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 - Dante

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14
121
what about a shirt that says "Kiss Me even though I'm a drunk German-Italian" ? are those okay?

Will it have a swastika on it?

122
Naw….the problem isn’t with the Irish, it is with all the people that “claim” to be Irish today.  It really pisses me off that everyone seems to think that it is ok to display all these stereotypes, when they don’t understand what the true meaning of St. Pat’s Day is really about.  It is about celebrating our heritage, showing pride in what our families over came back in Ireland, and then when they immigrated to this country.  Irish history is full of misery, mostly coming from the English, but also involved significant discrimination when they reach this country as well. 

So, if you think it is ok to get drunk, puke your guts out on 5th St., and wear a green hat while claiming “kiss me I’m Irish”, then I assume you are probably the same type of person that would enter a watermelon eating contest on MLK day.  Both show a lack of intelligence, and are wrong. 

Lecture over, sorry for the soapbox, but this is a very sore point with me.  Please, enjoy your day but remember that some a-hole in a Guinness shirt is probably not the be representative for an entire nation and its people.   


Happy St. Patrick's Day to all of you...

123
Quote
I can understand what you are trying to say, but I think you missed my point. 

What I am saying is that some seem to think that a person should be able to perform on  the LSAT to the best of their ability the first time.  If the performance lacks, for what ever reason, the person should be disregarded for LS due to the inability to "get it right" the first time.  Second, on the issue of averaging.  Some would believe that the scores should follow the person.  Then wouldn't it follow that bar scores should follow as well?

 After all, someone that makes a 170 on a second test showed the same skill at answering questions as someone that did so the first time around.  Just as a person that shows enough skill to pass a bar exam, whether it is the first or second attempt. 


I agree that someone who makes a 170 on a second test showed the same skill at answering questions as someone that did so the first times around. HOWEVER, he/she had the right to cancell it if he/she bombed it the first time for whatever reason...No one has EVER said that people will not get second chance for LSAT test. Indeed, LS give weight for one's improvement by AVERAGING the score. If you made mistake, you have to live with it. Think about the real world, if you are a lawyer and you screwed your client first time because you didn't do enough research/effort for the work, even if you recover from it by doing it right the second time, your work can't be considered the same as someone who did it right the first time. It is the nature of the business...


So we agree that a 170, whether it is the first or second time, is still the same skill level.  Each applicant demonstrates that they have the same potential to perform in the first year of LS similarly.  The person taking the test the second time now has developed the skills (otherwise they would not have achieved the 170) necessary that the LSAT assumes are required to do so.  So why should the test taker continued to be measured as someone that does not possess these skills?

Second, I never stated that a person could not take the test again if they had performed in a sub-par fashion.  The point is whether they should still be judged at a level that is not representative of their abilities.  Basically, person 1 goes in and scored well, person 2 doesn’t.  Person 2 studies, learns logic, learns to evaluate arguments, and improves to a higher score.  Doesn’t person 2 now possess the same skill level as person 1?  Wouldn’t they be able to use the same skill as person 1?  Both persons are now at the same skill level and would have the same assumed abilities for LS and therefore should be judged the same in the LSAT’s eyes in my opinion.

Regarding the cancellation of scores…it is true you are free to cancel if you “bomb” it.  However, since this is rather difficult to determine because you are blind to your score, the person has no idea how they actually did until they receive their score.  So, if a person “knew” they bombed it and cancelled their score.  Then went and studied, came back retested and scored higher is better qualified for LS than a person who test at the same level that didn’t cancel a poor test?  It is back to whether a person should be judged at the level they finally achieve or at a level that might not be indicative of their true potential ability. 

About mistakes…I didn’t realize that someone with a high LSAT score was able to achieve an error free practice of law.  I understand what you are saying regarding the need for competent lawyers and the need for accuracy.  But I don’t think you could assume how someone will perform in their practice based upon the LSAT.  Because as others has mentioned, the LSAT doesn’t test one’s knowledge of the law, just the ability of the person to perform on the LSAT and the first year of LS.  The bar exam (the point you haven’t addressed and I would like to understand what you think) would be a much better indicator as to the person’s ability to be a good attorney.

