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 - weinmatt

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Educated Assumption of Scale Range
« on: February 27, 2005, 02:08:05 PM »
you all seem to forget... December had 99 questions due to LSAC dropping one. Thus, you are expecting the same curve? I tend to agree, just making that observation

I'd go with a disproportionately large number of higher scoring people post on LSD. Or we'll all a bunch of liars.

Either one works for me.

Utter Pessimism: 163
Pessimism: 165
Probably: 167-169
Maybe: 170-171
I'm dreaming: 172-174


Studying for the LSAT / Re: PREDICT THE SCALE
« on: February 17, 2005, 01:01:11 PM »
Given that the test was above average difficulty... you might expect the same scale as December. Keep in mind Dec. had 99 q's so if you add 1 raw to decembers 87, you'd get 88 = 170.

Thus we would have

180 - 98/100
175 - 93
170 - 88
167 - 84/85
165 - 82
160 - 74/75
155 - 66
150 - 57/58

That seems fair. More or less. 80 raw would be a 163.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Maybe before March 7th????
« on: February 17, 2005, 09:16:06 AM »
wheres that

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Maybe before March 7th????
« on: February 16, 2005, 07:39:00 PM »
Most law schools admission deadlines are March 1. I'd put money we might see the scores on the 26th or 27th... especially since December was the 23rd, 10 days early... and WAYYYYYY less people (like 40% less) take the test in February.

Here's to really wanting to know. I sent my apps in today, blind to my score, so I hope i'm not tooooo much of a dissapointment

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Three C's In a row
« on: February 16, 2005, 07:35:00 PM »
i'll corroborate that

Studying for the LSAT / Re: master list of arguments!
« on: February 16, 2005, 10:57:18 AM »
it looks better and better every time :)

8 - random sample didn't account for peak time drivers

20 - polar ice caps - grew 20,000 years and shrunk 10k. only thing that could be inferred.

23 - def. sales contest.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Q about LSAC GPA
« on: February 16, 2005, 10:50:36 AM »
in regards to fairness... we are on a plus minus system here at umd but the pluses and minuses dont actually count. However, you'd be pleasantly surprised to see that it helps profs distinguish between A/B and B/C. thus i've gotten a few more than i might have without the system. Same goes for plus.

I would imagine thought that... my LSDAS gpa is identical to my actual GPA, because even with A+ = 4.333 I have as many pluses as minuses. I dont know of any school that does plus/minus without giving A+'s... even if they are the same value as A's in that schools system

Studying for the LSAT / Re: SQUIDS- .001
« on: February 15, 2005, 09:57:19 AM »
Not to pipe in and start up discussion again... but I'm in the court with the .001 answer here's why: This was an inferance question... and you could not infer that before the invention of SQUIDS that measurements that small were unattainable. With regard to the .001 answer : some kind of experiment has to be done to establish that measurement! Hence, that answer makes more sense.

At least to me.

I tend to agree with what's being said there on that other topic: Everybody brings what they remember and hence some of their bias to the boards... so who knows :)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5