« on: October 28, 2008, 05:54:27 PM »
I think you have a chance at all of them but will certainly get a few rejections too. I'd apply to those plus some safeties for sure.
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 - wtracing
« on: October 28, 2008, 05:08:28 PM »
I agree w/ Dennis on the public ivy issue. There are private schools and state schools. Sure, some are better than others but the same may be said for private schools too. Just be proud of where you went (or regret it) but I hate hate hate the public ivy designation.
« on: October 28, 2008, 04:40:27 PM »
Not meaning to slam you at all here, but first off:
I love the term public ivy. But honestly, if its not HYS I doubt they care where you went. What they do care about is whether your major was challenging. If thats a 3.7 in communications it will not be nearly as impressive as biosciences, etc.
I'd say really wait and see how your actual LSAT goes. If you're doing them untimed your score may fluctuate. Plus, you may score drastically better or worse than your practice scores during the actual exam. Right now, look at the T14 and see where interests you. Don't base it on where you're likely to get in. Then when the test score arrives apply at schools that you actually like. I think that makes sense, no?
I am from the KC area and had considered SLU briefly. It seems their St. Louis reputation is pretty good. SLU alums watch out for each other within the city and with good grades I think you'll find a pretty good job. They don't reach very much farther than St. Louis however. KC has several schools nearby with loyal alums and Chicago has an onslaught of applicants from all over. If you'd be happy staying in St. Louis after school and working there and they give you a good chunk of money, I think its a good choice. Their reputation there is pretty good since they pretty much dominate the local market.
« on: October 28, 2008, 04:34:28 PM »
I really enjoy my leather calendar set I received beforehand. Its good for planning my day and writing down assignments. Other than that, I definitely agree with alcohol. They may not see the humor/necessity now but they definitely will soon enough.
« on: October 28, 2008, 04:22:55 PM »
Yeah, sounds like a good idea. We have to get started on this stuff pretty soon so I'd say you just make it happen and whoever shows shows. I love using two identical words in a row, not sure that is proper grammar or not, but its always fun.
« on: October 28, 2008, 04:16:14 PM »
That would work for me bot, and no they don't take roll. They gave a handout this week of job descriptions of various legal work possible and some sites to use online to find jobs. Next week we discuss resumes, that will probably be more helpful but this week was pretty much 45 mins of my life I will never get back.
I have yet to get my first memo back; so don't take this as extremely authoritative!
In the sample memo given to us and in my first memo, I used subheadings followed by a quick topic sentence followed by the rule of law. I THINK you could probably leave the topic sentence out; however, I feel like even though the reader has read your header it does not substitute for quickly introducing the topic within the paragraph. I feel it is a little redundant but it helps keep the flow of ideas smooth.
I take the first and last sentence of each paragraph and chart them out. If you read them it should be an outline of your paper that shows you where you went and what conclusion you arrived at.
I actually have them both so I can probably help you a little here. Honestly, if you understand torts pretty well but just have trouble arranging the concepts in a logical order to easier remember them, you need Gilberts. It is a good torts outline that hits the basic principles you'll need to know. However, if you don't understand a concept, it is definitely less helpful. It will give you some BLL to memorize but not a whole lot of substance behind it (although when it is keyed to your textbook and it cites those cases, that definitely helps). E&E will help you learn the material better and engage it through questions while Gilberts helps present it to you in the form you will likely want to use for the exam. I use E&E while learning the concepts in class, then Gilberts after to re-cap and make sure I know the info in a logical easy to learn fashion. So, I enjoy having both in the end.
If you just want one I'd go with the E&E. You can engage the material in a lot of hypos better this way. If you have no trouble outlining for torts, E&E is the way to go. If you have trouble arranging the concepts in a flow that helps you answer a question logically, I'd say go Gilberts. I hope that helps you a little.
I've kind of taken a different view on fee waivers. I think schools varying in ranks use them for different reasons.
Top tier schools are definitely more likely to use them to entice candidates to apply and subsequently reject them, thus boosting their rankings. Presumably, if you can get into the T5 or T6 by LSAT or GPA that is where you will apply and a fee waiver is not going to do much for a school. So, if you're getting them from a T14 school with a great GPA and mediocre LSAT, I think that is their plan with you.
However, if you're receiving them from schools in your target range (and we still don't know if they know both your LSAT and GPA or just one or the other) I think they're more likely to be a good sign. Anywhere I got a waiver in my target range subsequently accepted me. They were typically schools that are not the most "popular" in their respective range and want to entice students to consider them when you would not have considered applying there previously. Its not a definite acceptance or definite scholarship in the making; but its a reasonable way to attract qualified students who might not otherwise apply.
If you're receiving them from safety schools (again, with a grain of salt since we don't know what they know about your GPA/LSAT) I think these are usually an effort to catch students with good credentials who might want to sell out for money in fear of massive debt, etc. They can attract some highly qualified people who are risk averse who might not have considered applying otherwise.
This is probably putting too much into the mouth of adcomms, but I think there is more strategy to the schools sending them than purely random mailing. They're not targeted to you individually of course but based on certain objectives and depending on the quality/rank of school, these objectives will vary. HTH somewhat.