The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
25% @ Stanford couldn't break 167!
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:47 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets Never forget. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821717) |
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:50 PM Author: Citrine church building milk Yet they managed to get into a school that's better than Harvard. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821728) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:52 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets 165LSATDINGEDATCOLUMBIAHARVARDANDYALEPWN3D! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821735) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:54 PM Author: Citrine church building milk Actually, you're right. That's a pretty fucking pathetic 25%. You win. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821743) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:54 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse actually, many of the sub-170 people who were accepted at s were also accepted at h...they're the ones who are clearly doing better things with their lives than studying for the lsat (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821744) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:56 PM Author: Citrine church building milk Or they were too stupid to study a bit for an easy test, so they started saving animals and talking with a lisp in an attempt to be "diverse". (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821750) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:57 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets ORLY?
http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=shotime1 http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=BigSplitDC http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=partlett |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:58 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse i didn't say all...i said many (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821761) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:59 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets Not with sub-167 LSAT's they weren't. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821765) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:15 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse i said sub-170, also the two people you listed with multiple lsats probably would have been accepted to h had h only looked at their higher score (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821836) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 9:54 AM Author: Swashbuckling Meetinghouse (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5825859) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:00 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse also, at least a couple of those are multiple lsats and now lsac is even admitting the highest lsat score *can be* the better indicator, not the avg (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821766) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:01 PM Author: vibrant ungodly circlehead wrinkle "now lsac is even admitting the highest lsat score is actually the better indicator, not the avg"
evidence? |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:14 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse from deloggio.com
Law Services has officially changed their policy on averaging multiple LSAT scores. On Feb. 14, LSAC announced that their Board of Trustees had approved a change in their "Cautionary Policies Concerning LSAT Scores and Related Services." LSAC used to encourage the use of the average of multiple scores. The revised Cautionary Policies are silent on this topic. This change is intended to advise law schools that there is no need to alwyas average multiple LSAT scores, and that they should use their best judgment in deciding which LSAT score best refelcts the applicant's potential.
In a quick follow-up to the change in policy, the ABA has scheduled a discussion of whether to require law schools to report averaged LSAT scores dor applicants who took the test more than once.
"Law Schools should be aware...that the Questionnaire Committee might recommend...shifting the LSAT reporting requirement in the Annual Questionnaire from the average score to the high score. "We will not know until ...June ... whether there will be any change in reporting requirements.
"At the very least, this means that if they are not doing so already schools should be collecting in their admissions databases the high score in addition to the average score...."
What this means to you is that, come June, law schools might look for people with a high second LSAT score to pull from their wait list. So if you have two scores five or more points apart, and you sent most of your apps to schools that take your averaged LSAT scores, you might want to send a few more apps to schools that you're dying to attend and where your higher score is above the median.
|
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:17 PM Author: vibrant ungodly circlehead wrinkle "The revised Cautionary Policies are silent on this topic." =/= "now lsac is even admitting the highest lsat score is actually the better indicator, not the avg" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821846) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:21 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets Logic probably isn't this guy's strong suit, thus the reason he's at Stanford to begin with (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821855) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:23 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse i'm not at s... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821864) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:22 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse yeah, my memory was wrong...they are admitting the higher score may be a better indicator in certain situations...sorry...i almost put a disclaimer after the quote stating my original post was off but i thought it wasn't necessary (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821861) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 10:02 PM Author: shimmering theater stage Doing better things like being black? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5823774) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:25 PM Author: Salmon Marvelous Station Does anyone in their right mind think that SLS is a better than HLS? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821875) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:53 PM Author: Excitant anal dilemma yes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821986) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:55 PM Author: Citrine church building milk yes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821992) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:03 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets Only the xoxo trolls who were dinged at Harvard, Yale, and Columbia. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822003) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 10:33 AM Author: nudist prole rigpig most recent june ca bar first-timers:
hastings>harvard
of course, both are ginormous factories.
hth |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 1:56 PM Author: Brass Parlor your premise is flawed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821752) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:23 PM Author: Aphrodisiac vermilion death wish heaven And 25% of students at the school you shamelessly troll for, Columbia, couldn't break 168 or a 3.50 gpa, but who cares? Your inferiority complex is overwhelming. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821866) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:45 PM Author: Brass Parlor ... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821961) |
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:27 PM Author: Up-to-no-good saffron party of the first part legend According to USNews, 25% at Yale couldn't break 168. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821882) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:28 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse it doesn't say they couldn't, it says they didn't
it amazes me how much weight people put on small differences in scores on a test that can be learned... |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:45 PM Author: Up-to-no-good saffron party of the first part legend Douche. I was responding to the OPs claims that the 25% LSAT of Stanford meant Stanford sucked. I used his phrasing. You should have been able to see the parallel. But if you were smarter and could pick up on that, you would have done better on the LSAT and wouldn't such a defensive douche. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5821962) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:50 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse i wasn't trying to attack you...i knew exactly what you were doing...i was just pointing out the idiocy of the whole discussion, just as you were. any condescending sentiment was not aimed at you. EDIT: the purpose of pointing out the difference between couldn't and didn't was not to attack you but to show the flaw that some others on this board frequently make |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 2:58 PM Author: Odious Embarrassed To The Bone Temple Giraffe Well Stanford bottom 25% probably has 4.0s. Even though LSAT is a good indicator for success in lawschool, so is GPA. A girl from Yale undergrad with 167/4.0, 2majors and a minor, firm experience, club activity..etc can probably contribute to Stanford's prestige..no?
