Law Schools To Avoid At All Costs!

[mirra]

Some of you people really are sickening, let me guess you are at or near the bottom of your class so you assume becaquse you can barely get by that those at lower ranked schools (USNews is a farce in its rankings anyway) must be dumber than you.

I am assuming you're placing these people at/near the bottom of their T1/2 class .. I'd like to see you amend your assumption and guess these schmucks to be at/near the bottom of their T4 class ..

[Western_MA_Law]

I'd say the only law schools that should be avoided at all costs are the non-ABA accredited ones.

Some of those are even alright, such as the Massachusetts School of Law.  It isn't accredited because of reasonable philopsophical debates with the ABA, such as the LSAT and the size of their library.

[ellybean909]

Florida Coastal has a high bpr because it is a factory. A for-profit factory. With no respect, hence very little networking potential. You can know your stuff, but no one will care.

State-only accredited schools may do well and have high bpr, and because of their character (defined by focus or library or whatever it may be) still manage to employ well. I'm not saying all or even most non-aba schools can acheive this, but they sometimes do better than aba-schools (part of the reason Golden Gate was placed on probation and other CA schools became accrediated provisionally).

And to the dumba*s that made a comment about ADD at 28 - you can develop it at any age, whether or not you are still being educated. You can get 4.0's and 99% test scores your whole life and then suddenly find yourself having extreme difficulty. Do some research before you assume you know what you're critizing.

[hotdiggity]

And to the dumba*s that made a comment about ADD at 28 - you can develop it at any age, whether or not you are still being educated. You can get 4.0's and 99% test scores your whole life and then suddenly find yourself having extreme difficulty. Do some research before you assume you know what you're critizing.

You have to show symptoms of impulsivity or inattention before the age of 7 for a diagnosis of ADHD.  While an adult can be diagnosed with ADHD the psychologist would have to do a retroactive diagnoses meaning that these symptons were there in childhood but never found out.  A mental health professional is typically reluctant to do so with students who were invloved in formal education due to the fact that someone else should have picked them up.  The issue of adult onset ADHD is a contraversial one right now, with some saying it can be that a person develops a new set they've never had before while another group saying it's not possible.  Currently the DSM still lists this disorder in the subsection Disorders Usually First Diagnosed in Infancy, Childhood or Adolencence. And the APA has not recognized adult onset ADHD to be a valid disorder. The DSM is the publication that all mental disorders available for diagnostic are listed along with the minimum symptoms needed to meet such a diagnostic.  Its published and revised by the American Psychology Association. If it's not listed in the DSM then it basically isn't considered valid science until it gets in there. 

http://www.behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/adhd.htm
if you want to read about ADHD. (formerly called ADD)

[kmpnj]

And to the dumba*s that made a comment about ADD at 28 - you can develop it at any age, whether or not you are still being educated. You can get 4.0's and 99% test scores your whole life and then suddenly find yourself having extreme difficulty. Do some research before you assume you know what you're critizing.

You have to show symptoms of impulsivity or inattention before the age of 7 for a diagnosis of ADHD.  While an adult can be diagnosed with ADHD the psychologist would have to do a retroactive diagnoses meaning that these symptons were there in childhood but never found out.  A mental health professional is typically reluctant to do so with students who were invloved in formal education due to the fact that someone else should have picked them up.  The issue of adult onset ADHD is a contraversial one right now, with some saying it can be that a person develops a new set they've never had before while another group saying it's not possible.  Currently the DSM still lists this disorder in the subsection Disorders Usually First Diagnosed in Infancy, Childhood or Adolencence. And the APA has not recognized adult onset ADHD to be a valid disorder. The DSM is the publication that all mental disorders available for diagnostic are listed along with the minimum symptoms needed to meet such a diagnostic.  Its published and revised by the American Psychology Association. If it's not listed in the DSM then it basically isn't considered valid science until it gets in there. 

http://www.behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/adhd.htm
if you want to read about ADHD. (formerly called ADD)

This is true.  The DSM IV is the standard for psychological disorders.

[da!]

[fani]

FYI, an 95% IQ only translates to an LSAT score of 154. There are many students at T4 that have a higher LSAT score than that.

Unless there's tremendous bundling around the 151 mean, I tend to believe 95% IQ equals 158 LSAT.

[Budlaw]

FYI, an 95% IQ only translates to an LSAT score of 154. There are many students at T4 that have a higher LSAT score than that.

Unless there's tremendous bundling around the 151 mean, I tend to believe 95% IQ equals 158 LSAT.

The LSAT isn't designed to measure IQ. As much as some people would like it to, it just doesn't. If it did then there would be no reason for you to take the LSAT. You could just take an IQ test and use it instead.

[rosanne]

LSAT is essentially an IQ test.

[yn]

I consistently test in the 95th percentile on the IQ test, but that only translated into me landing in the top 95th percentile of a 4th tier law school (did you see what I did there? That was a joke). So, there's gotta be something else going on with me...

Anyway, what I really feel is anger toward myself (I'll get to that) but especially toward the school. After being shown the door I had nothing but time to do a bit of research and came to realize that my fourth-tier law school had a bit of a ponsi scheme going on .. What I suspect is that lower tier schools accept people who don't necessarily demonstrate true aptitude for legal study, nor passage of the bar, in the interest of generating revenue. That revenue is then used toward rank-improving initiatives, such as a new coat of paint, the odd computer, rat-traps or a halfway decent booze-cruise.

These lower tier schools actually set their curves lower than the upper tiers meaning that while a 2.5 may be a C+ at Michigan, a 2.5 is a D+ at Lionel Hutz School of Law. Since Law School is a sum-zero game it is inevitable that, say, 10-20% of the 1L's at a fourth tier school will fall below a certain line and receive a waive good-bye from the dean while he lights a cigar with your money. See, once they have your money they are then concerned with your ability to pass the bar, which is also used in assessing the school's ranking. An academic review committee gets together and makes a simple, cold business decision as to whether or not you are worth their kid's braces. From all I've read and heard, the practice is nowhere near as common in the upper tiers. Once you're there, you're there.

I can't @ # ! * i n g believe I didn't figure this out before it was too late because I've always had an aptitude for that sort of reasoning (I'm applying to business school now, by the way). Everyone told me to not even bother applying if I got below a 160 on the LSAT, and moreover not to let that particular 4th tier law school fleece me the way they did. But of course, every prospective JD candidate has an ego the size of the Atlantic and is not so easily dissuaded by, y'know, reason. What an arrogant little SOB I was.

I'm also angry at myself because, at 28 I've just learned that I'm ADD and Dyslexic. Had I taken the odd pill here or there half of my problems would likely have been ameliorated. The other half of my problems is caused by the fact that I'm a tremendous not so nice person, but Merk has yet to develop medication for that ...

Posted by: st96f49t | October 21, 2005 at 02:38 PM

http://civpro.blogs.com/civil_procedure/2004/01/first_semester_.html