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 - The Poster

Pages: 1 ... 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 [1162]
11611
Studying for the LSAT / Re: June05 testers, am I crazy or...
« on: June 28, 2005, 08:29:28 AM »
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I know its a longshot but I wrote to LSAC about this question. Something just doesn't sit right with me about it. BTW I don't think LSAC would take points away from anyone after the fact, especially if they found out that they had made a mistake. In any case, I decided to write LSAC about it just for some peice of mind. Here is part of the email I sent them, I tried to explain it a little better:

Taking into account the correct answer in question #14, we are essentially told that the passage suggests that the author believes that the society which shunned Naomi violated its own supposed religious ethics by doing so. Beginning with line 41 in the passage we are told that the author uses motifs drawn from Christian rituals and symbols to form a subtle critique of the professed ethics of said the culture which shunned Naomi. I cannot see how the passage even implies that the professed ethics of the culture are in any way religious ethics. I do notice that line 45 gives an example of the symbolism that the author uses to critique the culture's ethics, and that symbolism is indeed religious as it invokes biblical imagery and draws an analogy between the biblical story of turning bread into stone and the bundle of documents as being akin to "stone" while also containing "bread." However this seems to be misleading as it says nothing about the ethics of the society/culture which has shunned Naomi.
 
From my point of view there are far too many leaps to be made in question #14 to arrive at what the author believes about the society that shunned Naomi. I had chosen answer A, "it discoursed its citizens from seeking out their heritage" due to the overall tone of the passage and specifically the references made in lines 37-39 to the "culture screens of silence and secretiveness that have enshrouded her past," this answer appeared to be much more plausible.
 
I would appreciate any insight into this question that you can provide.

11612
Studying for the LSAT / June05 testers, am I crazy or...
« on: June 27, 2005, 05:51:30 PM »
Okay I know this test has been beaten to death in here, but I just have to bring this up. The infamous JOB question (RC #9) was thrown out, but why? Supposedly because of the way in which it invoked Christianity as a possible answer. Well in going over that second RC passage which that question was a part of (the Obasan passage) I can't help but feel that yet another question is amiss.

Anyone who cares, please take a look at RC #14, where it says the passage suggests that the author believes which of the following about the society that shuns the girl. The answer is that "it violated its own supposed religious ethics by doing so". Am I the only one who thinks that this is a little fishy, ala the Job question? I believe that LSAC intended the answer to be extrapolated from lines 45-52 in the passage. Unless I'm missing something here (which is possible) it seems to me that the leap one would have to make to get that answer correct would almost certainly rely on some religious knowledge. The only real information we are given to determine what the society's supposed religious ethics are is when it talks about the documents compared with the biblical story of turning stone into bread, and the whole bread of a spiritual sustenance thing.

I don't want to start a debate on whether throwing out Job was right/wrong/good/bad, but I'm thinking if Job wasn't up to par with LSAC then this question shouldn't be either. I know LSAC has thrown out questions post-scoring before, so why not this one, its at least worth a look I think. Am I crazy or does anyone else see what I'm talking about?

11613
Studying for the LSAT / Re: fatigue or overconfidence?
« on: June 27, 2005, 02:20:17 PM »
Did anyway else have their performance fall off in the final section?  I had only 7 wrong going into the last section, which for me was the 2nd LR, than I got 8 wrong there (I usually do very well on LR, get about 4 or 5 wrong out of 50/51). I was feeling really relaxed because I knew I just nailed the games (usually my worst) and I started cruising through the last section.  Maybe I got overconfident, or maybe I was fatigued (I never practiced with 5 sections, just 4).  Do you think it makes a difference to practice with 5 sections instead of 4? Practice test average was 171, real thing 165.

You know its funny but I was just thinking about that myself. I think the extra section through me off, by the time I got to the last section of the test I felt spent (btw I got 7 wrong in the last section too, but it was the games on my test). So maybe there is something to this, maybe we should throw in a random section into our practices. Has anyone done this?

