Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker  (Read 8267 times)

Maintain FL 350

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 696
    • View Profile
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2012, 10:17:54 AM »
If you have never heard of the University of Massachusetts then that fact does not reflect favorably upon your credibility since UMass is the Massachusetts'
public university.

I should have said "except for UMASS and Cooley." UMASS's new law school at UMASS/Dartmouth is the old Southern New England Law School re-branded with the UMASS seal. Many people have heard of UMASS/Amherst, but not UMASS/Dartmouth. The law school is only provisionally accredited, and largely unknown outside of it's region. That's not a criticism of the school, BTW, but it takes a while to build a reputation. Either way, it does not possess the kind of elite reputation that's going to allow the OP to land a job in CA based on pedigree.

Further, UMASS's first time bar pass rate for February 2012 was 0% (that's not a typo). The school only recently received provisional accreditation. The bar pass rate will be taken into account by the ABA when the school applies for full approval. Some of the other schools you mentioned have no bar pass rates to report because they have not yet graduated a class.

Roald .... 'fess up; what is your connection to ABA unaccredited law schools?  are you a student, grad or employee?

Nice try, but none of the above. I graduated from an ABA accredited law school in CA.

Now, based on your vast experience in the CA legal market, why do you think a degree from a largely unknown ABA school is better than a CBA school? How many out of state T4 grads show up in LA with no local experience and land a job? Have you seen the CA bar pass rates for out of state T4s?
 


Maintain FL 350

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 696
    • View Profile
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2012, 12:29:54 PM »
Also I have a 2.6 GPA and have been scoring in the low 140s on the LSAT can any California residents point me out to a school ( ABA or Non-ABA approved) for which I stand a chance of getting admission?

Brandadalaw:

I don't know if you mean practice LSATs or actual LSATs, but if you can get your score up to about 150-155 you might be able to get into a few CA ABA schools. Schools like Southwestern, La Verne, Chapman, and Cal Western might take someone with a 2.6/150-155. An in-state ABA school is probably a better investment than either a CBA or out of state T4 ABA school.

PIgooroo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #22 on: January 14, 2013, 11:44:36 PM »
I have real life experience.  First, I had a 2.3 undergrad gpa, and a 142 LSAT.  Quantitative, I am bottom of the barrel and not going to be successful in law school, or the bar exam.  I was admitted to SJCL, and sat through the full first year.  I was academically disqualified because my GPA was below the standard.  From what I recall, the cut rate was 2/3, GONE.  I went to work as a paralegal, and then applied to another Cal Bar law school.  I am not one quarter away from graduation.  Here is my take.  No matter what law school you go to, Stanford or Yale or small time cal bar school, YOU WILL BUST YOUR BUTT, just to get through the first year.  If you have the scores to get to a big time ABA school, you probably can "play the game" a little better.  but regardless, its hard, and you will dump many sleepless nights, weekends are shot, and you may lose your spouse.  I encourage you to go.  But do not be bummed if you do not get through the first year.  However, it is not impossible, with hard work. A LOT of hard work.  you have to learn the game, and quickly.  oh, and there is no magical pill to get out of hard work.  everyone has their own method to passing law school, they are all different.  the one thing in common, is hard work.  best of luck to you.

jack24

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1050
    • View Profile
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2013, 12:31:09 PM »
I have real life experience.  First, I had a 2.3 undergrad gpa, and a 142 LSAT.  Quantitative, I am bottom of the barrel and not going to be successful in law school, or the bar exam.  I was admitted to SJCL, and sat through the full first year.  I was academically disqualified because my GPA was below the standard.  From what I recall, the cut rate was 2/3, GONE.  I went to work as a paralegal, and then applied to another Cal Bar law school.  I am not one quarter away from graduation.  Here is my take.  No matter what law school you go to, Stanford or Yale or small time cal bar school, YOU WILL BUST YOUR BUTT, just to get through the first year.  If you have the scores to get to a big time ABA school, you probably can "play the game" a little better.  but regardless, its hard, and you will dump many sleepless nights, weekends are shot, and you may lose your spouse.  I encourage you to go.  But do not be bummed if you do not get through the first year.  However, it is not impossible, with hard work. A LOT of hard work.  you have to learn the game, and quickly.  oh, and there is no magical pill to get out of hard work.  everyone has their own method to passing law school, they are all different.  the one thing in common, is hard work.  best of luck to you.

What are you talking about?

Anybody with reasonable focus and intelligence can reach 95% of their potential in law school by dedicated 50 hours (real hours) a week.   After my first semester, I probably spent about 35 hours a week for 12 weeks and then 80 hours a week for 3 weeks.  A lot of that time was spent for law review, moot court, and writing papers.
I was almost always over-prepared for exams. 

Really, every hour over about 50 per week will be next to useless.  It would be much better to spend that extra time to work out, watch movies, take your spouse on dates, or have sex.

Cher1300

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #24 on: January 16, 2013, 05:48:17 PM »

Further, UMASS's first time bar pass rate for February 2012 was 0% (that's not a typo). The school only recently received provisional accreditation. The bar pass rate will be taken into account by the ABA when the school applies for full approval. Some of the other schools you mentioned have no bar pass rates to report because they have not yet graduated a class.


