|
|
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 - nate
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 17
91
« on: November 29, 2005, 07:06:20 PM »
this is good advice. i would also say it's sounds best for you to go to CU, especially if you get scholarship money.
the one thing i'm going to have to disagree with is the poster that said only going to one of the top 5's would be better than CU. the top 14 are the national schools, so i don't really understand why somewhere like NYU would be worthwhile, but somewhere like michigan or penn would not. they're all national schools that would help put you in the running for great jobs, wherever you wanted to work in the country. once you're outside the top 14, however, it becomes an entirely different story.
92
« on: November 29, 2005, 01:34:39 PM »
if you get in to umich, your problems are solved. there would be no reason to not go there. i would probably say the same thing for texas.
why do you want to go to CO? do you have ties to the area, or are you just interested in the area?
also, how set are you on ending up there?
93
« on: November 20, 2005, 07:46:22 PM »
it sounds like you made the right choice.
however, you were top 5%. where i would say transferring up might be beneficial is for someone who is top 15-20% and didn't make law review. in that case, the closer you can get to the top of the rankings the better (assuming biglaw is a goal).
i'm sure you've heard it plenty, but excellent work.
94
« on: November 13, 2005, 05:32:44 PM »
i'm studying abroad this summer, but i haven't yet decided where.
anyone know if employers will look at study abroad as the "something legal" you're supposed to do your first summer? or would it be a good idea to get an internship when i came home, for the rest of the summer?
95
« on: October 28, 2005, 04:44:26 PM »
I'm at a T20 as well, and I second what T. Durden said. Save for a few people that sit in the back row, everyone has pretty much been on point with their answers. I know class prep. doesn't equate much to exam success and I've been anywhere from top 25 to top 50% on our practice exams, but I'm nevertheless worried about the "competition" on finals.
Kris, I found your post helpful; thanks for sharing. I think telling us your rank helps to put your success perspective. Law school is all about numbers, so it is helpful for you to tell us where you finished.
this is my problem too. i miss undergrad when i could look around the class and know that i'd be getting a better grade than most people because they weren't doing any work. of course i realized that law school would be different, but i also though there'd be a greater percentage of slackers. i was wrong. on the other hand, we were discussing midterm answers yesterday in class and some of the people who spoke and asked questions had no clue what they were talking about. i know things will be different by finals when everyone becomes a super gunner and lives in the library, but yesterday's class really made me feel that continuous reading/briefing/outlining/study groups have been of signficant beneift. now i just have to start the practice exams...
96
« on: October 28, 2005, 04:38:16 PM »
Oh, and to the original poster, to whom I spent 10 minutes writing some advice, a little acknowledgment in defense of a clearly idiotic post would have been nice.
hmm. i did think it was inappropriate, but i only just saw it now. i made my original post yesterday and i don't exactly spend a lot of time here. i would try and blow off the whole "crap school" because everyone (except perhaps those at HYS) can be sure that someone else at a better school thinks they're at a crap school. i've been told that my top 20 is a joke. but i do appreciate your thoughtful response. i had thought that practice would make the real difference difference, so i'm glad you have had good experience with them. i can see it being similar to the LSAT, where going in knowing the test can take you to a whole different level.
97
« on: October 27, 2005, 05:53:04 PM »
if you never skip class, read everything assigned, brief every case, partake in a study group (which you believe does more good than harm), and read supplements...what are the chances that you'll end up at the bottom of your class? is the bottom reserved for those who don't work hard, or are law school exams a total crapshoot, where those who know the material AND take exams well are the ones who end up on top? i guess what i really want to know is, is there any way you can know you won't end up at the bottom?
98
« on: October 25, 2005, 12:11:27 AM »
so i got my first legal research and writing memo back. 12 people in the class, given one of three grades (A-, B+, B) and i was in the bottom group of 4 people. the class isn't graded, and i can think of more important things to worry about in law school, but i still feel like i messed up big. should i not care and move on? or should i take this as some sign of how i'm going to do in law school? annyone have any advice or similar experience?
99
« on: October 23, 2005, 05:02:16 PM »
Nate - you don't truly seem to be agreeing with antwan. His point was that the 3.3 was so egregious that no 1L GPA could overcome it. Which, frankly, I disagree with. Note that I posted the original WL. Truly Harvard didn't see it as SO egregious.
My understanding is that law schools are much more heavily focused on your 1L GPA, almost to the exclusion of the LSAT/GPA. (However, yes, YHS do specify that you should have had numbers which would make you competitive originally - which obviously H considered me to have.) So I don't think the 3.3 will be a largely negative factor.
So what 1L GPA, or alternately class rank, do you think it'll take for me to meet the civil standard of proof - more likely than not?
when i said "this is definitely true", i meant that antwan was correct that places like harvard say your numbers should have allowed you to originally have been a candidate. i didn't mean antwan was absolutely right in everything that s/he said. i apologize. i would say you should make top 5% for a real chance, though maybe there's a little leeway. that's just my estimate. but check out the database of that yahoo group, transferapps, to see the numbers and schools of others who transferred to YHS. that would give you a much better idea. hey, i'll tell you what though...when you decide it's a good idea to transfer to GW, let me know, and i'll trade you my spot for yours at michigan.
100
« on: October 23, 2005, 01:13:31 PM »
From what I understand, the very top schools, especially harvard and yale, dont accept any transfers that couldnt have gotten in originally (or at least could have come close). Your LSAT is good, but I think your UGPA will prevent them from accepting you no matter how well you your 1L. However their are other top schools that dont operate this way. I know GW is one.
this is definitely true. however, i think one girl from transferapps transferred in to harvard with a 165. i'm convinced the whole "you should have been able to gain admissions here originally" is just a check to stop everyone who places in the top of their class from applying. even with a 3.3, and especially with a 174, you could make a good argument that you were originally a candidate for admissions (as impossible as it might have been for you to actually get in). and if you do well enough (probably top 5%) at a school like michigan, having those original stats, i'm willing to bet that harvard would take you.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 17
|
Discussion
Resources