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 - vsavatar

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Anyone cancelling their score?
« on: February 05, 2006, 07:36:11 AM »
Wouldn't do me much good.  Under the same stressful conditions I probably wouldn't do much better unless they gave one like December's, which I'm sure they'll never do again.  Besides, I'd have to wait another year to go to law school, and I'm almost sure I'll get into at least U of D.  Unless I really screwed the pooch in a major way, which I don't feel was the case, I'm probably somewhere around the 154-157 range.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Post Mortem Args Master list
« on: February 05, 2006, 07:08:07 AM »
I agree with you on 15. Seems like it wasn't a consensus answer on this list, but that's what I chose (also an econ major).

Alright, I'm a little drunk now (been drinking since 2!) but I'll try this anyway...I think on a few of these some of you guys are practicing "groupthink" so I'll try to dispute as many as I can! Hehe, just kidding, but those who took the test will appreciate the joke.  :)

1) I have more of a question on this one since I'm going to use groupthink and accept everyone else's answers!  Didn't part of the argument say that it was unethical to release confidential medical information "UNLESS the patient posed a threat to themselves of others"?  I think I chose E which said that Mr. Tyler didn't pose a threat to others (or maybe it said that he DID pose a threat to others?).  Anyone remember anything about that part of the stimulus?

2) Fairfield?  The answer is right, but for some reason I think the town's name started with a "R".

14) I don't remember this being on the test, maybe experimental? (I skipped 3 on the LR though, so maybe it's one of those).  I had 2 RC sections so I am pretty clear about which ones were scored (except for the 3 I didn't get to!).

15) This was a strengthen question.  The answer was A, "A greater demand for goods will allow Europe to begin producing goods that they previously imported from other countries", implying that it will lead to a greater variety of goods being produced in Europe (the conclusion of the argument).  I'm an ECON major and it made sense, I am almost positive on this one.  IMPORT was defintiely in the answer.

16) The answer you posted looks correct, I think it was E.  It said that "ALL good lawyers have a thorough knowledge of the law" and it also said that most good lawyers are unwilling to depart from (standards?), so it could be inferred that some good lawyers who had a knowledge of the law were unwilling to depart from (standards?).

24) The conclusion said that government programs will continue.  The assumption was E, "AT LEAST (keywords) as much reveneue will be earned by the new policy as by the current policy".

27) The posted answer is correct but here's an addition to the wording.  Stimulus said that people who attend the sessions get better grades, proving that the sessions help them understand.  Answer was that "students who attend are more likely to do their homework than other students."

35) The posted answer is correct, the wording was that the 2nd arguer "accepted the conclusion but undermined the 'REASONING' behind it".

I chose import as well... also an econ major.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Officially over
« on: February 04, 2006, 10:39:01 PM »
My third was an LR.  I hated that farking test. It had to have been the worst one I've ever taken, bar none.  How can I score a 167 on the December practice only to score at best a 157 on the February real one?

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Post Mortem Args Master list
« on: February 04, 2006, 10:17:30 PM »
I'm pretty sure that 13 isn't what it says it is.  I think it was something to do with confusing a desirable general state with a particular means of attaining it or something like that.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Post Mortem Args Master list
« on: February 04, 2006, 10:10:04 PM »
It was worder like this: It is a premise for the claim the hot water in the tank losses oxygen, or similar to this... It was choice C as I remember. Do you agree? Another option that I considered was: it is a premise for the argument's main conclusion... but maybe I'm just hallucinating this answer

yes.. I remember that this answer was towards the end of the list.  I put down that it was a premise for the conclusion which is supported by additional information?  I think it was C or D.  I think I put D... but I was debating C.

lack of oxygen -> unsuitable cooking water, sitting in a hot water heater -> lack of oxygen
I was able to combine them most successfully as sitting in a hot water heater -> lack of oxygen -> unsuitable cooking water

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Horrible Proctor At Oakland University, MI
« on: February 04, 2006, 10:03:22 PM »
I hated them.  I only finished two of them, the first and fourth.  I should have given up on the first when I realized how deep I got myself in, but I persisted and got at least one of them wrong as a result.  I think I got all of the fourth one though.  I got one question from the other two games right by just comparing the list of rules with the options, and chose D for the rest of them.  The reading comprehension wasn't so hot with that damn groupthink one.  Had I bothered to look and seen it had 8 questions, I'd have done that one first.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Horrible Proctor At Oakland University, MI
« on: February 04, 2006, 09:53:28 PM »
I agree.  We had only 20 students in our classroom and the other auditorium only had like 15.  I don't see why they couldn't have added more people to the auditoriums or used the ones in O'Dowd or Hannah hall.  God knows there's enough to go around.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Horrible Proctor At Oakland University, MI
« on: February 04, 2006, 09:44:58 PM »
Were you in 156 NFH?  That's where I was and I didn't notice anything like that.  I mean they were a bit on the strict side, but I never got whacked with a coat or anything.  Then again, I think what we were in could be considered an audotorium.  Sorry you had a bad experience.  My bad experience wasnt' with the proctors.  It was with the test.

BTW, you can report them to LSAC and you may get to retake the LSAT free of charge or get a refund.  If you really think they caused you to do badly, cancelling the scores might not be a bad idea.

Removed last post.  I misread the post and thought you meant you were trying to get into a top 25 (i.e. Chapman is a top 25)  After checking on that, I realized that's not what you meant.  As a URM, you stand a decent chance at Chapman given that their 25/75 is 154-158.  If you think you can squeak out a 154, you'd have a damn good chance.  Now it all comes down to how many times do you want to keep trying and do you really think you can do better next time?

Hey, what about Golden Gate, Thomas Jefferson, or Western State?  You could even throw a Hail Mary to Southwestern if you get a 153.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Proposal to the lurkers
« on: February 04, 2006, 06:55:13 PM »
I would try to help but everything from this morning is a blur. After the test I drove home, incoherently rambled at my roomate about the test while he stared at me like I was an idiot, then I left and drove around for about an hour with music blasting, then finally made it back to my apartment somehow for a long nap. Now I have a headache and I feel like LSAC raped me.

Any contribution that I give will probably not help much.

I hope they at least got you drunk first.  As for me, after the test, I had lunch with an extremely beautiful and sweet girl, who will never be my girlfriend because I'm not Jewish.  To make it worse, the ONLY reason she won't be my girlfriend is because I'm not Jewish.  So, today, I have had to deal with two things that are just out of my reach, law school and a woman who can be described only as a goddess.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13