Law school admission strategy

[Anonymous]

I think you need something similar to the athlete’s broken leg test, but for major/grad school/lifeplan.

If the now 17/18 year old changes their mind before age 22, will they be happy they attended a less prestigious school?

Think about it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they do too well and are not fortunate enough to have law school funded, they could be stuck in BigLaw paying off BigLoans.

Also, scoring a 170+ on the LSAT is not the piece of cake that DCUM makes it out to be and not something everyone achieves with a little practice. How were ACT/SAT scores?

It's not something everyone achieves with a lot of practice, let alone a little practice. I scored around the 95th percentile and got recruited to teach for Kaplan so I have some insight into this. For the most part, the LSAT tests how you think. How logical you are. How good your reading comprehension is. Deductive reasoning skills. I'm just naturally good at deductive reasoning, it's how my mind works, and my reading comp skills have probably been top 5% if not higher since first grade (and fwiw there is plenty of stuff I'm not good at at all, and there are plenty of people I know who are significantly smarter than I am who did not do all that well on the LSAT because they just aren't super analytical). Will preparation help you with your LSAT score? Yes. Will help all that much? For most people, no. Especially now that the most coachable part of the test is gone (the logic games -- I could teach people how to approach those, and that would increase their score for sure).

I wouldn't think about ACT/SAT scores as a predictor of how one will do on the LSAT. My SAT was not particularly high (I have ADHD and quit paying attention to math around 8th grade).

Finally, I would recommend a basic logic or critical thinking class in college. Doesn't need to be fancy high-level philosophy or anything, just something basic with review of Venn diagrams, etc. That is arguably more helpful for folks who will eventually take the LSAT than LSAT prep classes.

Do LSAT scores tend to be higher or lower with the logic games section gone? I thought that was a pretty significant change. The LSAT also tests processing speed -- maybe less so without the "games" section. Testing accommodations allowing for more time were rare when I took it but I imagine are fairly common now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go to the undergrad that’s the best fit that he’s excited to attend. Then manage course load so it not impossible to maintain a high GPA. Mix rigorous courses in the major with fun ones (don’t take super hard stem and Econ courses just bc your friends are taking it and it’s not your major!!) Prep for LSAT and aim 172+. This is advice I would give to my kid. This is what I learned after the fact and was lucky to attend a top 5 law school.

Not always, as I think law schools like engineering and hard STEM majors and give them somewhat of a break on GPA. Someone has to major in STEM to be able to take the patent bar.

Ok, reading comprehension skills which are very important for the LSAT. Please reread the original post…

Yeah, I don't think the OP's "strategy" is necessarily the correct strategy. I don't think a 4.0 in basket weaving is viewed as being better than a 3.4 in ChemE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go to the undergrad that’s the best fit that he’s excited to attend. Then manage course load so it not impossible to maintain a high GPA. Mix rigorous courses in the major with fun ones (don’t take super hard stem and Econ courses just bc your friends are taking it and it’s not your major!!) Prep for LSAT and aim 172+. This is advice I would give to my kid. This is what I learned after the fact and was lucky to attend a top 5 law school.

Not always, as I think law schools like engineering and hard STEM majors and give them somewhat of a break on GPA. Someone has to major in STEM to be able to take the patent bar.

Ok, reading comprehension skills which are very important for the LSAT. Please reread the original post…

Yeah, I don't think the OP's "strategy" is necessarily the correct strategy. I don't think a 4.0 in basket weaving is viewed as being better than a 3.4 in ChemE.

Do you know nothing about law school admissions? Yes, a 4.0 in basket weaving looks better. The main goal of these schools' admissions committees is to get the highest median GPAs and LSATs possible. Any 4.0 > any non 4.0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go to the undergrad that’s the best fit that he’s excited to attend. Then manage course load so it not impossible to maintain a high GPA. Mix rigorous courses in the major with fun ones (don’t take super hard stem and Econ courses just bc your friends are taking it and it’s not your major!!) Prep for LSAT and aim 172+. This is advice I would give to my kid. This is what I learned after the fact and was lucky to attend a top 5 law school.

Not always, as I think law schools like engineering and hard STEM majors and give them somewhat of a break on GPA. Someone has to major in STEM to be able to take the patent bar.

Ok, reading comprehension skills which are very important for the LSAT. Please reread the original post…

Yeah, I don't think the OP's "strategy" is necessarily the correct strategy. I don't think a 4.0 in basket weaving is viewed as being better than a 3.4 in ChemE.

Do you know nothing about law school admissions? Yes, a 4.0 in basket weaving looks better. The main goal of these schools' admissions committees is to get the highest median GPAs and LSATs possible. Any 4.0 > any non 4.0

Lol. Ok...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go to the undergrad that’s the best fit that he’s excited to attend. Then manage course load so it not impossible to maintain a high GPA. Mix rigorous courses in the major with fun ones (don’t take super hard stem and Econ courses just bc your friends are taking it and it’s not your major!!) Prep for LSAT and aim 172+. This is advice I would give to my kid. This is what I learned after the fact and was lucky to attend a top 5 law school.

Not always, as I think law schools like engineering and hard STEM majors and give them somewhat of a break on GPA. Someone has to major in STEM to be able to take the patent bar.

Ok, reading comprehension skills which are very important for the LSAT. Please reread the original post…

Yeah, I don't think the OP's "strategy" is necessarily the correct strategy. I don't think a 4.0 in basket weaving is viewed as being better than a 3.4 in ChemE.

Do you know nothing about law school admissions? Yes, a 4.0 in basket weaving looks better. The main goal of these schools' admissions committees is to get the highest median GPAs and LSATs possible. Any 4.0 > any non 4.0

This ^^ is correct. Mostly, anyway.

And fwiw, STEM-obsessed DCUM opinions aren’t on point here. Nothing wrong with “basket weaving.” (Or theater, which is what I majored in, and I graduated from law school cum laude, ahead of many who had majored in STEM).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they do too well and are not fortunate enough to have law school funded, they could be stuck in BigLaw paying off BigLoans.

Also, scoring a 170+ on the LSAT is not the piece of cake that DCUM makes it out to be and not something everyone achieves with a little practice. How were ACT/SAT scores?

It's not something everyone achieves with a lot of practice, let alone a little practice. I scored around the 95th percentile and got recruited to teach for Kaplan so I have some insight into this. For the most part, the LSAT tests how you think. How logical you are. How good your reading comprehension is. Deductive reasoning skills. I'm just naturally good at deductive reasoning, it's how my mind works, and my reading comp skills have probably been top 5% if not higher since first grade (and fwiw there is plenty of stuff I'm not good at at all, and there are plenty of people I know who are significantly smarter than I am who did not do all that well on the LSAT because they just aren't super analytical). Will preparation help you with your LSAT score? Yes. Will help all that much? For most people, no. Especially now that the most coachable part of the test is gone (the logic games -- I could teach people how to approach those, and that would increase their score for sure).

I wouldn't think about ACT/SAT scores as a predictor of how one will do on the LSAT. My SAT was not particularly high (I have ADHD and quit paying attention to math around 8th grade).

Finally, I would recommend a basic logic or critical thinking class in college. Doesn't need to be fancy high-level philosophy or anything, just something basic with review of Venn diagrams, etc. That is arguably more helpful for folks who will eventually take the LSAT than LSAT prep classes.

Do LSAT scores tend to be higher or lower with the logic games section gone? I thought that was a pretty significant change. The LSAT also tests processing speed -- maybe less so without the "games" section. Testing accommodations allowing for more time were rare when I took it but I imagine are fairly common now.

Interesting question. I don’t know. It doesn’t really matter though, because it’s all relative. I don’t even think about scores, I think about percentile.

[Anonymous]

Law school is overrated. After college go work for a law firm in VA or one of the 3 other (I believe) states/commonwealths where you can read for the law. Follow the steps to qualify, sit for and pass the bar and presto you are a licensed attorney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Law school is overrated. After college go work for a law firm in VA or one of the 3 other (I believe) states/commonwealths where you can read for the law. Follow the steps to qualify, sit for and pass the bar and presto you are a licensed attorney.

With no experience, no clients, and no biglaw firms willing to hire you.

[Anonymous]

You can be seen as useful in various ways if you're a CPA or engineer or something adjacent with a law degree. Political "science," for example, is just not the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Law school is overrated. After college go work for a law firm in VA or one of the 3 other (I believe) states/commonwealths where you can read for the law. Follow the steps to qualify, sit for and pass the bar and presto you are a licensed attorney.

Nothing “presto” about it. First, most who take this path are unable to pass the bar. And second, even if they do, no one will hire them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school is overrated. After college go work for a law firm in VA or one of the 3 other (I believe) states/commonwealths where you can read for the law. Follow the steps to qualify, sit for and pass the bar and presto you are a licensed attorney.

With no experience, no clients, and no biglaw firms willing to hire you.

Going this route requires you to work under the supervision of an attorney with considerable experience. They will be well aware of the law reader”s ability and may be willing to hire them. In some states such as Washington you would already be an employee of the law firm. Not everyone is interested in biglaw.

As far as passing the bar, yes the pass rate is lower than for those who attend law school. But there are also students that attended premier law schools that need several attempts to pass the bar.