Boalt is another school that I really didn't understand. Last year they had 25% at 161. Now this is not prestigious.
But, I know people that has 165/3.9 who clearly could contribute to the academic vibe at any school. They are very dedicated students so you can't just ding them for LSAT especially if they have good soft factors.
Penn on the other hand is LSAT prestigious. At least compared to Boalt. But these days I am not really sure if accepting people purely using their LSAT is a wise move. As far as I am concerned Penn student body could be full of evil, bitter, semi-nerdy columbia rejects. I don't know if they could contribute to the wellbeing of our society as well as these 165/3.9 Boalt students can.
Just my 2 cent |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:00 PM Author: Bat-shit-crazy flirting spot people who are hurt yale and stanford are similar in that they suck at the GPA/diverse/interesting teat, while Harvard sucks on the high but not great GPA/very high LSAT teat
EDIT: This statement's only real basis is my own case. I had a very high LSAT with middle of the road GPA and no ECs or diversity to speak of- admitted to H almost immediately after completion, summarily rejected from Y and S. |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:04 PM Author: Odious Embarrassed To The Bone Temple Giraffe Yeah. H is pretty strict with LSAT. I would say you are prestigious. Good luck at HLS. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822004) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:11 PM Author: Bat-shit-crazy flirting spot people who are hurt :=) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822029) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:19 PM Author: Odious Embarrassed To The Bone Temple Giraffe Let me guess. You had 176/3.7 right?
YOU ARE PRESTIGIOUS! Can you please help me talk shit on Michigan Law school? I am sick and tired of them trying to talk shit on NU. I'll admit that Michigan has a higher historical, academic prestige. But you can't ignore NU's higher LSAT/GPA, lower acceptance rate, and rising job prospect.
MICHIGAN is NOT PRESTIGIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 4:22 PM Author: Floppy Peach University Roommate Isn't Michigan supposed to be the easiest T14 to get into? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822353) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 12:30 AM Author: Odious Embarrassed To The Bone Temple Giraffe Yup. It is probably the easiest.
This is the break down of Penn, Michigan, NU, Dook, GULC, Cornell, UVA:
Name LSAT/GPA Acceptance rate
Penn 169/3.68 12.5% Michigan 168/3.65 19.5% NU 169/3.7 16.7% Dook 168/3.72 21.4% GULC 168/3.67 19.3% Cornell 167/3.67 16.7% UVA 169/3.67 20.2%
Michigan and perhaps Cornell are the weakest.
The selectivity rank based on LSAT/GPA/Acceptance rate
1) Penn 2) NU 3) UVA 4) Dook 5) GULC 6) Michigan Cornell
Michigan people try to redeem themselves by using gay things like: soft factor, USNWR ranking, and Michigan's past glory.
Interdisciplinary studies my assss Diversity my asss Prestige my asss
PWNED!
|
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:20 PM Author: Dull Fortuitous Meteor With so many factors to consider, there needs to be a methodology created to evaluate and rank top law schools, and then that ranking needs to be generally accepted in the legal community.
Oh wait....
Stanford #2 Harvard #3 |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:24 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets USNWR has jumped the shark and is now irrelevant (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822101) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:26 PM Author: Odious Embarrassed To The Bone Temple Giraffe You are a douche. USNEWS? Get the fuck out of here. You don't know anything about ranking. USNEWS is incomplete and inaccurate on some points! HLS gets higher quality assessment score than SLS.
Go read some criticisms on USNWR and go read other rankings with different methodology.
YOU ARE A MORON!!!!!!!!
Which law school do you go to? |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:27 PM Author: Dull Fortuitous Meteor lol, ad hominem (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822114) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 3:27 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets "Which law school do you go to?"
100 to 1 odds says it's STTTanford |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 11:21 AM Author: Aphrodisiac vermilion death wish heaven I think you were going for "1 to 100," but nice effort. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5826026) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 4:15 PM Author: Racy menage At the same time, 75% of Stanford students could only do better than a 3.8 UGPA. Clearly pathetic. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822311) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 5:27 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets 3.8+ in a TTT discipline like Polisci is not impressive in the least. The LSAT however is universal. HTH (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822708) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 6:12 PM Author: Racy menage Yeah, you're right. Only people with joke majors get accepted to SLS. All the toughest majors must go to your school.
|
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 6:13 PM Author: Adventurous Pea-brained Nibblets My point stands.. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822918) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 4:42 PM Author: maroon center ratface will you people shut up with this shit. damn. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5822459) |
|
Date: May 20th, 2006 6:46 PM Author: insane useless coldplay fan And I know two who will clerk for feeder judges... life is so unfair. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5823083) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 11:33 AM Author: Autistic roast beef casino Oh yeah, the great jobs should be distributed based on lsat scores. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5826070) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 11:41 AM Author: Curious set How many of them are URMs? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5826099) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 12:36 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse 32.4% (compared with harvard's 28.9%) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5826301) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 1:00 PM Author: Flickering turquoise sanctuary s can and does practice AA. the CA law only constrains public institutions (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5826390) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 1:01 PM Author: misanthropic bateful puppy crackhouse post edited (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5826397) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 1:00 PM Author: spectacular shivering skinny woman Subject: 100% of your posts suck your complex is unbearable. stop embarrassing yourself. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419835&forum_id=2#5826395) |
|
Date: May 21st, 2006 1:12 PM Author: fuchsia maniacal site Subject: 25% of Columbia didn't score above 168! AND their GPA was only 3.5
anyway, this proves nothing. OP is an idiot. |