Im not sure why everytime somebody raises this everyone jumps up and vehemently defends resident personality "Liz." I mean it is pretty sad...
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.
Canadians scoring highly on the LSAT do not necessarily wish to go to Toronto. Canadian schools tend to be more regional as a whole than top US law schools. I did not even consider applying to law school in Toronto, for example. (I did not apply to any Canadian schols, but if I had, it would have been to UVic and UBC.)
I would also believe that Canadians scoring highly on the LSAT are more likely to attend top American law schools, further reducing the pool of 170+ applicants to schools like Toronto.
I doubt assertions that Canadians as a whole are not as good at standardized tests as Americans, merely due to the lack of an SAT or ACT to enter into undergrad.
Actually, yes, it probably is. Canadian schools are pretty regional. UT or McGill can get you a job in New York City, but the oppurtunities they offer aren't as great as a T10 US school, which a 170+ gets you into. There really isn't anoter explanation for why UT has lower LSAT scores. On a whole, given Canada's better education system, one would expect Canadians get average higher scores.
I agree with your explanation. But if you analyze it by the structure of the argument presented, then I disagree. In order to make a Valid argument, the evidence must support the conclusion. In this example, the evidence specifically states that "The only way to sell copies of them is to make the potential buyers believe they need to adopt the most recent system.", then isn't it also valid to conclude "This is the only motive"