jeez nvm; sorry to offend anyone who bought a personal statement

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

jeez nvm; sorry to offend anyone who bought a personal statement

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:40 am

anyone know how to delete a thread? This one is most unproductive.
Last edited by HarveySpecterr on Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:44 am

:idea: :arrow: :?:
Last edited by HarveySpecterr on Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AZ123

New
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:08 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby AZ123 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:47 am

I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby cavalier1138 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:48 am

An application benefits from not using pointlessly complicated jargon in order to sound smarter.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16642
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby Rigo » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:50 am

cavalier1138 wrote:An application benefits from not using pointlessly complicated jargon in order to sound smarter.

Seriously.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16642
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby Rigo » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:52 am

HarveySpecterr wrote:Thinking further on this, it might bear on a school's financial aid allocation, expecially need based aid. In other words, they may not want to give need-based aid to someone who could spend $800 on a LSAT prep course, or god knows how much for a consulting firm to perfect the personal statement. Accurate assumptions?

Need-aid is all about your tax returns and those of your parents.
I promise you saying you took a prep course will not impact your aid whatsoever.

User avatar
bitter_melon

Bronze
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:19 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby bitter_melon » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:38 am

In a very narrow sense, there might be some truth to what you're saying, in that schools want your personal statement to be your authentic written voice. So yeah, if you write some piece of crap and then turn it over to a "consultant" who rewrites it, that could potentially hurt you if the written voice doesn't compare to what's on your LSAT essay or if they otherwise suspect that it isn't a reflection of your own abilities, but that would be an extreme case. If you have someone look over your stuff and point out typos, awkward sentence structures, or otherwise areas where it doesn't really work, and then you go and fix that on your own, that's better than turning in some poorly trash that's filled with spelling and grammar mistakes.

But that isn't what you were asking us about, you were asking us to stroke your ego about how brilliant you must be in order for you to be able to do this without any sort of help, and the answer to that is that no, nobody cares, it's not unique, and nobody is going to worship you for it. I did the same thing and I know that I'm not alone, this isn't undergrad, most of us are adults.

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:03 pm

AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:07 pm

Also: wow. Some of y'all are incredibly bitter and negative.

User avatar
UVA2B

Gold
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 10:48 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby UVA2B » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:11 pm

HarveySpecterr wrote:
AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.


[+] Spoiler
The people applying to elite schools probably have better LSAT/GPA. Serious correlation/causation fail here.

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby cavalier1138 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:47 pm

HarveySpecterr wrote:I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.


That's not even remotely true, especially since most law schools don't ask for that information.

HarveySpecterr wrote:Also: wow. Some of y'all are incredibly bitter and negative.


Ask a pretentious question...

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:31 pm

cavalier1138 wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.


That's not even remotely true, especially since most law schools don't ask for that information.

HarveySpecterr wrote:Also: wow. Some of y'all are incredibly bitter and negative.


Ask a pretentious question...


It wasn't a pretentious question; it was just the "jargon" you didn't like. I suppose I could have asked about the value of "being self-taught" but to me that seems unnecessarily wordy. At any rate, a reader who is quick to assume such a word choice guarantees more flash than substance on the part of the writer is one whose opinion lacks value anyway..

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:34 pm

cavalier1138 wrote:An application benefits from not using pointlessly complicated jargon in order to sound smarter.


p.s. while we are criticizing people for their diction, it doesn't technically qualify as "jargon," since there is no particular profession or group who uses that term rendering it difficult to understand for outsiders. It's just a word you didn't know, and now ya do. You're welcome.

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby cavalier1138 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:35 pm

You're a good interviewer, aren't you?

User avatar
mjb447

Silver
Posts: 1279
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby mjb447 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:38 pm

You're definitely not proving cavalier's point right now. :roll:

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29316
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:39 pm

HarveySpecterr wrote:
AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.

No. First, were these law professors? Second, law professors (as opposed to adcomms) don't play a part in the admissions process at most law schools, so what they think about it is irrelevant.

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:04 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.

No. First, were these law professors? Second, law professors (as opposed to adcomms) don't play a part in the admissions process at most law schools, so what they think about it is irrelevant.


