Law School Solicitation Wash U

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

People don’t appreciate this until they actually experience it

It’s comical to hear middle-aged lawyers on here saying they got into Harvard with a 3.7 and 175

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

People don’t appreciate this until they actually experience it

It’s comical to hear middle-aged lawyers on here saying they got into Harvard with a 3.7 and 175

No one is "on here" saying that. Get over yourself.

+1

You two must be new. Because anyone who’s been around this forum knows that the PP you insulted is correct- those posters always pop up in law school threads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

well, to be fair, the 75th percentile at Harvard last year has a 3.99gpa and a 176 LSAT, meaning 25 percent had higher, so, yes, that means waitlist for your DD. It's not "fair" but that's the current system

What is your obsession with Harvard? Who mentioned Harvard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi my kid just graduated undergrad and took the LSAT. I am a lawyer but nearly 30 years since I graduated. She got an interview request from Wash U saying interview before your LSAT comes back. I don't recall this solicitation campaign when I applied to law school but I was lucky to get in anywhere with my GPA and LSAT lol--lucky the law schools didn't get a restraining order in my case.

Is this a thing? She got a lot of solicitations when applying to undergrad but I recall for undergrad it was basically to boost the school's stats. If it helps, her LSAT is unknown but she went to a lower tier Ivy (Dartmouth, Brown, or Cornell). Has near perfect grades (close to 4.0). Assume they asked for her school and GPA when she registered for the LSAT with LSAC.

Thoughts? Appreciate the help.

OP, you say she graduated? just this year? what is she planning on doing in the interim should she want law school? It should have an "oomph" factor as mentioned above. And I assume you know that applicants today use coaches or prep services for a year or more? And that applicants sometimes take the LSAT several times? (you can write off one bad score if you act within a certain time frame). It's nothing like when you and I just purchased or borrowed test prep books and went in and took the exam. Several of my mentees used Spivey. My DD used a private coach. Also be aware that the LSAT is dropping logical reasoning this which is a boon to those not good at logical reasoning

Oh, FFS. The mommies are out here spreading all kinds of inaccurate information. The LSAT is most definitely not "dropping logical reasoning" -- and if you are "not good at logical reasoning" you have no business in law school.

I'll never understand why people don't google before posting. google LSAT to drop
logic games. it's right there

I didn’t need to Google—I teach LSAT prep, you idiot. “Logic Games” is not the logical reasoning portion of the LSAT. Maybe you could Google before posting? No; you are too busy banging away on your keyboard about things you don’t understand. There will actually be an additional logical reasoning section added to upcoming exams.

What a sad job. And yet you clearly didn't know that the LSAT was dropping logic games at all.

What? Yes, I did. Again — the logic games portion of the test is not the logical reasoning portion of the test. It is the analytical reasoning portion of the test. Goodness, you are slow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

People don’t appreciate this until they actually experience it

It’s comical to hear middle-aged lawyers on here saying they got into Harvard with a 3.7 and 175

No one is "on here" saying that. Get over yourself.

+1

You two must be new. Because anyone who’s been around this forum knows that the PP you insulted is correct- those posters always pop up in law school threads.

lol, the “you must be new” attempt at snark always just sounds to the left of the bell and socially desperate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

Not true. No way this occurred, unless your kid has a conviction or serious discipline issues in college they did not get waitlisted at 13 different schools with those stats. Just plain lies. The statistical chance of 13 WL alone regardless of scores is pretty low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi my kid just graduated undergrad and took the LSAT. I am a lawyer but nearly 30 years since I graduated. She got an interview request from Wash U saying interview before your LSAT comes back. I don't recall this solicitation campaign when I applied to law school but I was lucky to get in anywhere with my GPA and LSAT lol--lucky the law schools didn't get a restraining order in my case.

Is this a thing? She got a lot of solicitations when applying to undergrad but I recall for undergrad it was basically to boost the school's stats. If it helps, her LSAT is unknown but she went to a lower tier Ivy (Dartmouth, Brown, or Cornell). Has near perfect grades (close to 4.0). Assume they asked for her school and GPA when she registered for the LSAT with LSAC.

Thoughts? Appreciate the help.

OP, you say she graduated? just this year? what is she planning on doing in the interim should she want law school? It should have an "oomph" factor as mentioned above. And I assume you know that applicants today use coaches or prep services for a year or more? And that applicants sometimes take the LSAT several times? (you can write off one bad score if you act within a certain time frame). It's nothing like when you and I just purchased or borrowed test prep books and went in and took the exam. Several of my mentees used Spivey. My DD used a private coach. Also be aware that the LSAT is dropping logical reasoning this which is a boon to those not good at logical reasoning

Oh, FFS. The mommies are out here spreading all kinds of inaccurate information. The LSAT is most definitely not "dropping logical reasoning" -- and if you are "not good at logical reasoning" you have no business in law school.

