U.S. News may go under

[EarlCat]

(for top GPA's and LSAT's that don't = top talent in all cases)

Just food for thought...
While high LSAT/GPA doesn't necessarily mean top talent, shouldn't the top talent be able to have a high LSAT/GPA?

[Netopalis]

Not necessarily.  One of the most successful public defenders in my hometown had a 142 LSAT and attended Cooley.

[goaliechica]

(for top GPA's and LSAT's that don't = top talent in all cases)

Just food for thought...
While high LSAT/GPA doesn't necessarily mean top talent, shouldn't the top talent be able to have a high LSAT/GPA?

Eh I think the idea is that there are lots of incredibly smart people who for whatever reason don't have high LSAT scores or GPAs. And that not everyone with a high LSAT score and/or GPA is top talent. Argue 'til the cows come home (and I think people have done that year after year, in thread after thread) about exactly how much correlation there is, but there are always examples of basically incompetent people with good numbers and brilliant people with bad numbers. Particularly if you leave the more controversial LSAT out of it and just look at GPA. It doesn't take much effort to see how someone very talented could end up with a sub-par GPA for all kinds of reasons and still be "top talent" (whatever that means) on down the road. But I think it holds true for LSAT, as well (that there are always some brilliant people with lower LSAT scores and some not-so-brilliant people with high LSAT scores).

[Netopalis]

Personally, I think that a better way to measure the ability of incoming students would be the writing of an argumentative essay....While it's not neat enough to include numbers, it does have some strong points.  It allows for more tailored responses to students and a more solid idea of who the person is individually.  These essays could be written in an LSAT-like setting, where the topic would be given to the writers that day and given a limited amount of time to write, to eliminate cheating.

[LawDog3]

Personally, I think that a better way to measure the ability of incoming students would be the writing of an argumentative essay....While it's not neat enough to include numbers, it does have some strong points.  It allows for more tailored responses to students and a more solid idea of who the person is individually.  These essays could be written in an LSAT-like setting, where the topic would be given to the writers that day and given a limited amount of time to write, to eliminate cheating.

+1! Great idea.

[LawDog3]

(for top GPA's and LSAT's that don't = top talent in all cases)

Just food for thought...
While high LSAT/GPA doesn't necessarily mean top talent, shouldn't the top talent be able to have a high LSAT/GPA?

Eh I think the idea is that there are lots of incredibly smart people who for whatever reason don't have high LSAT scores or GPAs. And that not everyone with a high LSAT score and/or GPA is top talent. Argue 'til the cows come home (and I think people have done that year after year, in thread after thread) about exactly how much correlation there is, but there are always examples of basically incompetent people with good numbers and brilliant people with bad numbers. Particularly if you leave the more controversial LSAT out of it and just look at GPA. It doesn't take much effort to see how someone very talented could end up with a sub-par GPA for all kinds of reasons and still be "top talent" (whatever that means) on down the road. But I think it holds true for LSAT, as well (that there are always some brilliant people with lower LSAT scores and some not-so-brilliant people with high LSAT scores).

yeah. It's funny...the LSAT really is another language. And some people really just don't get it right away. Some people think it's a worthless exercise and talk themselves out of really going for it. I can imagine this happens when they are sitting in the real test. That was me. I was thinking, "Why do I have to even do this shyt?" I resented it and my first score showed it.

Also think about this logic: the fact someone doesn't do something is not proof that they cannot...even when they continue not to do it. Larry Bird could dunk a basketball, but he probably did it in three games over his whole career. I'm sure that, with a little more effort, Bill Clionton could have stopped chasing skirts, but he didn't.

[LawDog3]

Does anyobody know how decisions are going? Schools seem to be gaming the rankings this year even more. I have been told by some schools that I likely will not get a decision until summer. They all put me on "hold", and that's foul. I might be able to fall back on NULaw, but it's still bothersome. That tells me that the schools want a look at their entire pools before deciding. So we are all getting screwed. I hope USN does go under, just so we can breathe for a minute.

[nsync]

(for top GPA's and LSAT's that don't = top talent in all cases)

Just food for thought...
While high LSAT/GPA doesn't necessarily mean top talent, shouldn't the top talent be able to have a high LSAT/GPA?

There's an obvious correlation, but the cause/ effect appears to be backwards.  Rankings should be based on the more substantive matters: academe and industry.  Namely the quality of professors and employment opportunities.  Students go to law school to learn something, and this something they learn is valued by law firms and law schools, enough to pay for at least.  It's the professors who control and are the source of this 'something' and what law firms are willing to employ and build on.  This should be what attracts the top talent; not LSAT nor GPA. 

Even those 0Ls with the highest GPAs and LSATs know relatively little more than those with the lowest LSAT and GPAs, and it appears US news believes that being in the company of the highest performing know-nothings is similarly significant for rankings than those who know something (professors, law firms).

[EarlCat]

(for top GPA's and LSAT's that don't = top talent in all cases)

Just food for thought...
While high LSAT/GPA doesn't necessarily mean top talent, shouldn't the top talent be able to have a high LSAT/GPA?

Eh I think the idea is that there are lots of incredibly smart people who for whatever reason don't have high LSAT scores or GPAs.

Reread my post.  I asked whether they should be able to have a high LSAT/GPA.

[EarlCat]

Personally, I think that a better way to measure the ability of incoming students would be the writing of an argumentative essay....While it's not neat enough to include numbers, it does have some strong points.  It allows for more tailored responses to students and a more solid idea of who the person is individually.  These essays could be written in an LSAT-like setting, where the topic would be given to the writers that day and given a limited amount of time to write, to eliminate cheating.