No, it was a Ph.D. program, and an uncommon practice at that. (Most doctoral programs don't even ask). While it probably doesn't matter at all, it's still interesting to think about: what can a committee at an elite school tell about the person who lists "Harvard, Columbia, Texas, etc." vs. the person who lists "Thomas Jefferson, Charleston School of Law, and one T14 Dream School?" I agree they probably don't think about this, but as I say, it's interesting to think about nonetheless because if they were so inclined, they could tell something about how we view ourselves.

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of {Being Self-Taught} for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:05 pm

FWIW: If I could, I would revise the title of this thread to: The Value Admissions Committees Might Place on Being Self-Taught

User avatar
rpupkin

Platinum
Posts: 5658
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby rpupkin » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:21 pm

HarveySpecterr wrote:
cavalier1138 wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:Also: wow. Some of y'all are incredibly bitter and negative.


Ask a pretentious question...


It wasn't a pretentious question; it was just the "jargon" you didn't like. I suppose I could have asked about the value of "being self-taught" but to me that seems unnecessarily wordy.

You could have written your OP using 80% fewer words: "I've learned that law school applications ask if you had help in preparing for the LSAT and composing your personal statement. How much do law schools care about this?"

You write with needless complexity. In other words, you're a bad writer. Was it rude for posters to point this out? Probably. But if you want to become a lawyer, you're going to have to get used to this sort of directness. Also, you're going to need to learn to write better. You might as well start now.

User avatar
lymenheimer

Gold
Posts: 3979
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:54 am

Re: The Value of {Being Self-Taught} for Admissions Committees?

Postby lymenheimer » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:23 pm

HarveySpecterr wrote:FWIW: If I could, I would revise the title of this thread to: The Value Admissions Committees Might Place on Being Self-Taught

You can. Edit your first post and change the title

Also lol at comparing phd admissions to jd admissions

User avatar
bitter_melon

Bronze
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:19 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby bitter_melon » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:34 pm

HarveySpecterr wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.

No. First, were these law professors? Second, law professors (as opposed to adcomms) don't play a part in the admissions process at most law schools, so what they think about it is irrelevant.


No, it was a Ph.D. program, and an uncommon practice at that. (Most doctoral programs don't even ask). While it probably doesn't matter at all, it's still interesting to think about: what can a committee at an elite school tell about the person who lists "Harvard, Columbia, Texas, etc." vs. the person who lists "Thomas Jefferson, Charleston School of Law, and one T14 Dream School?" I agree they probably don't think about this, but as I say, it's interesting to think about nonetheless because if they were so inclined, they could tell something about how we view ourselves.


My strong suspicion is that schools only ask this for statistical purposes, because they want to know what schools applicants see them as being comparable to. Only about half of the schools that I applied to asked this question, and I chose not to answer it every time. Nobody ever asked me about it in interviews or at any other time. Schools know if it's a reach school based on other application data, i.e. if you have a 165, the T-13s are all reach schools, they don't need you to let them know that.

I'm really not trying to sound insulting here, but all of this just sounds to me like "how do I subtly let schools know how great I think I am," and the simple fact is that if you write a good statement, have strong softs, and have a good LSAT/GPA, then schools will think that your great. Nobody will care if you didn't take an LSAT review course or if you're applying to a lot of great schools. If you actually get into a lot of great schools, then that will help you out a lot when you are negotiating scholarships, but simply applying is meaningless. Anybody can apply to Harvard, big whoop. Call me when you get in.

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:53 pm

bitter_melon wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.

No. First, were these law professors? Second, law professors (as opposed to adcomms) don't play a part in the admissions process at most law schools, so what they think about it is irrelevant.


No, it was a Ph.D. program, and an uncommon practice at that. (Most doctoral programs don't even ask). While it probably doesn't matter at all, it's still interesting to think about: what can a committee at an elite school tell about the person who lists "Harvard, Columbia, Texas, etc." vs. the person who lists "Thomas Jefferson, Charleston School of Law, and one T14 Dream School?" I agree they probably don't think about this, but as I say, it's interesting to think about nonetheless because if they were so inclined, they could tell something about how we view ourselves.


My strong suspicion is that schools only ask this for statistical purposes, because they want to know what schools applicants see them as being comparable to. Only about half of the schools that I applied to asked this question, and I chose not to answer it every time. Nobody ever asked me about it in interviews or at any other time. Schools know if it's a reach school based on other application data, i.e. if you have a 165, the T-13s are all reach schools, they don't need you to let them know that.

