Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
Ghost
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:34 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Ghost » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:45 am

.
Last edited by Ghost on Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bjsesq
TLS Poet Laureate
Posts: 13383
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:02 am

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby bjsesq » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:45 am

The only thing that made me dislike the idea of dropping the LSAT was my desire to see the next generation of prospective law students suffer what I had to suffer. I don't have a problem with granting schools more leeway to determine who they believe who will make the best lawyers and academics in the legal field. The way it stands now, we are too beholden to a stupid magazine.

SrLaw
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby SrLaw » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:56 am

Kili wrote:For those who argue that the LSAT is dependent on resources, and softs should play a stronger factor, I strongly disagree.

Prep for the LSAT consists of devoting time and purchasing materials. In hindsight, $700 (being VERY generous) would be enough to cover the latter and courses thru prep companies (to me) were worthless. This is MUCH less expensive than developing softs.

Soft factors could be seen as exceedingly more expensive. Those with socioeconomic disadvantages simply cannot throw money towards studying abroad, research abroad or across the country, substituting their time allotted to earning a salary for investing in things to pump up their resume beyond basic WE, saving cancerous babies, etc. The months (or years) of devotion to developing XYZ soft has opportunity costs that at the bare minimum will affect a person's earnings.

Diversity programs or initiatives aren't enough to compensate for the full effect of this. Even acquiring scholarships for funding may rely on an individual's previous softs that regress to a similar history of being disadvantaged, and thus unlikely to acquire requisite experience. Let's not forget that the advantaged typically have much more opportunities to professionally develop than others do.

The comparatively small investment in the LSAT is more appropriate. An otherwise disadvantaged person can impress the adcomms on a somewhat level playing ground. Sure there are factors which will influence test scores, possibly unfairly, but I just don't believe it will be enormously significant in where a person ends up. Maybe you won't be a Supreme Court Justice but at least you'll be in the vicinity of your goals (I think TLS obsesses over this a bit too much). Removing the LSAT would partially reduce admissions to a game of who, by a probability of birth, was born to a more advantaged family that funded/encouraged opportunities conducive to ending up at X Law School. (I'm pulling from Rawls here.)

And as far as the greater emphasis on GPA, that's got to be a joke right?


+1

LSAT needs to stay.

Cmart050
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Cmart050 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:59 am

firemedicprelaw wrote:I think interviews would also really help out. This is a career that regularly requires human interaction. There are people who get into lawl school who have the social skills of a dead mollusk. Even more who get in without a even vaguely reasonable reason they want to become a lawyer... I still don't get how people get into law school without knowing why the hell they want to be a lawyer. One of my friends, for instance, went to law school because he (and he admits it) literally didn't have any other idea what to do. Got a specialization in Maritime law and moved to a landlocked desert to practice. The fact that it is considered somewhat inappropriate to use a PS to talk about why you want to go to LS means that people can get in without ever articulating a decent reason.


I absolutely agree with interviews, however, my problem is better articulated in Malcolm Gladwell's Blink. Pretty much, humans carry too many preconceptions to be objective in an interview process, regardless of if they are aware of it or not.

User avatar
Drake014
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:22 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Drake014 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:59 am

Kili wrote:For those who argue that the LSAT is dependent on resources, and softs should play a stronger factor, I strongly disagree.

Prep for the LSAT consists of devoting time and purchasing materials. In hindsight, $700 (being VERY generous) would be enough to cover the latter and courses thru prep companies (to me) were worthless. This is MUCH less expensive than developing softs.

Soft factors could be seen as exceedingly more expensive. Those with socioeconomic disadvantages simply cannot throw money towards studying abroad, research abroad or across the country, substituting their time allotted to earning a salary for investing in things to pump up their resume beyond basic WE, saving cancerous babies, etc. The months (or years) of devotion to developing XYZ soft has opportunity costs that at the bare minimum will affect a person's earnings.
Diversity programs or initiatives aren't enough to compensate for the full effect of this. Even acquiring scholarships for funding may rely on an individual's previous softs that regress to a similar history of being disadvantaged, and thus unlikely to acquire requisite experience. Let's not forget that the advantaged typically have much more opportunities to professionally develop than others do.

The comparatively small investment in the LSAT is more appropriate. An otherwise disadvantaged person can impress the adcomms on a somewhat level playing ground. Sure there are factors which will influence test scores, possibly unfairly, but I just don't believe it will be enormously significant in where a person ends up. Maybe you won't be a Supreme Court Justice but at least you'll be in the vicinity of your goals (I think TLS obsesses over this a bit too much). Removing the LSAT would partially reduce admissions to a game of who, by a probability of birth, was born to a more advantaged family that funded/encouraged opportunities conducive to ending up at X Law School. (I'm pulling from Rawls here.)

And as far as the greater emphasis on GPA, that's got to be a joke right?


You're talking like people develop softs just to put on their law school application. Coming from poverty and overcoming that condition in and of itself is a soft. Not all softs cost a small fortune.

With that said, I don't think the LSAT should be jettisoned. But it does play way too big of a role.

Cmart050 wrote:
firemedicprelaw wrote:I think interviews would also really help out. This is a career that regularly requires human interaction. There are people who get into lawl school who have the social skills of a dead mollusk. Even more who get in without a even vaguely reasonable reason they want to become a lawyer... I still don't get how people get into law school without knowing why the hell they want to be a lawyer. One of my friends, for instance, went to law school because he (and he admits it) literally didn't have any other idea what to do. Got a specialization in Maritime law and moved to a landlocked desert to practice. The fact that it is considered somewhat inappropriate to use a PS to talk about why you want to go to LS means that people can get in without ever articulating a decent reason.


I absolutely agree with interviews, however, my problem is better articulated in Malcolm Gladwell's Blink. Pretty much, humans carry too many preconceptions to be objective in an interview process, regardless of if they are aware of it or not.


This. I don't think interviews do anything but show how good a candidate will be at interviewing (which might help gauging how well they'll do in OCI and early job prospects but that's it).
Last edited by Drake014 on Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby FiveSermon » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:01 pm

SrLaw wrote:If anything, drop GPA. I am tired of seeing people with a 160 LSAT and a 3.88 GPA from their TTT in Poli Sci gain admission to schools in which they cannot compete.


Not very subtle attack on UVA ED?

Ghost
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:34 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Ghost » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:03 pm

.
Last edited by Ghost on Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby TaipeiMort » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:04 pm

I think removing the LSAT requirement is going to damage non-ivy UG, white, asian, and Jewish kids the most.

URMs (with the exception of possibly American Indians) will cease to exist. Top law schools will take more ivy kids (so OCS can still have something to brag about to employers), and many more AAs, Mexicans, and Puerto Ricans-- many more will apply with palatable numbers and many more will apply in general because the LSAT currently weeds out a ton of minority students from top schools and discourages many from even attempting to go to law school.

You will have kids who previously would have had a 3.92/130 in communications from Chicago State now simply having a 3.92 and getting auto-admitted at CCN.

At the same time, currently overrepresented groups (Jews, Asians, Mormons) that don't have an Ivy or dark skin will get nailed in the admissions process. If URMs suddenly become fully represented and ivy kids take up maybe 50% more spots than they did previously, you would have the current overrepesented groups go down by 30%.

Think of Columbia admissions outcomes for the following candidates in the current system:

Princeton UG (167/3.85), Ohio State Caucasian (173/3.5), NYU Jew (172/3.6), Cal State Northridge African American (155/3.9), Arizona St. Mexican (142/3.84)

Under the current system, the Princeton student and the African American get WL and the Hispanic student gets rejected. The Jew and the Caucasian from T1 UGs get accepted.


Under the new system, the Jew and Caucasian would get rejected and the other three would be auto admits.

While removing the LSAT will help mitigate the URM problem in the legal profession, it will elminate and essentially fair and merited path for many.

User avatar
Drake014
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:22 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Drake014 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:04 pm

FiveSermon wrote:
SrLaw wrote:If anything, drop GPA. I am tired of seeing people with a 160 LSAT and a 3.88 GPA from their TTT in Poli Sci gain admission to schools in which they cannot compete.


Not very subtle attack on UVA ED?


And you have evidence that they can't compete? Graduation and bar passage rates are fairly high at schools that average a 160 LSAT and 3.88 GPA.

User avatar
Drake014
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:22 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Drake014 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:05 pm

Kili wrote:
Drake014 wrote:
You're talking like people develop softs just to put on their law school applkcation. Coming from poverty and overcoming that condition in and of itself is a soft. Not all softs cost a small fortune.

With that said, I don't think the LSAT should be jettisoned. But it does play way too big of a role.


Right, but an advantaged person will almost always blow you out of the water when that is all there is to compare. Not to mention their diversity of softs will be of greater breadth.

EDIT: My point is LSAT should play a big role. I concur with the great equalizer argument.


You're assuming your value system is comparable to that of the adcoms. It isn't. I know several people who sit on the admissions committee at my law school and they'll value overcoming poverty way over a summer in France.

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby FiveSermon » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:06 pm

But I think if we have standards and expect people to work hard (NOT teach a test, but teach material), this would be more beneficial to everyone. And yes, I believe there are BIG problems with US education, too.

But seriously, applying to law school is a little elitist. I could hardly afford to do so, living off of a graduate assistantship salary. It took a big chunk of my loans to pay for Powerscore Bibles, signing up with LSAC, the LSAT test, and application fees. This is certainly not attainable for everyone.


If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby FiveSermon » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:08 pm

Drake014 wrote:
FiveSermon wrote:
SrLaw wrote:If anything, drop GPA. I am tired of seeing people with a 160 LSAT and a 3.88 GPA from their TTT in Poli Sci gain admission to schools in which they cannot compete.


Not very subtle attack on UVA ED?


And you have evidence that they can't compete? Graduation and bar passage rates are fairly high at schools that average a 160 LSAT and 3.88 GPA.


Not really other than the fact that the LSAT is the best measure of success in law school. It might not be all that great but I'd put my money on the student who got admitted for his LSAT rather than his GPA. Or URM status.

User avatar
Drake014
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:22 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Drake014 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:09 pm

FiveSermon wrote:
But I think if we have standards and expect people to work hard (NOT teach a test, but teach material), this would be more beneficial to everyone. And yes, I believe there are BIG problems with US education, too.

But seriously, applying to law school is a little elitist. I could hardly afford to do so, living off of a graduate assistantship salary. It took a big chunk of my loans to pay for Powerscore Bibles, signing up with LSAC, the LSAT test, and application fees. This is certainly not attainable for everyone.


If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.


::sigh:: I hate this argument. There are a lot of people who benefit more from a study course than independent study. Not everyone benefits the same way from the same way of studying. The point is that the wealthy have all available options while the poor have few. Consequently, the wealthy will do better from studying on average.

FiveSermon wrote:Not really other than the fact that the LSAT is the best measure of success in law school. It might not be all that great but I'd put my money on the student who got admitted for his LSAT rather than his GPA. Or URM status.


Its somewhat of an indicator of 1L grades. If you put your money on an applicant's overall law school performance or performance as a lawyer, you have about a roulette wheels chance of losing your money.

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby FiveSermon » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:12 pm

Drake014 wrote:
FiveSermon wrote:
But I think if we have standards and expect people to work hard (NOT teach a test, but teach material), this would be more beneficial to everyone. And yes, I believe there are BIG problems with US education, too.

But seriously, applying to law school is a little elitist. I could hardly afford to do so, living off of a graduate assistantship salary. It took a big chunk of my loans to pay for Powerscore Bibles, signing up with LSAC, the LSAT test, and application fees. This is certainly not attainable for everyone.


If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.


::sigh:: I hate this argument. There are a lot of people who benefit more from a study course than independent study. Not everyone benefits the same way from the same way of studying. The point is that the wealthy have all available options while the poor have few. Consequently, the wealthy will do better from studying on average.


Most people on TLS will probably say that their prep course didn't help them much.
I can't really say because I didn't take a prep course but I don't think it would have helped me much more anyways. What can they teach me that I can't learn from powerscore books or taking preptests?

Not to mention lurking on TLS forums. Anything that prepcourses can teach you, you can learn from self study.

If you can't then you're probably in the minority.

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby FiveSermon » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:14 pm

Drake014 wrote:
FiveSermon wrote:
But I think if we have standards and expect people to work hard (NOT teach a test, but teach material), this would be more beneficial to everyone. And yes, I believe there are BIG problems with US education, too.

But seriously, applying to law school is a little elitist. I could hardly afford to do so, living off of a graduate assistantship salary. It took a big chunk of my loans to pay for Powerscore Bibles, signing up with LSAC, the LSAT test, and application fees. This is certainly not attainable for everyone.


If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.


::sigh:: I hate this argument. There are a lot of people who benefit more from a study course than independent study. Not everyone benefits the same way from the same way of studying. The point is that the wealthy have all available options while the poor have few. Consequently, the wealthy will do better from studying on average.

FiveSermon wrote:Not really other than the fact that the LSAT is the best measure of success in law school. It might not be all that great but I'd put my money on the student who got admitted for his LSAT rather than his GPA. Or URM status.


Its somewhat of an indicator of 1L grades. If you put your money on an applicant's overall law school performance or performance as a lawyer, you have about a roulette wheels chance of losing your money.


I never mentioned anything about performance as a lawyer.

Also I'd rather have a roulette wheels chance than whatever chance I would get from betting against the best indicator of success in law school that we have. Just because it's a weak correlation doesn't mean that it's worthless.

