Quote from: MC on March 10, 2005, 02:08:09 PMQuote from: eileen2004 on March 10, 2005, 01:57:45 PMIn response to the OP: Your LSAT is 4-5 points below the 25% for the schools that rejected you. Get over yourself. Hey, how'd you find that out?Ooooooooo .... Magic.
Quote from: eileen2004 on March 10, 2005, 01:57:45 PMIn response to the OP: Your LSAT is 4-5 points below the 25% for the schools that rejected you. Get over yourself. Hey, how'd you find that out?
In response to the OP: Your LSAT is 4-5 points below the 25% for the schools that rejected you. Get over yourself.
I was naive in that by soft factors they meant race.
Lastly, I really do not understand why there are specific clubs for every race but white.
I did not create a LSN spot and am reluctant to disclose much personal info due to privacy concerns. But let's put it this way, I finished my bachelor's and masters degrees in under four years total while working 30-60 hours per week, and it just gets more impressive from there. I am also not talking about one school in general but law schools overall. I looked at the LSN data for a bunch of tier 1 schools from this year and previous years and reached the result. You can try this yourself, I just picked 2 schools at random Stanford and Fordham, I sorted them by LSAT score and then looked at the people that had the lowest LSAT score. Every single person that was in the bottom few slots in terms of LSAT score was an URM. I am sorry but I don't understand how somebody with a 2. somthing GPA and 150 something LSAT score is going to trump my application based on merits. I am not being arrogant I am being realistic. If you have a 2. something GPA how in the world are you going to get a good job to brag about in your application or be able to write a good essay for that matter. And what professor is going to write a C student a good recommendation. I would understand if it was one person and one school, perhaps they did have a great application. But it is many people at many schools.
I respectfully disagree on the fact that the LSN is not an accurate representation. It is a mere sampling of the people that have applied to law school, and yes it is probable that the sample has people that have slightly higher stats that the average applicant pool (which definitely does not damage my inital argument) I would venture to say that the data on LSN is relatively accurate, it is definitely consistent (even with past years). A basic stats class will tell you LSN is more accurate than most people give it credit. (Note that I am not blind in that I do realize that some people with too much time on their hands may make fictious posts of stats). Yet, I have been able to make relatively accurate forecasts about timing and decisions by utlizing LSN.
Regarding my initial comment about my observation that almost every person that was a URM has lower numbers. Is this due to a mere correlation, or a cause-effect-relationship? It would be naive to believe that these application are "stronger" than the other applicants. For the people that have questioned my major, personal statement, etc. believe me none of these areas were weak. My application was extremely strong with some pretty prestigious jobs, extracurriculars, and volunteer work. (Yes my LSAT score was slightly low, but all these schools I applied to claimed they look beyond the LSAT score to "soft" factors and I figured that I would be a perfect candidate to be admitted on that basis). I was naive in that by soft factors they meant race.