Finally, if you believe that lawyers never make mistakes, then get prepared for some new information.  Lawyers make mistakes all the time, and carry malpractice insurance for that very reason.  No one can be perfect all the time.  That is the true nature of the business.  And what you get on one test, one time, is not, cannot be a good indication as to the attorney he/she will be in the actual practice of law. 


Take care....

124
also, the majority of the debate was around whether the LSAT is a test of aptitude...
The bar is a comprehensive exam, testing you on competence in law (as well as character and fitness). It is like a school exam that tests you on stuff gone over in classes (1L mainly) and application of that knowledge. The LSAT is different in that it isn't comprehensive of any class everyone has taken --in theory, it's more of a judge of a person rather than what they have learned.

http://www.abanet.org/legaled/baradmissions/basicoverview.html

the pass/fail vs scored is a big issue too


Well, then wouldn't it be true then that the bar exam should have even stricter standards?  No second attempts, one shot and that is it?  After all, it is the test to practice the law and not just study it.  And, for some reason, after three years and studying and acquiring huge debt, a person bombs the bar.  Well, get used to saying "would you like fries with that?"  After all, there are some that believe a person shouldn't be given considerations or second chances right?

125
Quote

Your example is in no way analagous. No one on this thread has argued that people shouldn't be allowed to take the LSAT twice- only what to do with multiple scores. I think that Aurora (let me know if I'm putting words in your mouth) would say that the lawyer who failed the bar exam first and then passed it either demonstrated

a. They don't have natural talent
B. they didn't understand how crucial the test was
C. they prepared and still didn't do well

You would still be allowed to practice law, of course, but most clients would rather have the lawyer who nailed it the first time.

The bar exam is pass/fail; the LSAT is a scaled score.

There's a huge difference.
Quote


I can understand what you are trying to say, but I think you missed my point.  

What I am saying is that some seem to think that a person should be able to perform on  the LSAT to the best of their ability the first time.  If the performance lacks, for what ever reason, the person should be disregarded for LS due to the inability to "get it right" the first time.  Second, on the issue of averaging.  Some would believe that the scores should follow the person.  Then wouldn't it follow that bar scores should follow as well?

 After all, someone that makes a 170 on a second test showed the same skill at answering questions as someone that did so the first time around.  Just as a person that shows enough skill to pass a bar exam, whether it is the first or second attempt.  

126
Can't resist to jump in... :P Here is my opinion:

Aptitude -- natural or acquired talent

If you are natural talent, you don't need to prepare as much as the other people and still get good LSAT score -- then your LSAT reflects your natual talent!

If you are not a natural talent, then you need to study for the LSAT. If you mastered it through the study, great! Your LSAT reflected your acquired talent!

For people who didn't make good use of the first LSAT test, you have two reasons:
1. You didn't prepare for it and you failed it. -- It shows that
 (1) you don't have the natual talent
 (2) You didn't even do research and know that LSAT is THE MOST IMPORTANT factor in the application process. You are likely to fail for the type of work lawyer would do. -- in this case, if you prepare it again and did a good job on the second test, your first test indicates your incompetent nature in law world. The school is really justified to take the average - which counts for your improvement and also your failure.

2. You prepared enough for it but still didn't do a good job on the test.
 -- It shows that you have neither the natural talent nor the acquired talent.






Just some food for thought here....


Following your reasoning from above, would you support only one attempt to pass the bar exam as well?  Or maybe, averaging the scores on additional necessary attempts to pass?  Just curious...

127
tagging....just wanted to see what books everyone recommends..thanks

I dont recommend the aforementioned book. It was one of the recommended readings for soon to be 1L'ers on a website. Only if I could find that link . . . .



Yes I know....and thanks...just figured someone will be coming along with other recommendations....Take care

128
tagging....just wanted to see what books everyone recommends..thanks

129
Welcome aboard....nice to see new other new people on here as well....

Good luck with your studies!

130
Will be looking at setting up a private general practice in a smaller town...with as much emphasis on criminal as I can. 

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14