That's may be, but their July 2012 Bar Pass rate was 70%...I beleive the year before it was 77%.  I tried to find the bar pass rate for February 2012, but couldn't.  Maybe none of their students took the exam?

 http://www.mass.gov/bbe/statisticsjuly2012.pdf

Maintain FL 350

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 696
    • View Profile
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #25 on: January 16, 2013, 07:19:29 PM »
I have no doubt that UMass is a good school, my main point was simply that it doesn't make sense to go to a relatively unknown law school in MA if you want to practice in Los Angeles.

I'm not sure what that particular administration of the exam indicates about UMass, if anything. Schools sometimes have "outlier" years where they score low, then recover.

livinglegend

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
    • legalmatch
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #26 on: January 19, 2013, 12:39:06 AM »


What are you talking about?

Anybody with reasonable focus and intelligence can reach 95% of their potential in law school by dedicated 50 hours (real hours) a week.   After my first semester, I probably spent about 35 hours a week for 12 weeks and then 80 hours a week for 3 weeks.  A lot of that time was spent for law review, moot court, and writing papers.
I was almost always over-prepared for exams. 

Really, every hour over about 50 per week will be next to useless.  It would be much better to spend that extra time to work out, watch movies, take your spouse on dates, or have sex.

As far that goes I don't know if that is true just because you did it one way does not mean it is the same for everyone. I guarantee you I could do everything Lebron James does and I will not be half the basketball player he is. Some people are just naturally better at understanding the law and I think that is what the LSAT does. A person with a 142 LSAT score is probably going to have to bust their ass 10x as hard as someone who got a 175 to pass the bar.

For some people RAP, negligence, IRAC jsut clicks others it does not. So I think the poster you responded you made a good point it will be hard partiuclalry if you go to a CBA school to succeed. So for anyone considering law school if you got a 141 on the LSAT it means you probably don't understand the nuances or handle the pressure of a test that well. Those are things you will need to do in law school and you will need to work harder to succeed than someone that gets it.


jack24

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1050
    • View Profile
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2013, 02:00:13 PM »

As far that goes I don't know if that is true just because you did it one way does not mean it is the same for everyone. I guarantee you I could do everything Lebron James does and I will not be half the basketball player he is. Some people are just naturally better at understanding the law and I think that is what the LSAT does. A person with a 142 LSAT score is probably going to have to bust their ass 10x as hard as someone who got a 175 to pass the bar.

For some people RAP, negligence, IRAC jsut clicks others it does not. So I think the poster you responded you made a good point it will be hard partiuclalry if you go to a CBA school to succeed. So for anyone considering law school if you got a 141 on the LSAT it means you probably don't understand the nuances or handle the pressure of a test that well. Those are things you will need to do in law school and you will need to work harder to succeed than someone that gets it.

I'm talking about potential.  My point is that the difference in your grades between working 50 hours a week and working 100 hours a week won't be that substantial if you are a mediocre student.   Yes, it is extremely difficult to get all As in law school on a curve, but it's not very difficult to get all Bs (or whatever the average grade is.)   
You really start to see harshly diminishing returns as you add more and more hours.  You start to get into minutiae that nobody cares about.
Now that may vary depending on the type of final exams your school has, but not by much. 

I really doubt anyone in the bottom quarter of their class (outside the top law schools) puts in 50 hours of real studying every week.  I'd love to hear about a real world example.


Duncanjp

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2013, 08:58:45 PM »
In an ideal world Id be able to practice all day long to the point Id be able to give lectures on the LSAT, but realistically I work two jobs, cant afford a prep course and can only study a few hours a week on a borrowed book from my local library.  I have no problem understanding LSAT concepts it's the time factor that I struggle with

1. Even though CBE schools are less expensive than ABA, attending a CBE school is an expensive proposition. Law school wants money every time you turn around. If you can't afford an LSAT prep course, you're going to have a rude awakening once you enroll somewhere - anywhere. Not that prep courses are critical, but a serious student would find a way to get into one, especially if he's already received a score in the low 140s on a formal administration of the test (versus self-testing).

2. You can buy study guides from LSAC and elsewhere for $20-$40. If you're limiting your preparation to a few hours a week with a book borrowed from the library, you aren't approaching the LSAT with nearly the energy, dedication, and determination that you need to apply to it. You should be tackling practice exams every evening and all weekend for months before the next LSAT. Not a few hours a week.

3. Part-time attendance at law school is a second full-time job. If you don't devote the time to it, you'll waste your time, their time, and your money.

Just some food for thought. Law school success demands that you be all in, or not in at all.

livinglegend

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
    • legalmatch
Re: ABA versus Non-ABA; marathon LSAT-taker
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2013, 10:26:57 PM »
@Jack I would say I put in 50 if you include in class-time no more no less and you are correct you can certainly overstudy. Furthermore, I don't know if the hours count so much as your effiency in studying I am sure plenty of people set in a library for 60 hours, but if your on facebook the whole time in a library it is going to improve your performance.

So that is something I think any law student should realize the amount of time you put into studying does not matter it is the quality of your study habits. If you are organized, outline properly, etc you can really shorten the amount of time you spend studying and do all the extracurricular things jack mentioned in the prior post. I remember in 1L many people going hours upon hours, but when the final comes all that matters is your performance not the amount of time you spent studying.