Should I even apply to law school? Forum

[Nicholasnickynic]

Have you thought about taking the mcats?
I know your GPA is probably too low for medical school, but I bet if you mention how you are a brilliant student, they'd let you in.

[beachbum]

He got into Columbia which means hes probably smart enough for 170 to be his realistic goal.

::Shaking head::

(Edit: Adding clarification that I don't intend that to be shaking my head in agreement)

A smart person who puts in the effort can easily hit 170.

The LSAT doesn't measure specific knowledge, more of a way of thinking. A person going to a community college could muster up a 170, just as someone going to Columbia could not surpass 165. Just because you go to Columbia doesn't mean you have the aptitude for the LSAT. Just because OP thinks he's "brilliant" doesn't mean he is.

Sure, but if the average LSAT by college is any indication, Columbia is a much better indicator of superior intelligence/aptitude than Acme University.

[JennBNYC]

Sure, but if the average LSAT by college is any indication, Columbia is a much better indicator of superior intelligence/aptitude than Acme University.

Well, sure, yea.... There's a better chance of applicant X from an Ivy having a better LSAT than applicant Z from Acme U, but I just think it was too much of a blanket statement to say "He got into Columbia which means hes probably smart enough for 170 to be his realistic goal." Do we even know OP's major? He could be a theater major for all we know (totally NOT knocking theater), which doesn't necessarily translate into LSAT aptitude.

Anyway, really didn't mean to draw this out. We can get back on point now .

[artichoke]

He got into Columbia which means hes probably smart enough for 170 to be his realistic goal.

::Shaking head::

(Edit: Adding clarification that I don't intend that to be shaking my head in agreement)

A smart person who puts in the effort can easily hit 170.

The LSAT doesn't measure specific knowledge, more of a way of thinking. A person going to a community college could muster up a 170, just as someone going to Columbia could not surpass 165. Just because you go to Columbia doesn't mean you have the aptitude for the LSAT. Just because OP thinks he's "brilliant" doesn't mean he is.

+100

[blink]

Have you thought about taking the mcats?
I know your GPA is probably too low for medical school, but I bet if you mention how you are a brilliant student, they'd let you in.

there's only one there, champ.

[blink]

OP, are you URM? I ask because the grammar in your post seems rather lacking for somebody lauded as a brilliant student.

What the hell kind of comment is that? URM's are not retarded just because they are under-represented.

OP: Get over the 3.0 hump, get a decent LSAT in the 170s and you'll be in decent shape at some decent schools. But in all honesty, I really doubt you have ANY shot at the t14 regardless... unless your academic letters of rec are freaking awesome AND an add. comm actually forgives your numbers long enough to give to the letters and the rest of your application a fair look.

I think what he meant, was that English may not be the first language in this case. HTH

[09042014]

Sure, but if the average LSAT by college is any indication, Columbia is a much better indicator of superior intelligence/aptitude than Acme University.

Well, sure, yea.... There's a better chance of applicant X from an Ivy having a better LSAT than applicant Z from Acme U, but I just think it was too much of a blanket statement to say "He got into Columbia which means hes probably smart enough for 170 to be his realistic goal." Do we even know OP's major? He could be a theater major for all we know (totally NOT knocking theater), which doesn't necessarily translate into LSAT aptitude.

Anyway, really didn't mean to draw this out. We can get back on point now .

Major has nothing to do with it. I'm basing it on the SAT needed to get Columbia.

I am assuming hard work on the LSAT though.

[whymeohgodno]

Sure, but if the average LSAT by college is any indication, Columbia is a much better indicator of superior intelligence/aptitude than Acme University.

Well, sure, yea.... There's a better chance of applicant X from an Ivy having a better LSAT than applicant Z from Acme U, but I just think it was too much of a blanket statement to say "He got into Columbia which means hes probably smart enough for 170 to be his realistic goal." Do we even know OP's major? He could be a theater major for all we know (totally NOT knocking theater), which doesn't necessarily translate into LSAT aptitude.

Anyway, really didn't mean to draw this out. We can get back on point now .

Major has nothing to do with it. I'm basing it on the SAT needed to get Columbia.

I am assuming hard work on the LSAT though.

Did you just seriously compare the SAT to LSAT? Other than both being standardized tests, there's almost no comparison. Might as well look at SAT II's and shit as well then.

[09042014]

Well, sure, yea.... There's a better chance of applicant X from an Ivy having a better LSAT than applicant Z from Acme U, but I just think it was too much of a blanket statement to say "He got into Columbia which means hes probably smart enough for 170 to be his realistic goal." Do we even know OP's major? He could be a theater major for all we know (totally NOT knocking theater), which doesn't necessarily translate into LSAT aptitude.

Anyway, really didn't mean to draw this out. We can get back on point now .

Major has nothing to do with it. I'm basing it on the SAT needed to get Columbia.

I am assuming hard work on the LSAT though.

Did you just seriously compare the SAT to LSAT? Other than both being standardized tests, there's almost no comparison. Might as well look at SAT II's and shit as well then.

Both are a very very very rough judge of intelligence. I bet there is high correlation between SAT and LSAT.

[whymeohgodno]

Well, sure, yea.... There's a better chance of applicant X from an Ivy having a better LSAT than applicant Z from Acme U, but I just think it was too much of a blanket statement to say "He got into Columbia which means hes probably smart enough for 170 to be his realistic goal." Do we even know OP's major? He could be a theater major for all we know (totally NOT knocking theater), which doesn't necessarily translate into LSAT aptitude.

Anyway, really didn't mean to draw this out. We can get back on point now .

Major has nothing to do with it. I'm basing it on the SAT needed to get Columbia.

I am assuming hard work on the LSAT though.

Did you just seriously compare the SAT to LSAT? Other than both being standardized tests, there's almost no comparison. Might as well look at SAT II's and shit as well then.

Both are a very very very rough judge of intelligence. I bet there is high correlation between SAT and LSAT.

Columbia Stats:
Test Scores -- 25th / 75th Percentile

* SAT Critical Reading: 680 / 770
* SAT Math: 680 / 780
* SAT Writing: 690 / 770

Do these stats really impress you? I'm sure anyone who studies can get over median on both math/reading section of the SAT.

I mean math= given 800.

Reading = at least 700 or you're not an English native.

[09042014]

Major has nothing to do with it. I'm basing it on the SAT needed to get Columbia.

I am assuming hard work on the LSAT though.

Did you just seriously compare the SAT to LSAT? Other than both being standardized tests, there's almost no comparison. Might as well look at SAT II's and shit as well then.

Both are a very very very rough judge of intelligence. I bet there is high correlation between SAT and LSAT.

Columbia Stats:
Test Scores -- 25th / 75th Percentile

* SAT Critical Reading: 680 / 770
* SAT Math: 680 / 780
* SAT Writing: 690 / 770

Do these stats really impress you? I'm sure anyone who studies can get over median on both math/reading section of the SAT.

I mean math= given 800.

Reading = at least 700 or you're not an English native.

All native english speakers score in the 95th percentile? Haha.

If he gunned his way into an SAT score, he can gun to a LSAT. LSAT is learnable, and 170 is easy.

[blsingindisguise]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

[JennBNYC]

If he gunned his way into an SAT score, he can gun to a LSAT. LSAT is learnable, and 170 is easy.

Isn't a 170 ~ 98th percentile? I don't think that's necessarily "easy." Maybe if you're inclined to think the way the LSAT requires, but that's not necessarily every person, even if they go to Columbia. OP won't know until s/he takes the test.

[09042014]

If he gunned his way into an SAT score, he can gun to a LSAT. LSAT is learnable, and 170 is easy.

Isn't a 170 ~ 98th percentile? I don't think that's necessarily "easy." Maybe if you're inclined to think the way the LSAT requires, but that's not necessarily every person, even if they go to Columbia. OP won't know until s/he takes the test.

Your repeated inclination to take my argument to extremes is a perfect example of not thinking logically, which you of course paid dearly for on the LSAT.

[JennBNYC]

If he gunned his way into an SAT score, he can gun to a LSAT. LSAT is learnable, and 170 is easy.

Isn't a 170 ~ 98th percentile? I don't think that's necessarily "easy." Maybe if you're inclined to think the way the LSAT requires, but that's not necessarily every person, even if they go to Columbia. OP won't know until s/he takes the test.

Your repeated inclination to take my argument to extremes is a perfect example of not thinking logically, which you of course paid dearly for on the LSAT.

What? I don't see how I'm taking this to the extremes. If anything, I believe you are by overgeneralizing. You're saying just because he got accepted to Columbia that a 170 will be easy for him. I think that's naive. Just because he goes to an Ivy school doesn't mean he can master the elements of the LSAT. I don't think YOU are thinking logically.

If Columbia, then 170 is not necessarily a true statement. You won't convince me otherwise.

[09042014]

Isn't a 170 ~ 98th percentile? I don't think that's necessarily "easy." Maybe if you're inclined to think the way the LSAT requires, but that's not necessarily every person, even if they go to Columbia. OP won't know until s/he takes the test.

Your repeated inclination to take my argument to extremes is a perfect example of not thinking logically, which you of course paid dearly for on the LSAT.

What? I don't see how I'm taking this to the extremes. If anything, I believe you are by overgeneralizing. You're saying just because he got accepted to Columbia that a 170 will be easy for him. I think that's naive. Just because he goes to an Ivy school doesn't mean he can master the elements of the LSAT. I don't think YOU are thinking logically.

If Columbia, then 170 is not necessarily a true statement. You won't convince me otherwise.

I didn't say it was certain. Just that it isn't unreasonable for a Columbia grade to assume he can do it. Hell I'm an Illinois grad, and I assumed I could beat 170, and I did.

Almost everyone at Columbia is smart enough to hit 170 with a lot of study.

[DreamShake]

OP, are you URM? I ask because the grammar in your post seems rather lacking for somebody lauded as a brilliant student.

What the hell kind of comment is that? URM's are not retarded just because they are under-represented.

OP: Get over the 3.0 hump, get a decent LSAT in the 170s and you'll be in decent shape at some decent schools. But in all honesty, I really doubt you have ANY shot at the t14 regardless... unless your academic letters of rec are freaking awesome AND an add. comm actually forgives your numbers long enough to give to the letters and the rest of your application a fair look.

I think what he meant, was that English may not be the first language in this case. HTH

This, sort of. "Brilliant" + shitty grammar=probably not native English speaker-->significantly increased likelihood of being URM (compare non-native speaker demographics in the USA...guess who's at the top of the list? not blacks, Asians, or whites...)-->inquiry about URM status (hugely relevant factor given OP's low GPA). Sorry for assuming most TLS users could make the jump in logic. Inception meme was 180, though.

[pocket herc]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

[beachbum]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

It's 163, which is higher than the vast majority of colleges in America. I'm inclined to agree with DF on this one: admission to Columbia (barring some incredible pre-college experiences) demonstrates high intelligence and test-taking ability. If nothing else, I'd expect a Columbia student to have the capacity to score upper 160's/lower 170's. Of course, OP is going to have to put in the time studying if he wants to reach that potential.

[bk1]

This, sort of. "Brilliant" + shitty grammar=probably not native English speaker-->significantly increased likelihood of being URM (compare non-native speaker demographics in the USA...guess who's at the top of the list? not blacks, Asians, or whites...)-->inquiry about URM status (hugely relevant factor given OP's low GPA). Sorry for assuming most TLS users could make the jump in logic. Inception meme was 180, though.

It's not a logical jump, it's just you being an idiot and using incorrect terms.

[JennBNYC]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

It's 163, which is higher than the vast majority of colleges in America. I'm inclined to agree with DF on this one: admission to Columbia (barring some incredible pre-college experiences) demonstrates high intelligence and test-taking ability. If nothing else, I'd expect a Columbia student to have the capacity to score upper 160's/lower 170's. Of course, OP is going to have to put in the time studying if he wants to reach that potential.

Really? I'm surprised it's 163. Interesting. If nothing else I think that goes to show that Columbia students are human beings, too, and don't necessarily get 170+. Guess that just goes to show that TLS really is a skewed sample, lol.

[pocket herc]

I don't know. I find it hard to believe that the high-achievers that Columbia tends to attract slackened in their study habits for the lsat.

[beachbum]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

It's 163, which is higher than the vast majority of colleges in America. I'm inclined to agree with DF on this one: admission to Columbia (barring some incredible pre-college experiences) demonstrates high intelligence and test-taking ability. If nothing else, I'd expect a Columbia student to have the capacity to score upper 160's/lower 170's. Of course, OP is going to have to put in the time studying if he wants to reach that potential.

Really? I'm surprised it's 163. Interesting. If nothing else I think that goes to show that Columbia students are human beings, too, and don't necessarily get 170+. Guess that just goes to show that TLS really is a skewed sample, lol.

Yup. You have to remember that, even from Columbia, most students don't put as much time and effort into the LSAT as those on TLS. My point is that admission to Columbia gives you a great starting point (in terms of natural intelligence/ability), making 170 a reasonable goal with the proper study routine.

[moopness]

Intelligence is not uniform. HTH

[NU_Jet55]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

It's 163, which is higher than the vast majority of colleges in America. I'm inclined to agree with DF on this one: admission to Columbia (barring some incredible pre-college experiences) demonstrates high intelligence and test-taking ability. If nothing else, I'd expect a Columbia student to have the capacity to score upper 160's/lower 170's. Of course, OP is going to have to put in the time studying if he wants to reach that potential.

/stupid argument started by DF because he was probably bored