too much worrying?

[plumbert]

I feel bad for those who try desperately to stay in law school but fail.  However, I can't help but wonder:  how the hell is it possible to get under a 2.0 in law school? 

By being in law school. The strict curve mandates this.

Exactly. The curves all but require sub-2.0 GPAs. A set percentage of students at many schools (including my own) is *required* to get under a 2.0 in any given class, and as a result, some number of those students will necessarily get below a 2.0 GPA overall. No matter how hard they worked or didn't work. In effect, *somebody* must fail out.

[unlvcrjchick]

Strict curve or no strict curve...one must be awfully slow to get a "required" GPA of under 2.0.  In actuality, I don't believe those people who say they studied but got bad grades:  I think they did not do jack (meaning they did not even read the cases, nor did they open up a commercial outline or peruse canned briefs).

Maybe I'm adept at taking law-school exams, I don't know.  But I like to think of it in terms of a mystery:  there are certain things that cannot be explained, and this is one of them.

[zemog]

unlvcrjchick, I don't understand how you find it hard that a person can fail at something. You must be young with hardly any life experiences or just a damn idiot.  Even if a person tries at something as hard as they can, there's always a possibility that they will not succeed. 

If a person trains hard for a marathon, there's still a chance he may not finish.  If a person tries hard to complete a work project, he may not complete it. As goes with law school or any other school.

Hard work doesn't necessarily equal success.

[unlvcrjchick]

Cheap shot, cheap shot.  Seems to me that you're the idiot for resorting to such ad-hominem tactics. And, isn't resorting to such ridiculous tactics the sign of one who lacks life experience?

Yes, I am young (I'll be 25 this month)...so does that automatically make me (and most of the people on this board, for that matter, since most law students are not old and decrepit) an idiot? I'll tell you, I may be young, but I've been through enough BS in my life to be able to write an anthology on how to survive normal, everyday life.  And I happen to go to law school, work a full-time stressful job, AND take care of a sick relative.  So, you're the idiot for judging someone you've never even met.  Also, I'm betting that you're the one who lowered my reputation score (ooh, how awful, this is a blow from which I may never recover).  If it took you this long (I'm assuming longer than 25 years) to develop such reasoning skills and maturity, then you're way behind me in this regard.

Yes, I find it absolutely mind-boggling that someone who tries his or her d**mndest can fail while someone like myself, who hardly did *&^%, can succeed.  One would think that if one has passion for something, that person should at LEAST obtain a D grade!

I would be the first to agree with you on the obvious truism you condescendingly articulated (namely that"hard work doesn't necessarily equal success").  However, would you mind telling me how someone can make the Dean's List without even trying?  That was all I asked earlier, and you automatically resorted to name-calling. 

Furthermore, how do you define success in the first place?  Is success making the top 1/3rd of your class, or does it equate to just passing by the skin of your teeth?  I was talking about FAILING out of law school, namely how is it possible for one to put in innumerable study hours only to get kicked out of law school?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but most law schools will NOT kick you out unless you score under a 2.5 or 2.0 GPA.  True, there are some Tier 1 schools that will kick a certain percentage of the class out, but those schools are the vast minority (I attend a Tier 1 school, and one will not be kicked out unless that person scores under a 2.0 GPA for 2 consecutive semesters) If you can't earn this bare-minimum GPA, then chances are that you don't BELONG in law school and I sure as hell wouldn't want to see you representing real-life people with real-life significant problems.

In conclusion, I certainly hope you don't become a lawyer, for it is obvious to me that you would rely upon personal attacks ("ooh, my opposing counsel is a jerk, therefore I should win") as opposed to sound legal arguments. 

[plumbert]

Okay--you get good grades in law school without even trying, and okay, you don't understand how somebody could get a poor grade under the forced curves that *mandate* poor grades for a pre-set percentage of all students at many schools. Can we move on?

[unlvcrjchick]

I wanted to move on, until that poster personally attacked me, so I wasn't going to let that go without posting a response.

Second, I DO understand that the strict curve results in some students receiving poor grades.  However, poor grades can still mean passing, and not failing out of law school. 

Nevermind, I'll just drop it.  I thought there was nothing wrong with engaging in an intelligent discourse on this board, but apparently I was wrong.

[ray7]

If the mandatory curve exists for each class, in order for someone to be below the required OVERALL GPA, that person would have to be at the bottom of the curve for almost every class, correct?

Just trying to understand it all.

[zemog]

unlvcrjchick, I don't understand how you find it hard that a person can fail at something. You must be young with hardly any life experiences or just a d**mn idiot.  Even if a person tries at something as hard as they can, there's always a possibility that they will not succeed. 
 
 If a person trains hard for a marathon, there's still a chance he may not finish.  If a person tries hard to complete a work project, he may not complete it. As goes with law school or any other school.
 
 Hard work doesn't necessarily equal success.
 
 

Cheap shot, cheap shot.  Seems to me that you're the idiot for resorting to such ad-hominem tactics. And, isn't resorting to such ridiculous tactics the sign of one who lacks life experience?

Yes, I am young (I'll be 25 this month)...so does that automatically make me (and most of the people on this board, for that matter, since most law students are not old and decrepit) an idiot? I'll tell you, I may be young, but I've been through enough BS in my life to be able to write an anthology on how to survive normal, everyday life.  And I happen to go to law school, work a full-time stressful job, AND take care of a sick relative.  So, you're the idiot for judging someone you've never even met.  Also, I'm betting that you're the one who lowered my reputation score (ooh, how awful, this is a blow from which I may never recover).  If it took you this long (I'm assuming longer than 25 years) to develop such reasoning skills and maturity, then you're way behind me in this regard.

Yes, I find it absolutely mind-boggling that someone who tries his or her d**mndest can fail while someone like myself, who hardly did *&^%, can succeed.  One would think that if one has passion for something, that person should at LEAST obtain a D grade!

I would be the first to agree with you on the obvious truism you condescendingly articulated (namely that"hard work doesn't necessarily equal success").  However, would you mind telling me how someone can make the Dean's List without even trying?  That was all I asked earlier, and you automatically resorted to name-calling. 

Furthermore, how do you define success in the first place?  Is success making the top 1/3rd of your class, or does it equate to just passing by the skin of your teeth?  I was talking about FAILING out of law school, namely how is it possible for one to put in innumerable study hours only to get kicked out of law school?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but most law schools will NOT kick you out unless you score under a 2.5 or 2.0 GPA.  True, there are some Tier 1 schools that will kick a certain percentage of the class out, but those schools are the vast minority (I attend a Tier 1 school, and one will not be kicked out unless that person scores under a 2.0 GPA for 2 consecutive semesters) If you can't earn this bare-minimum GPA, then chances are that you don't BELONG in law school and I sure as hell wouldn't want to see you representing real-life people with real-life significant problems.

In conclusion, I certainly hope you don't become a lawyer, for it is obvious to me that you would rely upon personal attacks ("ooh, my opposing counsel is a jerk, therefore I should win") as opposed to sound legal arguments. 

[zemog]

More or less, this is a correct assumption.  But of course, they could do well in one class or even several, but so bad in the others, that the ones he/she did bad in pulls the overall GPA below the requirement.  So, it's not necessarily that they had to do poorly in every class.

If the mandatory curve exists for each class, in order for someone to be below the required OVERALL GPA, that person would have to be at the bottom of the curve for almost every class, correct?

Just trying to understand it all.