11614
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Do schools pay attention to the scale?
« on: June 27, 2005, 12:12:23 PM »
Tink,

I feel your pain. I got a 76 raw in June which also gave me a 159. I've been trying to look on the bright side even though I had been scoring around 165. Hey the 79th percentile isn't all that bad. Though I probably will retake in October because I know I can do better. That is really the only way to prove to the schools that your actual ability is higher than the 159 from this test. By the way I remember reading somewhere on LSAC's site that schools are NOT sent your raw score. That kind of stinks because like you said our raw score would have equaled a higher scaled score on any other lsat. Are you retaking in October?

I think I'm going to take it again, but I'm not positive. I really want to go to Miami, and I have a 3.0 gpa. I'm not sure if I want to risk it with a 159...

You know I wonder...say with our 159 we apply to whatever schools we want, get all of our applications completed early so the schools have everything from us right. Then say we decide to retake the test, in October or maybe even December. The schools already have our first score...I'm assuming that lsac will send the second score along automatically, but even in that case the schools already have our stuff. I guess what I'm saying is the second score couldn't hurt, unless it was far below the first one, but that isn't likely if we went in prepared. Even if the second score was lower, the first one is already there submitted to the schools so we are safe in way. Or am I wrong?

11615
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Do schools pay attention to the scale?
« on: June 27, 2005, 09:08:43 AM »
Tink,

I feel your pain. I got a 76 raw in June which also gave me a 159. I've been trying to look on the bright side even though I had been scoring around 165. Hey the 79th percentile isn't all that bad. Though I probably will retake in October because I know I can do better. That is really the only way to prove to the schools that your actual ability is higher than the 159 from this test. By the way I remember reading somewhere on LSAC's site that schools are NOT sent your raw score. That kind of stinks because like you said our raw score would have equaled a higher scaled score on any other lsat. Are you retaking in October?

11616
Studying for the LSAT / Re: So Difficult
« on: June 26, 2005, 02:27:59 PM »
hmm Yale with below 150? maybe a URM olympic winner with one leg and a PHd or two. nah that's a reach too.

Exactly! Maybe a computer hacker to boot?

Only if he were a deaf, dumb and blind kid!

Who single handedly captured Hitler, Stalin and Saddam by defeating their guards with a toothpick attached to his/her eyelids.

Jokes aside though, someone DID get into YALE with those score. What does that say about this whole process?


It says that sometimes adcomms play pin the tail on the application. Seriously, the whole process is pretty subjective, so I guess anything is possible. I wonder what the stats are on people who apply to every single T14 school, if anyone even actually does that...they would probably get into one of them, for one reason or another.

11617
Studying for the LSAT / Re: So Difficult
« on: June 26, 2005, 01:59:00 PM »
hmm Yale with below 150? maybe a URM olympic winner with one leg and a PHd or two. nah that's a reach too.

Exactly! Maybe a computer hacker to boot?

Only if he were a deaf, dumb and blind kid!

11618
Studying for the LSAT / Re: So Difficult
« on: June 26, 2005, 01:49:03 PM »
hmm Yale with below 150? maybe a URM olympic winner with one leg and a PHd or two. nah that's a reach too.

11619
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Test Harder? Practice tests?
« on: June 26, 2005, 01:46:35 PM »
You know its funny, I got 7 wrong on the June 05 games, which is about where my games were a few months ago but they had gotten better recently. I think the biggest mistake I made is I really focused in on the first games section (the experimental one). Of course I didn't realize it at the time...but you know I wouldn't be surprised if I got that entire experimental section correct, it just all seemed to click. My confidence was my undoing. By the time the second games section came around I was feeling a little burnt out, and strange happenings during the test didn't make it any easier (the guy next to me got in trouble for going ahead).

11620
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Test Harder? Practice tests?
« on: June 26, 2005, 01:00:29 PM »
Thank you for your post. I've been beatng myself up since yesterday because my 159 score is a lot lower than the 165+ range I had been consistently testing in, but you know as much as I'd like to blame the scale for it, I can't. You are right, the test is doing exactly what it is supposed to do, and all the practice in the world doesn't make anything a sure thing. Of course if I hadn't done 25+ practice tests my final score probably would have been in the low 150s, so I should be pleased.

Pages: 1 ... 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 [1162]