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 - davidatfsu

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8
41
Studying for the LSAT / Re: 143, 151, 171+
« on: May 25, 2005, 12:57:02 PM »
My first prep-test was a 143... after LGB, LRB and endless prep-tests I got up to a 165 (untimed), then... with time, I plateued at 151-152...

I took a TM course and realized I had so much more to learn.... and decided to take the full TM Course for the October LSAT... my goal is 170+, possible?

Is it possible? Well, anything is possible. After all, a broken clock is right twice a day. But, I think your in the "one-in-a-thousand" odds here.

There seems to be a lot of misinformation floating on this board, and elsewhere, about the nature of the LSAT test. It is an APTITUDE test, and as such, after prepping adequately, the gains of hard work are minimal. Eventually, your intellectual capacity for the material governs; that is why it is used by Law Schools: they aren't interested in who works the hardest, but who has the innate skills to succeed in law school. Some prospective test takers, without prepping, take the test and get a 140, then take a course, study hard, and work there way up to 160, and see this as proof you can improve your score significantly though hard work. That is like saying I never golfed a day in my life, shot a 150, then took a three months worth of lessons, practiced incessantly, and now I can shoot 100. So, I will be able to beat Tiger Woods with a few more months of work.

Now, does that mean you cannot bomb the LSAT? Of course not. But, as the saying goes, you can't be more than your genetics say you can be, but through laziness or unpreparedness, you can be a whole lot less. If you have prepped adequately, going from a 151-152 (average) to 170+ (Top 1-2%) is as close to impossible as going from a 100 IQ to a 200 by studying. It won't happen. BUT, there may be a flaw in your preparation that keeps you from your innate 170. So, by all means, try!

I'd agree with all of that. The class for me just buffed me up a little more for the timing. I had 20 people in my class and I never heard of anyone improving 20 points like that. 143-151 seems fair to me though. I took a diagnostic, scored a 155 and then fluctuated on practice tests (timed of course) between 153-159. I ended up with a 157, which was of course right within my band I'd been scoring at. And I worked my ass off learning how to get 4 games done in time. I honestly don't feel like 4 more months of practice tests and studying would have changed much at all. I'd also emphasize Boscos point of anything beyond a 170 being very rare (1-2%) and probably not something reachable by studying.

42
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Should I postpone??!?!!
« on: May 25, 2005, 06:59:05 AM »
It seems impossible to me to guarantee any score. If you wait until you're confident enough to score a 170, you'll probably never take the test. There are too many factors that can make your score fluctuate like that. I'm with celarkobri: consider the shortest band of your scores. That's more likely to be your current potential, not necessarily 169. I mean, you went 163, 166, 169 and felt you were improving after all your hard work, right? When you got the last score (163), you didn't think all your work disappeared, did you? My point is that your highest score on the practice tests are not necessarily what you can or will achieve most of the time.

And remember, postponing your LSAT till October will slow down the application process for you. I couldn't imagine having to wait on those damn scores while my apps were out.

43
Studying for the LSAT / Re: 143, 151, 171+
« on: May 25, 2005, 06:50:32 AM »
I've never understood why people score untimed exams. It doesn't do anything except give you a nearly impossible goal if you can't get the timing down. And it constantly looms over your head as your "potential". When you're working on given sections, at first, of course you can check your answers and see which ones you missed. But to me, the timing is so crucial and difficult that you can only do preptests with a stopwatch (if you're going to time them.)

The test is less about how many you can get right and more about how many more can you get right within the allotted time. Most people taking the test who haven't prepped will not finish their sections. If you've worked on time management, you're bound to do better than all of them because you'll at least have an educated guess on one's you didn't fully complete.

So to answer your question, I'd say maybe. And I'd echo uwofresh: I think 160 is an achievable goal for most if they're dedicated to preparing.

44
Incoming 1Ls / Re: It's final, I'm headed to Samford
« on: May 24, 2005, 02:30:54 PM »
I've already contacted Dax and been PMing Sara, but I wanted to let AuburnChick and blondielaw (and anyone else Samford-bound) that I'll be there with you guys in the fall. I'm going to check out apartments not this weekend but the next. Heidi has been helpful so far. Dax and Sara mentioned a pre-orientation party. Sounds exciting! I'm in a wedding the weekend before orientation, so hopefully I'll be able to attend. It'd be great to at least know a few faces before we start the hardest year of our education. Talking to some future classmates gets me itchin' to get out of Tallahassee and move to beautiful Birmingham. I frequently refer to it as the Ham around here. I think it makes for a good nickname.

