't great (mine isn't either so not trying to be rude) so you need as high an LSAT score as you can get. The truth is lawschools will probably only look at the numbers, they won't care if your school was hard or if you were Cum Laude so it's important you get your number as high as possible on the LSAT. It could translate into better schools, more scholarship money and possibly a better job one day down the road.
« on: October 30, 2012, 01:17:29 PM »
I've done a google search on this, but haven't found a clear answer. This may be because I'm not sure how to word my question to fit into a google search so I'll try asking here. How is the LSAT graded? I know in law schools your grade depends on how everyone else does on the test since you are graded against the rest of the class and not a grading key like in undergrad. Is the LSAT graded like law school exams where only a certain portion of people could score 180s or is it theoretically possible for everyone taking the test to score a 180?
« on: October 29, 2012, 03:41:27 PM »
I'm thinking of taking an LSAT prep course. One of the lawyers my dad works with recommended Kaplan, but he admitted he never took one and was just suggesting it because they were the oldest company. Everything I've read about them makes me kind of wary, though. Testmasters has a full course in the Spring near me, and Powerscore has a weekend course. Out of those three which do you all think would be best? The Testmaster course ends less than a week before the June 10th LSAT which is one reason I'm leaning towards them and I've heard better things about them than Kaplan. I was just wondering what you all thought.
« on: October 24, 2012, 07:40:12 PM »
Correct me if I am wrong, but Harvard, for some reason, is at the top of the totem pole of society. I am going to apply there. Is it the best college in the world?
Reasonable minds disagree about your assertion. In some circles, Princeton is more highly regarded because of its eating clubs and because "Prince" is included in its name. Others argue that Yale is at the top of the "totem pole of society" because Rory Gilmore chose to attend Yale over both Harvard and Princeton. Finally, others argue that Oxford is the best because it's British.
I second Oxford for the simple fact that Tolkien taught there.
« on: October 23, 2012, 12:18:20 AM »
I've only taken a couple of undergrad course in Constitutional Law, but I've really enjoyed it. I was wondering what are the career aspects like for someone specializing in this area? I know since there aren't a lot of cases that raise Constitutional issues a lot of firms won't have Constitutional departments so I thought I would ask if anyone here know what the job numbers were like?