People That Apply to T14s With Sub 150 LSATs Should Be SHOT.

[StevePirates]

Another thing that a lot of people seem to overlook is financial reasons for going to a T4 school.  I got into a top tier school, and my safety school.  I had a 167 LSAT, so I wasn't limited in my admissions prospects. I chose to attend my safety school since they loaded me up with enough scholarships that I'll graduate debt free. 

I personally have no interest in BigLaw, transactional law is boring, and I have a beautiful fiance who I would hate to abandon just to suck up to some partner.  I want to be a prosecutor, and the placement rate of my school to the local DA is pretty high.  A big difference between the higher ranked schools is national reputation.  A lot of the lower ranked schools are perfectly fine, and the local hiring partners and DA/PD offices know that.  Some of the lower tier schools suck, sure.  But the best indicator of how a T3 or T4 stacks up is local regard.  There are two T4 schools in my city, one has a good local reputation, the other doesn't.  But to anyone on the other side of the nation, they probably seem identical.

I also agree with mgd83, I sincerely hope that my classmates are not cut from the same cloth as many of the posters on this board.  Based on some of the opinions expressed by some members of this board, I can see why the public at large has so many negative stereotypes of attorneys.
 

This thread bemuses me greatly....Erapit, why are you so opinionated about who should or should not become an attorney? A T3 or T4 might be restricted in their job options, but your assumption that they shouldn't be practicing law based on their LSAT is elitist, and your entire arguement is based on false information. In fact, graduates of these lesser schools ban together, creating a strong network. The LSAT is a potential measurement of ones future success in law school, used by schools to weigh the merits of various candidates. The LSAT was never meant to "weed" out incompentents, though you are intent on viewing it in this manner. Erapit, if you are bound for glory, why do you care about the students at Cooley or Wiedmer? A mediocre lawyer isn't going to kill anybody. Inreality, anyone who has invested in a JD program regardless of rank will find a job as attorney. Just look at the numbers.

[kmpnj]

All of this talk about T14s and T3s or 4s, at the end of the day, is a big bunch of crap.  People go to different schools for a variety of reasons.  I went to a T4, admittedly, because its where I got in.  However, I know have the GPA to go pretty much anywhere I would want to, with the exception of Penn (and, really, who wants to hang out for two years in Baghdad West anyway).  But, for the kind of law I want to do, it makes no sense for me to transfer.  The bottom line is that I love my school, have received an excellent education and feel qualified to compete in court with my colleagues from the other, bigger name schools.  I also believe in our new dean.  The changes she has implemented at our school, in just her first year, have been remarkable.  Finally, I do believe that there is such a thing as loyalty.  Widener took a chance on me, that my LSAT wasn't a true indication of my ability.  Now that I have achieved a degree of academic success, it would just be disrespectful and disloyal to go to a bigger name school, especially when the quality of education at Widener is just as high.

As for not being able to find a job, this summer, as a first year, I had offers from 5 different agencies, including the DE Dept. of Justice (their AGs office) where I was one of only three out of state people offered a position with that agency.  In addition, I have had the opportunity, through my 'rinky-dink' T4 law school to network with judges, politicians and various other members of the Philadelphia, New Jersey and Delaware Legal communities, all of whom have encouraged me to come and see them if I'd like to work for them.  Ultimately, I was able to choose the agency that fit best for me and what I wanted to accomplish.  I'm at an agency that, as long as I do a decent job, I will probably be invited back.  When I'm invited back next summer, I will get to argue domestic violence hearings, juvenile hearings and arraignments.  The summer program at the prosecutor's office where I'll be working is the feeder program through which they hire their attorneys.  So, it would seem that I have an inside track on becoming a prosecutor immediately upon graduation.  Seems as though going to a T4 hasn't really hurt me too much.

[fire]

Don't pay attention to erapitt, he's fbi/cia *&^%

[nowako21]

Clearly the OP, with a name like "RapSkeletor" and claiming that people should be shot over their LSAT score, is both very mature, and has to put others down because he was tormented by others over his inadequacies all of his life and has to make up for it on a law school discussion board.

[Flashman]

Are you people seious?

I guess its reasonable if you're a URM, but even that's stretching it. Sub 150s should be eliminated altogether from the legal profession. HTH

So should people who can't spell "serious."

[philosophia]

Amusing.      

[..................................1]

I guess I am in this category because I have a test score in the low 150's.  The funny thing is that I was admitted to 2 out of 4 T14 schools that I applied to.  Another funny thing is that I may actually attend one of those 2 schools.  What happens when a person like me goes to a T14 and out performs many of those who agree with the subject of this thread?  I am sure this happens all the time.

[..................................1]

My best advice is to really engage in a tough self-analysis and inward reflection. Opportunities are generally better at the T14, but T14 schools do occasionally admit students with no real chance for success. Some of these folks really would be better off being at the top of their class somewhere else.

Rather than going on a irrelevant tangent, I will just make two points:

1. LSAT score is not a accurate indicator/measure of an individual's "real chance for success." Grades and practical experience provide a stronger argument for an individual's ability to succeed in law school than does a Saturday morning standardized test score.

2. T14 Schools do admit applicants with LSAT scores under their 25 percentile; however, to state that T14 schools occasionally admit applicants with "no real chance for success" is a bit far-fetched, or rather absurd.

**Oh and for the record...get amiurpoppa a high priced defense attorney because he murdered this thread.   

[..................................1]

The site will not allow me to quote your comments so, Tm.+ Yellow:

I honestly do not think I was telling anyone how to succeed in law school.  I was simply making the assertion** that one score cannot accurately assess an individual's potential to succeed in law school.

I never said practical experience could help you in law school; however, practical experience can reveal a lot about an individual's perspective and how they will contribute to the diversity of an incoming class.
Grades and practical experience can also reveal much about an individual’s academic ability(reading/writing/analysis), critical thinking ability, and a individual’s ability to handle pressure or adversity. 

Yellow, please realize that you were not the only person in America who took courses in undergrad that were primarily Socratic method/critical thinking, which means that other students earned high ranks in classes that “help them the most in law school.”  Thank you for contributing to my argument. 

If one's academic or professional experiences have proven their ability to read, write, analyze, and comprehend complex material, one's LSAT score is, and should be less significant. 

Yes, I am a 0L so please... teach me more.

[..................................1]

I understand exactly what you are saying. However, I personally could careless about the disparity of LSAT scores in my incoming class because it will be irrelevant when orientation starts.

The LSAT did not test our ability to research, or score our ability to critically analyze a passage and write a compelling argument identifying the issues in the passage.  I do not necessarily agree that because one scored a 150 or even sub 150, he or she will be significantly intellectually inferior to one who scores a 176.  It just means that the 150 will be significantly inferior to the 176 on this particular standardized test.  One who scores a 176 has only exhibited that he or she can do exceptionally well on a standardized test. Have you taken a standardized test throughout your law school experience?  I personally would not think so.  As you said before, my law school success will be measured by my performance relative to other students in the class.  My performance, meaning how well I comprehend and analyze the concepts learned in class lectures & textbook readings, and transcribe/apply those concepts to actual exams well enough to compete with you.  

I do realize that some are naturally smarter/more intelligent than others; however, regardless of LSAT score (148- 176), I do not believe that anyone should question their ability to learn, comprehend concepts, and successfully compete with others who are learning the same material.  But I guess that's all personal preference.  Now with that said, I do believe that one with low test scores has to be realistic about their aspirations.  There is a big difference between competing with students at Harvard and competing with students at Duke.

The professional experience portion of my post was more geared towards the selection process, not grading while in law school.