By the way, Coldplay is going to be in Birmingham on Friday, Sep 16th. I don't know if you guys are into them or can imagine doing anything but studying at that point, but I'm definitely going. It's the weekend, and it's just one night. Tickets go on sale June 4th if you're interested in going.  8)

45
Incoming 1Ls / Re: What will be your relationship status as a 1L?
« on: May 23, 2005, 01:32:48 PM »
As of dinner time today, I will be single.  I am ending a 2 yr relationship that was not going to make it through law school.  I plan on staying single through school, with the occasional booty call ;)

I'm sorry if I come off as being nosy...but I'm just curious as to why you (or anyone else ending a long relationship before LS) may be ending your relationship. Not that this applies to you in any way, but I feel as though a few people on this forum seem to be throwing away a good thing just because they have this skewed mentality on a long distance relationship. I've heard before "Oh I can't do long distance..or..I wont have time to do a long distance thing and study..or...It won't last another 3 years, etc". I just feel like no matter how difficult it is to deal with LS and a long distance relationship, you don't just throw in the towel when you have something good going. If you don't love that other person, then it's a different story altogether.

Could you please call my ex-girlfriend who broke up with me a month ago for those reasons! See if you can change her mind. I give up. Three hours isn't that far! :P

46
Incoming 1Ls / Re: Tort Violation? You decide
« on: May 23, 2005, 09:47:31 AM »
the bus driver made his worst mistake by walking towards the back of the bus. however, the brown haired kid is definitely responsible for provocation, as he hopped up, said "hey mofo" and walked toward him--what else can be implied by such an action other than the kid is going to attack him?

I disagree. A young kid can't provoke a bus driver (meant to protect kids, I might add) into a choke hold. His action doesn't have to imply anything other than his disrespect. If the kid pulled a knife and walked towards the bus driver, he could reasonably restrain him. But to me, I don't see an assault on the bus driver here by simply name-calling and general lack of respect for authority. And it's certainly not assault to a point that justifies his response. The bus driver's lawyer, if he can get one, better start looking for some mental defect in his client if he has any case at all.

so a kid should be allowed to punch an adult without being restrained? the neck grabbing was out of hand and clearly in a fit of rage.

if the bus driver is proven to be mentally deranged, then the blame falls on the school district or the organization that hired him.

Did the kid punch the bus driver? I'm going on what I remember from seeing it a few times on the news. (Can't view video files here at work.) If the bus driver turned his back and then the kid said something and punched him, then certainly the driver could use reasonable force to restrain him.

Yeah, I think it's clear here that the guy is probably somewhat normal but had enough of those kids acting up and, like you said, had a fit of rage. And, I agree, I'm sure they'll sue him and the bus company or school district. Has bus driving been privitized in most districts nowadays?

47
Incoming 1Ls / Re: Tort Violation? You decide
« on: May 23, 2005, 08:38:55 AM »
the bus driver made his worst mistake by walking towards the back of the bus. however, the brown haired kid is definitely responsible for provocation, as he hopped up, said "hey mofo" and walked toward him--what else can be implied by such an action other than the kid is going to attack him?

I disagree. A young kid can't provoke a bus driver (meant to protect kids, I might add) into a choke hold. His action doesn't have to imply anything other than his disrespect. If the kid pulled a knife and walked towards the bus driver, he could reasonably restrain him. But to me, I don't see an assault on the bus driver here by simply name-calling and general lack of respect for authority. And it's certainly not assault to a point that justifies his response. The bus driver's lawyer, if he can get one, better start looking for some mental defect in his client if he has any case at all.

48
and don't forget about Judge Judy!!! NYLS alum!! Now that should be in the brochure ;-)

Yeah, trust me I looked as soon as I got the brochure. Either she didn't agree to be in the brochure, which seems unlikely, or they don't think she's scholarly enough.

By the way, as soon as I get my scanner working, I'm posting my autographed picture.  ;D

49
Incoming 1Ls / Re: Tort Violation? You decide
« on: May 23, 2005, 07:30:23 AM »
That video reminds me of why I stopped teaching.

The bus driver could be sued for assault, not battery (that's a crime). He'd also lose unless the plaintiff's attorney performed poorly on the LSAT.

Battery is a tort as well as a crime, although most jurisdictions make assault and battery one crime.

50
This was obviously flamebait, I don't know why everyone bit so hard.
Problem with a message board of all future lawyers: overanalysation.  Yeah, it was pure flamebait, but we all read into it and found a legitimate question, until Al just kept getting worse and worse.

Plus, for some of us it's clear that we don't have too many better things to be doing with our time than BBS posting. :)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8