Thanks. Good luck to you as well.
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 - Dr. Balsenschaft
« on: July 27, 2009, 08:42:30 AM »
Yeah, just send in your writing sample. My guess is due to your LSAT score they want to make sure you're somewhat intelligent so you don't fail out or are unable to pass the bar, which would reflect poorly on the school. I doubt they have an over-enrollment problem. I just don't see how an online school free from physical constraints can have over-enrollment issues unless some of the classes are actually in a classroom. Are some of the classes in a classroom?
« on: July 26, 2009, 10:47:40 PM »
Good luck Matthies! That is why I am posting on here as well. Stupid bar exam...
Me three. Good look to everyone else suffering through the drudgery! We're almost there. And by "there" I mean suffering through a month or two of terrible anxiety as we wait to find out we passed. But don't worry, after we find out we passed, we'll find other things to obsess over and worry about.
« on: July 26, 2009, 09:20:32 PM »
you wnat to be a lawyer, don't use wiki, if you cited to wiki in your brief or to a judge they would through you in jail for stupidy, get out of the wiki habbit. bad, wiki, bad.
What I find interesting is how people have a huge problem with wikipedia cites but really do not have any issue with cites to newspapers. I was a reporter for a few years and some of the stuff I wrote was barely edited. I was no Stephen Glass or anything, but I bet a lot of the stuff on wikipedia is more thoroughly fact-checked than most of the stuff that was published under my name. I think it's fine to cite to wikipedia or newspapers on a collateral matter so long as whoever is reading realizes it for what it is.
« on: July 26, 2009, 04:36:35 PM »
Wikipedia also isn't a bad place to look for primary sources, although their citations are often dead links.
« on: July 26, 2009, 01:24:48 PM »
Oyez and wikipedia are vastly different. Listening to the oral arguments for any con law case is highly instructive (and not as time-wastey as it sounds).
It's a waste of time. But it is interesting. If you're only going to discuss one case in class (rare), maybe it's worth it just so you can listen to intelligent and knowledgeable people (presumably) discuss the case. But it doesn't necessarily tell you much about what they based their decision on. Neither does what they write in their opinion for that matter, but that's what we're suppose to rely on so you're better off just focusing on what they wrote.
« on: July 23, 2009, 01:12:17 AM »
Retake LSAT and reapply next year instead.
Law schools really do not care that much about soft factors. They probably should, but they don't. Your undergrad GPA and LSAT score are really the only factors they care about. So nealric is correct, it will be viewed as a plus, though not an overwhelming one. From a maturity standpoint, however, taking a year or two off generally is a good thing so long as you look like you're doing something useful during that time.