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.
Topics - Denny Crane
« on: February 05, 2006, 06:26:10 AM »
According to the Kaplan podcast released after the February LSAT, the February administration of the test has traditionally been the 'experimental' test where they really try out questions they're considering for future exams. It's for this reason that the February LSAT is not included in any Real LSAT books (I was wondering about this myself before taking the test, and found out the reason from the podcast).
I'm hoping that the highly experimental nature of the Feb LSAT translates into a favorable scale. Can anyone shed more light on this?
To get the podcast it's best to use iTunes and search for it. The Kaplan website has yet to update and include the podcast, but I imagine it will be there on Monday (the podcast for the Feb. LSAT IS available on iTunes now though).http://www.kaptest.com/repository/templates/ArticleInitDroplet.jhtml;jsessionid=WGXUHIAV2QO2XLA3AQJHBOFMDUCBG2HB?_relPath=/repository/content/Law/Learn_About_the_LSAT/Prepare/LSAT-podcast-archive.html
« on: January 29, 2006, 01:01:31 PM »
I'm just coming off an illness which incapacitated me for the last few days, which has kind of screwed me over in terms of doing some last minute brush-up studying for the LSAT, as now I have spend the week catching up on a lot of missed work. I was thinking of still taking it on Saturday and cancelling my score if worst comes to worst. My question is, do adcomms care if you cancelled a score? I know they see on your score sheet that you cancelled a score, but do they really care? I know in the Montaulk book they discuss this, but I don't have mine with me right now (I'm studying abroad). If anyone knows the answer, please share, thanks!
« on: January 06, 2006, 08:42:09 PM »
This is perhaps the best thing I've ever heard any law school tell their prospective applicants:
"We only admit those students who, regardless of their quite varied political, spiritual, cultural or social backgrounds, have demonstrated a commitment to progressive social change, have an awareness of working class issues and will employ the skills gained at the school to further these goals in their own way. Thus, if you want to be a prosecutor or a corporate attorney, don't waste our time applying; there are plenty of other schools out there for you!"
If only other (read: better) law schools could be as explicit about what they're looking for in prospective applicants.
« on: December 19, 2005, 08:52:09 AM »
Even though I'm not applying until the Fall '06 cycle, I've been browsing through some law school's applications. It seems that many schools (Chicago for one, and I think Columbia, among some others) don't provide a space to list your extracurricular involvement. They do ask for resumes, and I guess that's the most appropriate space to list your EC's, but does the fact that they don't explicitly ask you about them mean that they are of relatively little importance? Of course, LSAT and GPA reign supreme, but (supposedly) EC's matter a lot too (or so say reps from law schools). Anyone have any thoughts on this?
« on: December 15, 2005, 11:16:35 AM »
For those of you who have taken the Testmasters course and completed it:
I took the late summer course this past summer, but was unable to attend the last two lessons. I just went back to those two lessons on my own to begin my reintroduction into studying for the LSAT before February. Does anyone know if the Logic Games in the last two lessons were supposed to be extra difficult or tricky? I'm trying to see if they were given as examples of difficult questions or if I'm just rusty. I was able to do most of them quite well, but it took longer than it did during my last diagnostic, where I finished the games section with over 10 minutes to spare. Any insight would help, thanks.
« on: September 24, 2005, 03:03:36 PM »
And here begins the obligatory thread on the most recent diag. Thoughts/Opinions/Complaints? I am very optimistic about my performance this time around, unlike diag 3 where I knew if it had been a real test, I would have cancelled my score. This marks the first time where I actually finished a logic games section that counted toward the score with time to spare. In fact, I had 15 minutes left by the time I got to the last game, which in my opinion was a female dog, but with my extra time I was able to confidently answer each question. I thought the logical reasoning sections were rough (ALL THREE OF THEM IN A ROW!!!), but that the reading comp was reasonably easy. The last RC passage was a doozy, but it certainly wasn't like the Puerto-Rican code switching passage of diag 3. Anyway, I hope people did as well as they hoped to do, if not even better. Also, I hope everyone gets their scores within a reasonable time frame (and not on Sunday night like I and a few others did).
« on: September 23, 2005, 02:31:36 PM »
I was just doing the logic games section for the October 2004 LSAT, and I would have gotten a perfect score on this section had I not screwed up on the last game. I know I missed at least one key deduction, but I'm not sure what it is. Can someone please diagram the game fully so that I can see where I missed out? Thanks, the game is recreated below:
Each of a five-day work week (Monday through Friday), Anastasia parks for the entire day in one of three downtown parking lots - X, Y, and Z. One of the lots costs $10 for the day, another costs $12, and the other costs $15. Anastasia parks in each of the three lots at least once during her workweek. The following conditions must apply:
- On Thursday, Anastasia parks in the $15 lot.
- Lot X costs more than lot Z.
- The lot Anastasia parks in on Wednesday costs more than the one she parks in on Friday.
- Anastasia parks in lot Z on more days of the workweek than she parks in lot X.
Thanks ahead of time.
« on: September 14, 2005, 10:29:14 AM »
So as I write this post, Fernando Ferrer is just hundreths of a percentage of votes from being declared the winner of the NYC Democratic primary for the mayoral race. Anthony Weiner has 29%, and Virginia Fields and Gifford Miller have dropped out of the race. My question to you is: Does any of this matter? Bloomberg's ratings are very high, and the
Democrats all seem weak. I am a registered independent (if I were to join a party, it would most likely be the Republican party, because being able to vote in Republican primaries is more important to me than voting in Democratic primaries, plus I generally lean toward classical liberalism politically). However, my parents are both registered Democrats, but haven't voted for a Democrat for the Mayoral race in the last 12 years (not since Dinkins). They didn't vote for any candidates in the primary yesterday because they knew they were going to vote for Bloomberg regardless of who the Democratic opponent would be. This kind of thought seems prevelant among many NYC Democrats. Thoughts? Opinions?
« on: September 14, 2005, 10:22:59 AM »
So despite my fervent opposition, if not unabashed hatred, towards the Law Firm, last night I found myself watching it again on Bravo. I hate reality TV for sucking me in, and I hate myself for allowing myself to be sucked in. Having said that:
Oh my god, what the hell was up with those lawyers yesterday? Worst closing argument I have ever had the misfortune to hear. I may end up just talking about this myself, because I'm not sure there are many of you out there who saw yesterday's episode, or at least are not shameless enough to admit it.
« on: September 08, 2005, 12:09:42 PM »
Last night I awoke in a semi-conscious state with thoughts that I could not fall back asleep until I fulfilled some sort of logical sequence. Because a logical premise in the stimulus was not fulfilled in the answer choice, it meant that I could not fall back asleep (something like Sleep --> A, A --> B, B --> C, but I did not have C, which meant I could not have Sleep. It took what felt like a few minutes to snap out of this state and realize that I could fall back asleep without any interference from missing premises. It sucked, thought I should share.