I am OP and my daughter rushed to take the LSAT because of the change after the June test (her second time taking). They are dropping logic games because it was argued it discriminates against those with disabilities. They are actually doubling up the logical reasoning.

Yes, that is why they are dropping games—it presents additional challenges to blind test takers because the games are very difficult if you can’t draw pictures. The games were the most coachable section though. So prep won’t really help a huge amount anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

Not true. No way this occurred, unless your kid has a conviction or serious discipline issues in college they did not get waitlisted at 13 different schools with those stats. Just plain lies. The statistical chance of 13 WL alone regardless of scores is pretty low.

Nope. You are out of touch with current admissions. And as another poster mentioned, it’s harder for the kids right out of undergrad. Those scores at 28 would probably have a different outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

Not true. No way this occurred, unless your kid has a conviction or serious discipline issues in college they did not get waitlisted at 13 different schools with those stats. Just plain lies. The statistical chance of 13 WL alone regardless of scores is pretty low.

Nope. You are out of touch with current admissions. And as another poster mentioned, it’s harder for the kids right out of undergrad. Those scores at 28 would probably have a different outcome.

Law schools have always preferred older applicants, including way back when I attended in the 1990s..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

Not true. No way this occurred, unless your kid has a conviction or serious discipline issues in college they did not get waitlisted at 13 different schools with those stats. Just plain lies. The statistical chance of 13 WL alone regardless of scores is pretty low.

Nope. You are out of touch with current admissions. And as another poster mentioned, it’s harder for the kids right out of undergrad. Those scores at 28 would probably have a different outcome.

I am not out of touch with admissions, I am a law professor at a highly ranked school who sits on the admissions committee this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

Not true. No way this occurred, unless your kid has a conviction or serious discipline issues in college they did not get waitlisted at 13 different schools with those stats. Just plain lies. The statistical chance of 13 WL alone regardless of scores is pretty low.

Nope. You are out of touch with current admissions. And as another poster mentioned, it’s harder for the kids right out of undergrad. Those scores at 28 would probably have a different outcome.

I am not out of touch with admissions, I am a law professor at a highly ranked school who sits on the admissions committee this year.

Sure you are. Then I guess you just don’t know everything. Enjoy your first year on the committee, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

well, to be fair, the 75th percentile at Harvard last year has a 3.99gpa and a 176 LSAT, meaning 25 percent had higher, so, yes, that means waitlist for your DD. It's not "fair" but that's the current system

What is your obsession with Harvard? Who mentioned Harvard?

1) we are talking about law schools
2) the PP above said their DC had a 3.9 and a 174 and was waitlisted at all T13, which includes Harvard.
3) I went to Harvard and just happen to have the incoming classes' stats memorized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

well, to be fair, the 75th percentile at Harvard last year has a 3.99gpa and a 176 LSAT, meaning 25 percent had higher, so, yes, that means waitlist for your DD. It's not "fair" but that's the current system

What is your obsession with Harvard? Who mentioned Harvard?

1) we are talking about law schools
2) the PP above said their DC had a 3.9 and a 174 and was waitlisted at all T13, which includes Harvard.
3) I went to Harvard and just happen to have the incoming classes' stats memorized.

The point was being made that the PP who claimed her high ranking kid was waitlisted with a 3.99 and 174 at all T13s makes sense. Her stats had to be higher for Harvard, especially if not hooked or had an "oomph" credential earned after college graduation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

People don’t appreciate this until they actually experience it

It’s comical to hear middle-aged lawyers on here saying they got into Harvard with a 3.7 and 175

100%

What's even more comical is watching a Harvard trained BigLaw attorney get her ass kicked by a Wash U. grad in a motion hearing, and then finding her crying in the courtroom bathroom because "I went to HARVARD!"

Girl, please. Either the facts and the law are on your side, or they're not. Either you know how to marshall the law and facts into a coherent argument or you don't. The judge doesn't care that you went to Harvard.

/True story

(Wash U. grad was my senior partner. )

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school admissions are no longer just GPA and LSAT. DC had a 3.9 and 174 and waitlisted at all T13. It’s more like undergrad - they want diversity of some kind.

well, to be fair, the 75th percentile at Harvard last year has a 3.99gpa and a 176 LSAT, meaning 25 percent had higher, so, yes, that means waitlist for your DD. It's not "fair" but that's the current system

What is your obsession with Harvard? Who mentioned Harvard?

1) we are talking about law schools
2) the PP above said their DC had a 3.9 and a 174 and was waitlisted at all T13, which includes Harvard.
3) I went to Harvard and just happen to have the incoming classes' stats memorized.

The point was being made that the PP who claimed her high ranking kid was waitlisted with a 3.99 and 174 at all T13s makes sense. Her stats had to be higher for Harvard, especially if not hooked or had an "oomph" credential earned after college graduation.

No, she said her child had a 3.9 (not 3.99) and a 174 -those are below Harvard Law's 75th percentile so not surprising that her kid was waitlisted. Harvard's 75th percentile last year was a 3.99 and LSAT was 176