SrLaw
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby SrLaw » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:15 pm

FiveSermon wrote:If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.


Agreed. People who have high GPA's and a low LSAT score usually went to a mediocre UG and majored in something easy. They then tank the LSAT because they are not used to having to put in the extra effort to achieve. The LSAT is basically something to show how bad you want it. I would rather have a 175/2.7 student who majored in Econ than a 162/3.9 major who is a Communications graduate.

- Anyone can go to the bookstore and pick a book off the shelf and read. Go to your local bookstore, sit down and read it there. Download PT. Borrow from a friend. I spent $70 for studying purposes for the LSAT. The LSAT is the one half decent thing LS Admissions has going for it. I do not see how looking at candidates "volunteer" hours proves anything? Once again, a Comm major at TTT U will have a lot more time to "volunteer" than a Engineering major at Cornell.

peter844
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:35 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby peter844 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:16 pm

FiveSermon wrote:
Drake014 wrote:
FiveSermon wrote:
But I think if we have standards and expect people to work hard (NOT teach a test, but teach material), this would be more beneficial to everyone. And yes, I believe there are BIG problems with US education, too.

But seriously, applying to law school is a little elitist. I could hardly afford to do so, living off of a graduate assistantship salary. It took a big chunk of my loans to pay for Powerscore Bibles, signing up with LSAC, the LSAT test, and application fees. This is certainly not attainable for everyone.


If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.


::sigh:: I hate this argument. There are a lot of people who benefit more from a study course than independent study. Not everyone benefits the same way from the same way of studying. The point is that the wealthy have all available options while the poor have few. Consequently, the wealthy will do better from studying on average.

FiveSermon wrote:Not really other than the fact that the LSAT is the best measure of success in law school. It might not be all that great but I'd put my money on the student who got admitted for his LSAT rather than his GPA. Or URM status.


Its somewhat of an indicator of 1L grades. If you put your money on an applicant's overall law school performance or performance as a lawyer, you have about a roulette wheels chance of losing your money.


I never mentioned anything about performance as a lawyer.

Also I'd rather have a roulette wheels chance than whatever chance I would get from betting against the best indicator of success in law school that we have. Just because it's a weak correlation doesn't mean that it's worthless.



Sorry I was reading the posts, but I think what Drake is saying that there needs to be less emphasis on the test; not that the test is worthless.

User avatar
Drake014
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:22 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Drake014 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:17 pm

FiveSermon wrote:Most people on TLS will probably say that their prep course didn't help them much.
I can't really say because I didn't take a prep course but I don't think it would have helped me much more anyways. What can they teach me that I can't learn from powerscore books or taking preptests?

Not to mention lurking on TLS forums. Anything that prepcourses can teach you, you can learn from self study.

If you can't then you're probably in the minority.


You're making gross generalizations from your own experience. The best statistics I've seen that shows the difference between independent study and prep courses show that prep courses improve someone's scoring about 2 points more than independent study. I wish I had a link but I looked up the statistics back around the time when I took the LSAT, which was a long time ago (so you'll just have to trust me on this one). Although a 2 point difference isn't huge, the study did not look into whether certain kinds of people benefit more from prep courses over independent study. In other words, that 2 points could be an understatement for a segment of the population and an overstatement for another segment.

Personally I took a prep course. I went from the low 160s to 177 on the actual test. As you can see, my personal experience differs greatly from yours. That's why you shouldn't go off of just your personal experience.

SrLaw
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby SrLaw » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:17 pm

FiveSermon wrote:
SrLaw wrote:If anything, drop GPA. I am tired of seeing people with a 160 LSAT and a 3.88 GPA from their TTT in Poli Sci gain admission to schools in which they cannot compete.


Not very subtle attack on UVA ED?



You could say that. However, I am not saying all high GPA/low LSAT students. Just students with a fluff major from a subpar school. I would say that an Engineering major with a 3.88 and a 160 is a LOT different than a 3.88/160 Comm major.

- If anything schools should factor in UG and majors for admissions than service hours.

SrLaw
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby SrLaw » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:20 pm

Just throwing this out there, but I think Political Science is the most worthless UG major on the market. Why not make all future law students go through prelaw classes like all med school majors go through premed classes?

firemed
Posts: 1195
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:36 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby firemed » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:23 pm

SrLaw wrote:Just throwing this out there, but I think Political Science is the most worthless UG major on the market. Why not make all future law students go through prelaw classes like all med school majors go through premed classes?


Grades in required courses can be a good indicator of success as well. Wouldn't hurt, fur shur.

User avatar
Drake014
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:22 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Drake014 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:25 pm

FiveSermon wrote:I never mentioned anything about performance as a lawyer.


This was more to allude to the fact that law school performance wasn't the be all end all. Its also of note that you didn't say what that meant. Do you mean high grades? Job obtained at OCI? I'd honestly say that the person who got a 2L firm job was better off than the person with higher grades but didn't get an OCI placement (and that does happen) but your definition of performance might be different than mine.

FiveSermon wrote:Also I'd rather have a roulette wheels chance than whatever chance I would get from betting against the best indicator of success in law school that we have. Just because it's a weak correlation doesn't mean that it's worthless.


Ummm... perhaps you're not familiar with a roulette wheel. There are 2 options to pick from, red and black. Each options represents slightly below a 50% chance of winning the bet (its slightly below because there is also a very small amount of green so that the house can win sometimes).

So, let's say red is the high LSAT student having a more successful law school performance and black represents the student with the high GPA, with green being a tie. By implication, I was pointing out that betting on one or the other would result in you having about the same chance of winning or losing. GPA is a better indicator of 2L and 3L grades, the LSAT is a better indicator of 1L grades (and only 1L grades, so please stop implying something more than that by referring to overall law school performance because it makes it look like you don't know what you're talking about)

User avatar
DeeCee
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:09 am

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby DeeCee » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:58 pm

FiveSermon wrote:
But I think if we have standards and expect people to work hard (NOT teach a test, but teach material), this would be more beneficial to everyone. And yes, I believe there are BIG problems with US education, too.

But seriously, applying to law school is a little elitist. I could hardly afford to do so, living off of a graduate assistantship salary. It took a big chunk of my loans to pay for Powerscore Bibles, signing up with LSAC, the LSAT test, and application fees. This is certainly not attainable for everyone.


If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.


Where were you able to get the preptests for free? If you are talking about downloading them illegally, I'm not interested. If you know of a website where all of the PTs are free legitimately, please share it with me.

Anyway, I did not download anything. I bought 2 PS Bibles (on Amazon, average $50 a piece), multiple books of the PTs, and numerous single PTs. And then, I had all the usual expenses, as stated in my post above. If you think that's not a lot of money, it is for me. Looking at the costs conservatively, I spent close to 1K, including app fees and everything.

1K out of my 10K salary is a big chunk. You should not assume that each of us has the same life experiences as you and that we are simply able to buy one book, take the test, and be done. Some people need more or less help, such as classes.

User avatar
Blindc1rca
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:11 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby Blindc1rca » Sat Jan 15, 2011 1:04 pm

the LSAT is a good metric and it should stay. that said it shouldn't be weighted as it is, especially with respect to top schools. i simply fail to believe that the people behind a 171 and a 178 are that different with regards to intellect.

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Postby FiveSermon » Sat Jan 15, 2011 1:05 pm

DCLaw11 wrote:
FiveSermon wrote:
But I think if we have standards and expect people to work hard (NOT teach a test, but teach material), this would be more beneficial to everyone. And yes, I believe there are BIG problems with US education, too.

But seriously, applying to law school is a little elitist. I could hardly afford to do so, living off of a graduate assistantship salary. It took a big chunk of my loans to pay for Powerscore Bibles, signing up with LSAC, the LSAT test, and application fees. This is certainly not attainable for everyone.


If you have access to a computer+internet you can download all of the preptests+explanations for free. The only other material you would need is probably the powerscore books for logic games and logical reasoning.

Please don't tell me you can't afford the $100 or so it would cost for the prep material. If you can't afford that than you probably should consider your next meal before thinking about law school.


Where were you able to get the preptests for free? If you are talking about downloading them illegally, you might want to keep those activities to yourself. If you know of a website where all of the PTs are free legitimately, please share it with me.

Anyway, I did not download anything. I bought 2 PS Bibles (on Amazon, average $50 a piece), multiple books of the PTs, and numerous single PTs. And then, I had all the usual expenses, as stated in my post above. If you think that's not a lot of money, it is for me. Looking at the costs conservatively, I spent close to 1K, including app fees and everything.

1K out of my 10K salary is a big chunk. You should not assume that each of us has the same life experiences as you and that we are simply able to buy one book, take the test, and be done. Some people need more or less help, such as classes.


Stop making straw man arguments. I never said I bought one book, then took the test. And I never said that was the way for everyone.

But if you can't study for the test with every single preptest made available and the powerscore books then well..I don't even know what to say.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests