Law School Discussion

Show Posts

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 - upgrade

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 76 77 78 [79] 80 81 82 83 84 ... 87
781
So, what did you all think? 

782
Law School Admissions / Re: Woohoo! Scholarship at WashU
« on: January 24, 2008, 10:05:52 AM »
I think you have to remain in "good academic standing" and from their website:
Quote
- Grading scale = 70 to 100
 - Minimum passing grade = 74
 - Minimum GPA (cum & yearly) to remain in good academic standing = 79

783
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Name a comic strip you read as a child
« on: January 24, 2008, 10:00:48 AM »
Non Sequitur was always my favorite.  I haven't looked at a comic strip in probably 10 years.

784
Law School Admissions / Re: Woohoo! Scholarship at WashU
« on: January 24, 2008, 09:55:53 AM »
What I found sketchy was the amount prediction with no LSN data to back it up. The PM was also unsolicited and struck me immediately as odd.

Maybe I just like conspiracies.

The only person I have seen that has posted stuff like this gives well balanced advice and even suggested that people go to other schools over WUSTL.  I don't think he/she is an adcomm.  As far as the offers being retracted, the offers were sent in error and they were corrected fairly promptly.  If I was one of those people and was going to the ASD tomorrow, I would try to get the extra $30,000 out of the school in exchange for committing to WUSTL the same day.

Congrats to those of you who are still receiving offers, hopefully there is still money left to reward my February 08 170 LSAT. =)

785
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Test 38, Section 1, #21
« on: January 24, 2008, 08:05:54 AM »
I think that D is the credited response.

Argument says studying a small amount in depth will allow students to study a broader variety of topics independently later on.  Answer choice D says that after studying a few Greek tragedies in detail, a student will be able to understand any Greek tragedy.

I don't have the answer key here - can anyone back me up on this?

I'm pretty sure D is the answer here, but I have one question. The reasoning in the stimulus is that you should learn the basic stuff first but in detail and then they can go on to explore the breadth of that subject.  How does answer choice D establish that when you're learning a few of them in detail, you're learning the basic subject matter?

The answer says it is easier to understand ANY Greek tragedy.  Analyzing a few of them gives you the ability to understand a variety of other tragedies.  It does seem somewhat restrictive and it may require the assumption that there are more than a few Greek tragedies to make the logic apply, otherwise there would be no breadth to explore after analyzing the exhaustive store of Greek tragedies.

786
Law School Admissions / Re: Thank You Note to Dean
« on: January 24, 2008, 05:26:20 AM »
I'd say no.

There is a video interview with the Dean of Admissions for Michigan and the footage shows her looking at a greeting card, laughing, and crumpling it up. I think an adcomm would find it a waste of time and think you were a brown noser.

If I am thinking of the same video as you are, the person was on the waitlist and had not been accepted.

787
Studying for the LSAT / Re: How to go from a 147 to a 169
« on: January 23, 2008, 08:15:12 PM »
I understand your criticism that you already know the answers for memory, but the point is not getting the answers. The point is getting to the place where you KNOW THAT YOU KNOW how to perfectly attack each game.

I also really think it is really helpful to do the same type one after the other after the other....you'd be surprised how many similarities you'll see within the micro-categories. Many of the games have characteristics that are unique to that type.
Here are the categories...(source: Powerscore Logic Games Bible)

In regard to memory of past problems, it is not the memory of which answer is correct, but the path that I found the answer in the path.  If I struggle with a problem, I am much more likely to remember exactly how I overcame that problem, which is usually missing a critical deduction.  When I rework the problem, I remember "there's something that restricts this pair of variables," which prompts me to find that.  On a fresh game, I don't have that thought lingering in the back of my mind.  I do try to prove to myself that the wrong answers are wrong as well as definitively proving my selection is correct.

I will break the games down further, I think seeing the similarities may help me.  So far this week, I have done each of the grouping games twice.  My timing and accuracy have improved, even when I make sure to eliminate all the wrong answers, but I am not sure if that is because I am familiar with the questions. 

Thanks for sharing your experiences.

788
Law School Admissions / Re: aw snap, full ride to WUSTL!??!?!
« on: January 23, 2008, 04:48:02 PM »
Yeah, they seem to be coming after us pretty hard.  I imagine it's difficult to recruit top candidates to St. Louis, but that could also be stemming from my desire to get out of the Midwest for awhile.

I'm still not too pleased about the mix up, but $90,000 just shot them back into real contention.

I really like Saint Louis.  I hated the move from Phoenix to Missouri, but the past ten years have been great here.

789
Law School Admissions / Re: aw snap, full ride to WUSTL!??!?!
« on: January 23, 2008, 04:22:44 PM »
Comparing to the data from last year's cycle on LSN, it appears WUSTL is trying quite a bit harder to recruit you guys.  I think there was only one person who reported a scholarship over $78,000 last year and approximately 70% of those who reported scholarships withdrew.  It will be interesting to see if the increased money helps out this year.

790
Law School Admissions / Re: aw snap, full ride to WUSTL!??!?!
« on: January 23, 2008, 11:29:36 AM »
Congrats!

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 76 77 78 [79] 80 81 82 83 84 ... 87