WSJ Blog on the LSAT

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
things fall apart
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:39 am

WSJ Blog on the LSAT

Postby things fall apart » Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:33 pm

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/01/13/is- ... -the-dodo/


Interesting when you tie this in with the oversaturation problem. The LSAT is also a big moneymaker.

I think rather than getting rid of it, I think there should be some flexibility either in modifying the test or coming up with a different benchmark. I always find it interesting "some schools" get rid of this because that always means Yale Stanford Harvard etc because they are immune to ratings and the game they were winning before the ratings were ever even imagined.

User avatar
pjo
Posts: 610
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:14 pm

Re: WSJ Blog on the LSAT

Postby pjo » Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:43 pm

The article really doesn't give much support for the need to get rid of the LSAT as much as the need to add additional criteria for being admitted. You don't have to get rid of the LSAT in order to have interviews like they do with med. school, which would def. help things out. What would be even more interesting is if you needed 3-5 years working in a legal setting to get into a good school, like B-School. I think both of those would help cut down the applicant pool.

User avatar
Pricer
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 9:25 pm

Re: WSJ Blog on the LSAT

Postby Pricer » Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:11 pm

pjo wrote:The article really doesn't give much support for the need to get rid of the LSAT as much as the need to add additional criteria for being admitted. You don't have to get rid of the LSAT in order to have interviews like they do with med. school, which would def. help things out. What would be even more interesting is if you needed 3-5 years working in a legal setting to get into a good school, like B-School. I think both of those would help cut down the applicant pool.


You don't need an MBA and to pass a business test to practice business. You do need a JD and to pass the BAR to practice law. Business school and law school are not comparable. An MBA is just an extra degree that earns you more respect and networking opportunities. A JD is essentially required to practice law, at least to the extent that no state BAR is going to allow you to take the exam without the degree.

Big Dog
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: WSJ Blog on the LSAT

Postby Big Dog » Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:16 pm

Actually, there are a handful of states that do not require a JD grad to sit for the bar. California is one of them. New York is another, but does require one year of LS.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests