LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby 09042014 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:14 pm

kwais wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:
kwais wrote:So. Will you still see fit to allow someone to pursue a legal education if they won't be wealthy?

No one's talking about "allowing" anyone. He can do whatever he wants. If you asked, though, I would tell you it's a fucking terrible decision to stick your hand in a wood chipper and/or go to a TTT.


The fact that you compare these two things speaks volumes about your perspective, elitism and character.


I hef does kwais can be his shit law personal injury lawyer.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby kwais » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:15 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:
kwais wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
kwais wrote:So. Will you still see fit to allow someone to pursue a legal education if they won't be wealthy?


Butt fucked by debt and jobless isn't merely "not wealthy".


Awesome analysis. Nevertheless, some people want a legal education and the chance to practice. Doesn't make them stupid. In the end, it probably makes them more intellectually curious (and therefore more interesting) than those who approach their education as a simple math problem.


What? Again, the reasoning is curious, at best. Intellectual curiosity is worth being financially ruined for the rest of your life? As in, not being able to retire, buy a home, get a loan, etc?


You are taking the worst possible scenario as fact. Your reasoning is "curious, at best".

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby kwais » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:16 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
kwais wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:
kwais wrote:So. Will you still see fit to allow someone to pursue a legal education if they won't be wealthy?

No one's talking about "allowing" anyone. He can do whatever he wants. If you asked, though, I would tell you it's a fucking terrible decision to stick your hand in a wood chipper and/or go to a TTT.


The fact that you compare these two things speaks volumes about your perspective, elitism and character.


I hef does kwais can be his shit law personal injury lawyer.


zinger!

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby Patriot1208 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:21 pm

kwais wrote:
Patriot1208 wrote:
kwais wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Butt fucked by debt and jobless isn't merely "not wealthy".


Awesome analysis. Nevertheless, some people want a legal education and the chance to practice. Doesn't make them stupid. In the end, it probably makes them more intellectually curious (and therefore more interesting) than those who approach their education as a simple math problem.


What? Again, the reasoning is curious, at best. Intellectual curiosity is worth being financially ruined for the rest of your life? As in, not being able to retire, buy a home, get a loan, etc?


You are taking the worst possible scenario as fact. Your reasoning is "curious, at best".


No, i'm not. The worst possible scenario is making nothing i.e. being unemployed. The best possible scenario is making biglaw but that is around 1%. The most likely scenario is becoming a lawyer and making 40-50k or switching careers and making 40-50k. So i'm taking the most likely scenario and showing that most likely, you will be financially ruined without being able to pay it off. This is fact, if it hurts your sensibilities I apologize, but you can't change the job market anymore than I can.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby kwais » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:24 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:
kwais wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:
kwais wrote:So. Will you still see fit to allow someone to pursue a legal education if they won't be wealthy?

No one's talking about "allowing" anyone. He can do whatever he wants. If you asked, though, I would tell you it's a fucking terrible decision to stick your hand in a wood chipper and/or go to a TTT.


The fact that you compare these two things speaks volumes about your perspective, elitism and character.

I could care less about the name on the diploma. It's the job prospects that make it career suicide.

Now go back to studying. I know you want to make that Nova Southeastern Law Review.


I appreciate the advice! Nova is super competitive.

User avatar
OrdinarilySkilled
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 10:22 am

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby OrdinarilySkilled » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:27 pm

this thread is mad generic. Somebody mix it up for once.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby kwais » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:28 pm

No, i'm not. The worst possible scenario is making nothing i.e. being unemployed. The best possible scenario is making biglaw but that is around 1%. The most likely scenario is becoming a lawyer and making 40-50k or switching careers and making 40-50k. So i'm taking the most likely scenario and showing that most likely, you will be financially ruined without being able to pay it off. This is fact, if it hurts your sensibilities I apologize, but you can't change the job market anymore than I can.[/quote]

The only thing that "hurts my sensibilities" is a bunch of 21-year-olds attempting to give life advice, using words like "life-ruining" to describe someone's salary, and treating other people terribly because they can hide behind their computer screen

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby Patriot1208 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:30 pm

kwais wrote:The only thing that "hurts my sensibilities" is a bunch of 21-year-olds attempting to give life advice, using words like "life-ruining" to describe someone's salary, and treating other people terribly because they can hide behind their computer screen


No one said 50k was life ruining, they said 50k was life ruining when you are 150k in debt. No one is being treated terribly, they are just getting blunt advice. Basically, you can't take the blunt truth that is being offered here. Also, most of the people ITT responding are a good bit older than 21.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby kwais » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:35 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:
kwais wrote:The only thing that "hurts my sensibilities" is a bunch of 21-year-olds attempting to give life advice, using words like "life-ruining" to describe someone's salary, and treating other people terribly because they can hide behind their computer screen


No one said 50k was life ruining, they said 50k was life ruining when you are 150k in debt. No one is being treated terribly, they are just getting blunt advice. Basically, you can't take the blunt truth that is being offered here. Also, most of the people ITT responding are a good bit older than 21.


More likely, most people can't take their "blunt advice" being ignored, hence the first page of this thread, in which a completely reasonable person was subjected to the same self-important crap. And I seriously doubt that "most" TLSs are a good bit older than 21. People on this site routinely complain that work experience as an admissions factor is unfair. These are the words of those whose lives consist of dorm rooms and computer screens

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby Patriot1208 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:38 pm

kwais wrote:
Patriot1208 wrote:
kwais wrote:The only thing that "hurts my sensibilities" is a bunch of 21-year-olds attempting to give life advice, using words like "life-ruining" to describe someone's salary, and treating other people terribly because they can hide behind their computer screen


No one said 50k was life ruining, they said 50k was life ruining when you are 150k in debt. No one is being treated terribly, they are just getting blunt advice. Basically, you can't take the blunt truth that is being offered here. Also, most of the people ITT responding are a good bit older than 21.


More likely, most people can't take their "blunt advice" being ignored, hence the first page of this thread, in which a completely reasonable person was subjected to the same self-important crap. And I seriously doubt that "most" TLSs are a good bit older than 21. People on this site routinely complain that work experience as an admissions factor is unfair. These are the words of those whose lives consist of dorm rooms and computer screens


No, what is really going on is that you can't take it. Factual statements have been presented to you and you have acted as if they were just being assholes. When, in fact, they were simply factual statements. And Maybe most TLS'ers are around 21. But several of the people ITT, and most of those that are regulars in these types of threads, are current law students who also happen to have full time work experience. That makes them a good bit older than 21.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby kwais » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:45 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:
kwais wrote:
Patriot1208 wrote:
kwais wrote:The only thing that "hurts my sensibilities" is a bunch of 21-year-olds attempting to give life advice, using words like "life-ruining" to describe someone's salary, and treating other people terribly because they can hide behind their computer screen


No one said 50k was life ruining, they said 50k was life ruining when you are 150k in debt. No one is being treated terribly, they are just getting blunt advice. Basically, you can't take the blunt truth that is being offered here. Also, most of the people ITT responding are a good bit older than 21.


More likely, most people can't take their "blunt advice" being ignored, hence the first page of this thread, in which a completely reasonable person was subjected to the same self-important crap. And I seriously doubt that "most" TLSs are a good bit older than 21. People on this site routinely complain that work experience as an admissions factor is unfair. These are the words of those whose lives consist of dorm rooms and computer screens


No, what is really going on is that you can't take it. Factual statements have been presented to you and you have acted as if they were just being assholes. When, in fact, they were simply factual statements. And Maybe most TLS'ers are around 21. But several of the people ITT, and most of those that are regulars in these types of threads, are current law students who also happen to have full time work experience. That makes them a good bit older than 21.


I hear what you are saying. The fact remains. An UG degree is by no means a guarantee of financial stability and yet, many people pursue it to develop their own minds and gain skills. I don't take issue with people pointing out the financial risk of law school. I take issue with people equating TTT schools with being maimed. Like everything on this site, it's not what you say, but how you say it. Some people are really proud to go to law school, no matter where it is. You can be "honest", "blunt" and whatever else you want without being an asshole. I promise that there is no statistic or "fact" that can't be stated respectfully.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby 09042014 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:51 pm

My maimed brother is more financially secure than most law grads.

User avatar
OrdinarilySkilled
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 10:22 am

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby OrdinarilySkilled » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:53 pm

Desert Fox wrote:My maimed brother is more financially secure than most law grads.

Yea but can he sign his welfare checks?

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby 09042014 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:55 pm

OrdinarilySkilled wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:My maimed brother is more financially secure than most law grads.

Yea but can he sign his welfare checks?


Ssda does direct deposit.

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby Patriot1208 » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:56 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
OrdinarilySkilled wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:My maimed brother is more financially secure than most law grads.

Yea but can he sign his welfare checks?


Ssda does direct deposit.


Your mother just rolled over and told me to tell you to not talk about your brother like that.

User avatar
OrdinarilySkilled
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 10:22 am

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby OrdinarilySkilled » Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:59 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
OrdinarilySkilled wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:My maimed brother is more financially secure than most law grads.

Yea but can he sign his welfare checks?


Ssda does direct deposit.


Your mother just rolled over and told me to tell you to not talk about your brother like that.

You see... At least this exchange is creative.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby beachbum » Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:02 am

I'm not sure what the point of conflict is here. Law school is a professional school. That is, for almost all students (and potential students), it is a means to establishing a future career. And for almost all students, the goal is to obtain a meaningful, well-paying job within that career. In other words, law students enter law school in the hopes of graduating with a better, more prosperous future. Therefore, we should evaluate all law schools against their graduates' ability to meet these goals.

In the case of the OP, the schools he would be looking at fail this test. He'll almost certainly graduate with a lot of debt and will almost certainly graduate with mediocre to nonexistent job prospects. And when you combine those two factors (debt and job opportunities), you're looking at a future that is neither better nor more prosperous.

That's all you really need to know. We can argue over details and semantics, but if your potential school selection falls short of this fundamental exercise, then (all things equal) it would be in your best interests to either a) do something to improve your potential school selection, or b) choose a different career path.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

User avatar
Barbie
Posts: 3746
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby Barbie » Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:48 am

OP,
I think you would surely get into Stetson. If you don't mind living in Tampa for at least a while after graduation, this wouldn't be a bad choice. Stetson places very well here and is well respected within city limits. It is a beautiful campus and apparently students are overall very happy with their education, but it isn't ranked very well and doesn't have reach much outside if Tampa, as well as having a high price tag. If you are really not worried about the debt, I would consider Stetson a great choice. One of the women I worked for (who worked alongside other graduates from GWU, etc) was a recent Stetson grad. She went for sticker and is still making hefty payments on her loans, but she is doing well for herself, has great hours, and s job she wanted. So overall-- if you like Tampa/St.Petersburg area and aren't worried about the $$, apply! Good luck with your cycle!


Oh and that was a tough loss tonight :( Sorry gators!

capnb
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby capnb » Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:56 pm

I don't know how me asking what school I should go into turned me into some dumb shit with a trust fund. I should have just used yahoo answers.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby d34d9823 » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:14 pm

capnb wrote:I don't know how me asking what school I should go into turned me into some dumb shit with a trust fund. I should have just used yahoo answers.

Haha dude, I think the irritation was for the other guy. I hope you do well. As long as you're aware what you're getting into, that's the important thing.

Honestly, from a career prospects perspective, I think the best thing to do if you're committed to being a lawyer would be keep working and intensively study for the LSAT if there's any possibility you could improve that score. Work experience looks good at OCI, and if you could pull a 170, you could crack T14.

imbored25
Posts: 361
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 8:58 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby imbored25 » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:16 pm

hey man just do some research on you own or try to find another board, this one is full of douchebags.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby 09042014 » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:20 pm

imbored25 wrote:hey man just do some research on you own or try to find another board, this one is full of douchebags.


http://Www.toilet-law-schools.com

capnb
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby capnb » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:28 pm

Thanks barbie (gators need to step it up)..and thanks kwais, desert, imbored, and d3.

I'm not sure why people are telling me whether or not I should go to law school. I don't really feel that I should have to explain exactly why I'm going and what justifies me going but apparently that is important for people to know.

My GPA is not representative of my ability to perform in law school. I became very ill and had to withdraw from several semesters while being hospitalized. My upper level GPA is much higher. I am very capable of performing at any law school. Plus, for all the posts about how "[insert important TLS person handle] studied 12+ hours a week for 17 weeks to get consistent 170s," you guys seem to treat this LSAT like an IQ test (when in reality it's just another test than anybody with enough time and determination can master).

I feel that the connections I have now would enable me to find a job in Florida regardless of what law school I go to. I have dozens of personal and family friends that operate law firms. Also, my fiance's family runs one of the larger law firms in north Florida. Furthermore, my family owns a business I could work at if necessary.

I think Stetson would be a good fit, but I'm being pressured to find a non-Florida school from aforementioned fiance. If anybody would give me a few ideas about which schools I should consider given my 160/2.8 from UF, please let me know.

There are quite a few schools I can get into- even if they're all tier3 and tier4. I refuse to believe that it is impossible for me to find a school that will give me a rewarding experience.
Last edited by capnb on Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby 09042014 » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:30 pm

capnb wrote:Thanks barbie (gators need to step it up)..and thanks kwais, desert, imbored, and d3.

I'm not sure why people are telling me whether or not I should go to law school. I don't really feel that I should have to explain exactly why I'm going and what justifies me going but apparently that is important for people to know.

My GPA is not representative of my ability to perform in law school. I became very ill and had to withdraw from several semesters while being hospitalized. My upper level GPA is much higher. I am very capable of performing at any law school. Plus, for all the posts about how "[insert important TLS person handle] studied 12+ hours a week for 17 weeks to get consistent 170s," you guys seems to treat this LSAT like an IQ test (when in reality it's just another test than anybody with enough time and determination can master).

I feel that the connections I have now would enable me to find a job in Florida regardless of what law school I go to. I have dozens of personal and family friends that operate law firms. Also, my fiance's family runs one of the larger law firms in north Florida. Furthermore, my family owns a business I could work at if necessary.

I think Stetson would be a good fit, but I'm being pressured to find a non-Florida school from aforementioned fiance. If anybody would give me a few ideas about which schools I should consider given my 160/2.8 from UF, please let me know.

There are quite a few schools I can get into- even if they're all tier3 and tier4. I refuse to believe that it is impossible for me to find a school which will give me a rewarding experience.


How much did you study for the LSAT? A few more points and you can get into some okay schools, and a 170 and you can get into some even better ones.

capnb
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: LSAT higher than GPA (160/2.8)..?

Postby capnb » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:37 pm

I'm consistently 80-90% on the logical reasoning. I've just about mastered logic games which I hadn't prepared for enough for the 1st one. I've just about mastered the reading comp too- its just about speed. I could probably raise it a few more points.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Sushi, uhwrestler and 2 guests