Deleted

[borderlaw]

There is a lot of truth to this post. Law Schools should definitely be more forthright about the actual magnitude of LSAT and GPA versus soft factors.
 

[Painting101]

I don't mean to sound like a jerk when I say this, but the real question is why didn't you do better on the LSAT?

It is curious when this statement is made, as if everyone can get a 170 or above on the LSAT. Isn't 170 and above the 99th percentile? Therefore, isn't it a literal impossibility for more than 1% of those who take the test to score above 170? No matter how hard you study, no matter what you do, only 1/100 who take the test will get a 170. It just doesn't happen for 99 percent of us.

Actually, you could have 100 people out of 100 get above 170 on the test.  It just depends on your sample really.  That's like saying only one of two spins at roullette can be red.

Anyway, just do what I did: tell the adcomms that your a left-handed, jewish, african american bisexual...

[InVinoVeritas]

every admissions person i've spoken with has been forthright about the importance of GPA and LSAT scores.  if anyone has stories about disingenous/misleading adcomms, spill!

[V00Jeff]

Yeah, everyone can't get above a 170 on the LSAT.  I truly do believe, though, that most smart people can get above a 170 if they study their butts off.  I say this because that is what happened to me

So "most smart people" can get above a 170 if they try hard enough and you base that on your own experience? LOL.

ok man whatever you say.

Yeah, you're right.  I've seen the error of my ways.  Only I'm smart enough to get above a 170.  No one else, no matter how hard they try, will ever do well on the LSAT or at life in general.   

[SleepyGuyYawn]

In addition, my educational background and jobs were different from 99% of the other applicants.

Yea, I'm not sure you're as rare as you think... 99% of all applicants?  The average person who gets into YHS isn't 22 -- most have worked (many doing things like working as investment bankers or chemical engineers or for the UN...) or have graduate degrees (PhD's from top universities, for example). 

CPA/JDs area rare species.

Hmmm... Perhaps.  But that it's rare doesn't necessarily mean it's especially desirable.  I remember talking to a former roommate who was going to Michigan's law school at the time (who now is an associate at Cravath) about Tax law.  He said that most presigious law firms see CPAs as undesirable b/c they see CPAs as people who do taxes.  And tax lawyers, particularly the ones who work in BIGLAW, do something that's highly intellectual.  Not that getting to be a CPA is easy, but it's not in the same vein as what a tax attorney at a large firm would be doing.   

Anyhow, a CPA would probably be desirable to a small or medium sized law firm, or an accounting firm, but that's not where people who go to top ten schools generally work after graduation. 

(which wasn't too low as it did qualify me for Mensa) and I might have a shot at an ivy school. 

Hmmm... I hate to say it, but Mensa allows people to qualify for it with the LSAT because they want members... Members equal money for their organization.  I personally think Mensa is a pretty pretentious thing to belong to...

Not at all.  I am absolutely convinced that all these schools look at is LSAT score and race. 

All they look at?  I don't see somebody with a B average going to Harvard.  Sorry.  You have to have it all.  You have to have an incredible background, fantastic soft factors, a great LSAT, and top grades to get into a top law school. 

And race?  Okay, I'm not a huge fan of affirmative action myself.  But don't try to blame affirmative action on the fact that you can't get into Harvard.  With or without AA, a 164 isn't going to get you into a top law school.  Maybe that's unfair, but it's true.  Race isn't the factor here. 

I wasted all this money applying to schools naively thinking maybe they really do look at soft factors. 

I think you should have done a little outside research.  I mean, come on... You're not a little kid here.  Of course Harvard says soft factors matter.  And they do -- they actually do.  But I think you need to get your head around the fact that your soft factors aren't extraordinary.  They're very good, but not extraordinary.  And you really need it all to get into HYSCC.  Even if the LSAT counted for half as much as it did, you'd probably not get into HYSCC -- b/c they have so many applicants apply with everything you have PLUS a great LSAT.  So why shouldn't they let that person in? 

The bottom line is that you're in a few law schools -- probably very good schools.  So stop sweating this and enjoy the fact that you're going to law school.  That's a great thing -- something to be really proud of.  And you did fansastic on the LSAT and you have wonderful grades.  Good for you.

Sorry about the harsh tone in this message.  But I just get tired of people who're in fantastic situations complaining and complaining. Six years ago I barely graduated from high school (I happened to go to college and did really well and transferred into Michigan).  But if you would have told me then that I'd be going to Pitt's law school next year, I'd have laughed in your face.  I'm estatic with my situation.  Sure it isn't Harvard or Cornell.  But it's all about perspective. 

[dbgirl]

I am one of those self-centered types who truly can't understand why anyone would reject me from anything. I think I'm pretty damn special.

But the bottom line is I really DON'T know who my competition is. Maybe for whatever I have that is special, there is another person out there who is special in the same way, only better. I would like to think that is impossible, but I really just don't know.

[ScurvyWench]

There is a lot of truth to this post. Law Schools should definitely be more forthright about the actual magnitude of LSAT and GPA versus soft factors.
 

I think law schools are pretty straight forward. They allow you to calculate an index number and then tell you the range they accept. Shows how much they weight the factors. What more is needed?

When I tried to assign a numerical value to my soft factors so that I could calculate it on Chiashu. I added 1/8 to 1/4 (at most) point to my LSAT for each soft factor. It brought me up to about a 159. See if that theory works for you.

[underwhelm]

Six years ago I barely graduated from high school (I happened to go to college and did really well and transferred into Michigan).  But if you would have told me then that I'd be going to Pitt's law school next year, I'd have laughed in your face.  I'm estatic with my situation.  Sure it isn't Harvard or Cornell.  But it's all about perspective. 

Yes. I'm lucky to have gone to college at all, and now I could go to law school for free? It's like I'm dreaming.

[MSUDuster]

Without making a qualification as to how "smart" someone is. I highly doubt a LSAT test would qualify someone for admission into MENSA. To be offered admittance to MENSA you must score in the top 98% of a certified IQ test. The lsat, used as a barometer for law school, would probably not qualify as an IQ test since it doesn't test many things that an IQ test does. IE: Spatial reasoning, memory, etc.

There is a list of acceptable tests somewhere, you can contact MENSA to get them I'm sure.

>SleepyGuyYawn
How do you know LSAT qualifies people for MENSA?

[jacy85]

The LSAT does, in fact, qualify people for Mensa.  If you'd taken the 2 seconds to google it, you'd know.

http://www.us.mensa.org/join_mensa/testscores.php3