Too Many Lawyers

[cooleylawstudent]

first, you clearly dont see how grades work(but I made up my own scale......) the same percent on the same identical test can be an A in one group and a D in the next.

As for raw percents, how is making a 160 the same as a 180 fair to the higher score and not giving an unfair advantage to the 160?

First, get it out of your head of a 73% being a D. It is only a D on a 5 GPA scale, not a 4,0 GAP scale. To fix it for you so you will understand better, 73% (on 4.0 scale), 83% (on a 5.0 scale). I am using my own scale of grading, not your grade scale. But, to make it even more easier, all people taking an LSAT need to get a 160 or better to be admitted into law school. You got a 159? Failed.

[sonofapickle]

Grades are much different in my state than yours obviously. Your state has a different way of grading from my own. That person on the test either passed or failed. The score will still be reported but not many people will be passing such a test. Whether it is fair or not is up to you as the current tests aren't fair at all because you have a bunch of people taking them and doing just enough to get into school and overcrowding the market for law students.

What is more fair to you: A) the current LSAT where anyone can become a lawyer, or B), a future LSAT where only a fraction, 20 percent of people, passing can become lawyers. Your line of thought is contradicts itself. You say people taking the test now is fair as there is not a pass or fail cap, but a pass or fail cap is like communism... The pass or fail cap limits the people gaining entrance to law school, and the law schools can dictate what scores among the passing groups qualify for their schools. For example, tier 3 accepts all 160 and over, tier 2 accepts all 166 and over, and tier 1 accepts all 176 and over. The tests will be just as hard and people will still differentiate amongst one another. The only variable different is that not many people will be passing.

[cooleylawstudent]

Wow. Its called the curve fetus.

All the other BS aside, how is it fair to the 180 to make it equal to 160? Shouldnt they get credit for the extra they did?

[sonofapickle]

How is it fair to the 160 if a dumbass gets into law school, passes the bar, and takes up space in the market? A 180 would rather have more options to choose from after law school than having to work as a goddamn assistant until he can become an associate. 20% of people getting into Law School? That 180 would be jumping in joy as that increases his/her chances of successfully landing a job after passing the bar, not any menial law job, but a damn good one. It limits and decreases the amount of lawyers in the market. You need to think about the bigger picture.

[cooleylawstudent]

you are an idiot. I was trying to "hide the ball"(a lawschool trick to make you find the real answer) but you are too stupid to ever get it, so here it is.

RAISE THE ADMISSION STANDARD!

Not make it pass/fail, just raise the cutoff point. There was that so damn hard for your fetus brain to get?

Plus you assume everyone who sits it gets in(they dont) you assume all who get in graduate(they dont) you assume all who graduate pass the bar(they dont)

If you really want to weed out bad lawyers, make the bar harder. Who cares if some squid wastes his daddys money while living in his mommys house to get a piece of paper. Without the license it dosnt mean squat. They all sit the same bar.

How is it fair to the 160 if a dumbass gets into law school, passes the bar, and takes up space in the market? A 180 would rather have more options to choose from after law school than having to work as a goddamn assistant until he can become an associate. 20% of people getting into Law School? That 180 would be jumping in joy as that increases his/her chances of successfully landing a job after passing the bar, not any menial law job, but a damn good one. It limits and decreases the amount of lawyers in the market. You need to think about the bigger picture.

[sonofapickle]

 I want the LSAT to be pass or fail. That is my point of view and you have your own. You are just stupid and opinionated, whereas I specifically stated, "this is what I believe,' a.k.a opinion. You obviously cannot read nor comprehend anything. Now you try to save face by bringing in some bull bunnies thing you call a tactic of, "getting to the real issue." That is just your opinion of the real issue, not a universal truth.

[cooleylawstudent]

You are an idiot. Your "idea" is a septic tank and I showed you why.

The "tactic" is a fact of life for anyone in lawschool. Do you even know what the socratic is? Your profs are going to LOVE teaching you that. Trust me, I can see that from miles away.

I want the LSAT to be pass or fail. That is my point of view and you have your own. You are just stupid and opinionated, whereas I specifically stated, "this is what I believe,' a.k.a opinion. You obviously cannot read nor comprehend anything. Now you try to save face by bringing in some bull bunnies thing you call a tactic of, "getting to the real issue." That is just your opinion of the real issue, not a universal truth.

[sonofapickle]

We learned the Socratic method while learning about Socrates in my critical thinking class back in High School. It is nothing new to me. I am all for generating ideas but not ones that are obviously idiotic like the ones you presented to me. If you are talking about the admission standard for law school? Then, that is idiotic as it is the schools volition to either raise or keep it the same. By making the test pass or fail, you force the schools to accept students from a higher pool. The downside to my choice is that tuition rates would possibly go up, but that won't matter to most of us. It will just cut even more people out of the market. It would benefit more prospective lawyers than not. You're just an idiot who is too opinionated to see a different perspective.

[cooleylawstudent]

Expect a lot of "idiot opinionated" Profs who think the exact opposit of you too.

Why not just make the bar harder? What do you care who goes to a lawschool that you'll never step foot on? Why not just make the bar harder to weed out those who can't make the cut?

[sonofapickle]

You can make the bar harder, but school and the pre-school forms need to be harder as well, just to make sure they have no chance of getting in. Also, I will go to a Law School as the LSAT is a simple test. I was speaking with a friend online about it and she mentioned that her score was 166 and it was a little easy, but I should do better than her as I have more knowledge and studied more. I take her words over other peoples opinions as truth.

You are certainly right though, I will never step foot into some cretin based law school like Cooley.