Law School Discussion

Nine Years of 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 - JonR0921

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12
71
I definitely think Princeton would be, in a way, grandfathered in to the t14.  Most certainly the assumption on the part of many (enough) applicants, professors, professionals would be that Princeton would produce only a high caliber law school.  So, highly qualified a applicants would apply, they could also attract a strong faculty, firms would likely be interested.  Certainly, Princeton  would not be hanging around with Falwell's school simply because it is a newbie in the discipline.  Besides, it is often ranked in the top 3 (in law schools) in polls of the public; the aura of this ivy would encompass the law school.

I disagree whole-heartedly.  By admission, you're basing your opinion on an assumption, which is something that should never be done.  In any event, like any other law school, I'm sure it'd have to "prove itself" before USNWR puts it in the Top 14 in its silly, meaningless rating system. 

72
I guess that I should clarify. This in no way reflects my own opinions on the matter. More than anything, it is a reflection on how messed up the whole ranking process.

I am basing this in the prevalence of the USNWR rankings on how most people rate law schools. From my understanding of the USNWR process, a ballot or some list of sorts with the names of the ABA law schools are sent out to whoever they choose to ask. For most of these "voters", name rec. is probably a key factor in their perception of a law school's quality. The idea is that if they see the Pricceton name, it has to be good.

OK..I agree with you.  I've always taken issue with the silly "Tier" system.  A Tier 4 grad who passes the bar is much more useful to the legal profession than a Tier 1 grad who fails it.  Moreover, I've known PLENTY of Tier 4 grads (and an equal number of non-ABA grads) who have gone on to be deputy bureau chiefs and bureau chiefs of prominent DA's offices (not great pay, but amazing trial experience), and several Tier 4 and non-ABA grads who are partners at NLJ 250 firms.

Point is...the USNWR rankings...and their "tiers" are silly.

73
Ok. Upon recieving accreditation, people will be falling over themselves to rank PLS in the top 10.

How can you make such a statement? You have no way of knowing the applicants' numbers or anything else that would contribute to the school's "ranking."  Oh, and what ranking are you referring to? USN&WR?  That's a magazine that rates schools....surely you don't give much credence to it.  I would hope not, and that instead you rely upon the opinions of students and alum from the various schools.

74
The US news "T14" would quickly expand, becoming the "T15".

Until it received provisional ABA accreditation, it wouldn't be ranked at all

75
Law School Applications / Re: Validity of LSAT as a gauge of success
« on: January 09, 2005, 09:38:57 PM »
When people say "intelligent" in this thread, they mean having the superior potential to become a lawyer, nothing more nothing less. 

Then that should be specified.

76
Law School Applications / Re: Validity of LSAT as a gauge of success
« on: January 09, 2005, 09:37:43 PM »
And thats why you got a low score

First, the ad hominem attacks are unnecessary.  Second, I'm certainly not the only one who has this belief.  Moreover, many VERY successful attorneys had dismal LSAT scores.  Barry Scheck (who runs the Innocene Project at Cardozo) and Bob Bennett (a senior partner at Skadden's D.C. office) both had LSAT scores that were less that 155 (there was an article about celebrity lawyers and their LSAT scores published not to long ago).  

So, the gentleman's blanket statement that the LSAT is a good gauge of one's intelligence is not entirely true.

77
Law School Applications / Re: Validity of LSAT as a gauge of success
« on: January 09, 2005, 09:30:07 PM »
It's a rough gauge of your intelligence.  As a competitive law school applicant, if you had chosen not to practice and improve your score, I would probably say you're an idiot.

The reason it's justifiable as a tool for admissions is that experience/evidence has shown that LSAT score is a more reliable indicator of law school performance than undergraduate GPA.

You state in your post that the LSAT is a "rough gauge of your intelligence."  Without trying to be argumentative at all, I wonder....if you had scored lower, say in the 130's or 140's, would you be saying the same thing? 

Second, what evidence do you have to support your claim?  The LSAT tests three spheres of thinking and reasoning, and is really just a really good gauge of one's ability to take a standardized test in a pressure-cooker evironment.

Basically, I really don't agree with you....one's LSAT score is completely and totally unrelated to one's intelligence or their ability to succed in law school.

78
Where should I go next fall? / Re: Is it possible???
« on: December 30, 2004, 07:53:44 AM »
Please post your opinion to the following question.  I am having a debate with my friend on it --

Do you think it is possible for a URM to receive an acceptance to a semi top school (i.e. UMich, Cornell, etc) with a 156 LSAT and 3.5 UGPA? 

The "URM gets preferential treatment" is the stupidest goddamn concept in the world.  This means, in theory, that if a black woman had the exact same numbers as I did, she'd get in because of her skin color.  Call it affirmative action, or whatever you want, I call it ridiculous, and I'm not sure many people would disagree!!

79
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Scott Peterson Death Penalty Poll
« on: December 14, 2004, 06:56:21 PM »
The prosecution offered no hard, conclusive evidence that Peterson killed Laci and Conner; indeed, they admitted that definitive evidence didn't exist!! I don't think they presented a strong enough case for a conviction, and certainly think the death penalty was thr wrong punishment in this case.

you probably were more focused on the evidence than i was. i just saw what was on the television or my mom's people magazine. what other possibility were you more convinced of? a friend of the family? a vagabond? would the defense have validity in saying that the location where the bodies were found was just coincidence?

That's the thing...the jury wasn't responsible for seeking out other possibilities...they were there to render a verdict based on the available evidence....none of which was conclusive.

80
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Scott Peterson Death Penalty Poll
« on: December 14, 2004, 06:40:09 PM »
The prosecution offered no hard, conclusive evidence that Peterson killed Laci and Conner; indeed, they admitted that definitive evidence didn't exist!! I don't think they presented a strong enough case for a conviction, and certainly think the death penalty was thr wrong punishment in this case.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12