I'm really not trying to sound insulting here, but all of this just sounds to me like "how do I subtly let schools know how great I think I am," and the simple fact is that if you write a good statement, have strong softs, and have a good LSAT/GPA, then schools will think that your great. Nobody will care if you didn't take an LSAT review course or if you're applying to a lot of great schools. If you actually get into a lot of great schools, then that will help you out a lot when you are negotiating scholarships, but simply applying is meaningless. Anybody can apply to Harvard, big whoop. Call me when you get in.


Y'all make a lot of assumptions, man. I'm not going to apply to Harvard, because I am not on that level -- I never implied that I was. I enjoy writing playfully, sure -- take more pleasure in putting together sentences on an anonymous discussion thread than anyone would in their personal statement -- this is just philosophizing. Just kickin' around ideas because it seems fun to read and write and think about. Why's errbody so serious?

User avatar
bitter_melon

Bronze
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:19 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby bitter_melon » Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:02 pm

HarveySpecterr wrote:
bitter_melon wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.

No. First, were these law professors? Second, law professors (as opposed to adcomms) don't play a part in the admissions process at most law schools, so what they think about it is irrelevant.


No, it was a Ph.D. program, and an uncommon practice at that. (Most doctoral programs don't even ask). While it probably doesn't matter at all, it's still interesting to think about: what can a committee at an elite school tell about the person who lists "Harvard, Columbia, Texas, etc." vs. the person who lists "Thomas Jefferson, Charleston School of Law, and one T14 Dream School?" I agree they probably don't think about this, but as I say, it's interesting to think about nonetheless because if they were so inclined, they could tell something about how we view ourselves.


My strong suspicion is that schools only ask this for statistical purposes, because they want to know what schools applicants see them as being comparable to. Only about half of the schools that I applied to asked this question, and I chose not to answer it every time. Nobody ever asked me about it in interviews or at any other time. Schools know if it's a reach school based on other application data, i.e. if you have a 165, the T-13s are all reach schools, they don't need you to let them know that.

I'm really not trying to sound insulting here, but all of this just sounds to me like "how do I subtly let schools know how great I think I am," and the simple fact is that if you write a good statement, have strong softs, and have a good LSAT/GPA, then schools will think that your great. Nobody will care if you didn't take an LSAT review course or if you're applying to a lot of great schools. If you actually get into a lot of great schools, then that will help you out a lot when you are negotiating scholarships, but simply applying is meaningless. Anybody can apply to Harvard, big whoop. Call me when you get in.


Y'all make a lot of assumptions, man. I'm not going to apply to Harvard, because I am not on that level -- I never implied that I was. I enjoy writing playfully, sure -- take more pleasure in putting together sentences on an anonymous discussion thread than anyone would in their personal statement -- this is just philosophizing. Just kickin' around ideas because it seems fun to read and write and think about. Why's errbody so serious?


I didn't literally mean Harvard, my point was just that things like "I'm applying to a bunch of great schools because I see myself as someone who belongs at the top" are meaningless.

User avatar
smaug

Diamond
Posts: 13973
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm

Re: jeez nvm; sorry to offend anyone who bought a personal statement

Postby smaug » Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:05 pm

Good trolling. I support this thread and OP's efforts

User avatar
HarveySpecterr

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: The Value of Autodidacticism for Admissions Committees?

Postby HarveySpecterr » Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:11 pm

bitter_melon wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
bitter_melon wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
HarveySpecterr wrote:
AZ123 wrote:I don't think law schools actually care whether or not you use an Lsat prep course/consulting service/etc. I would assume they just include that question to gather statistics or information, kind of like the question about what other law schools you applied to.


I know for a fact that some admissions committees will care what other schools you applied to because professors confirmed this to me during grad school at UT-Austin. They said they're more apt to accept someone who applies to a bunch of elite schools than someone for whom their own is clearly a "reach" or "Dream" school because it indicates the type of place where the applicant believes him or herself to really belong.

No. First, were these law professors? Second, law professors (as opposed to adcomms) don't play a part in the admissions process at most law schools, so what they think about it is irrelevant.


No, it was a Ph.D. program, and an uncommon practice at that. (Most doctoral programs don't even ask). While it probably doesn't matter at all, it's still interesting to think about: what can a committee at an elite school tell about the person who lists "Harvard, Columbia, Texas, etc." vs. the person who lists "Thomas Jefferson, Charleston School of Law, and one T14 Dream School?" I agree they probably don't think about this, but as I say, it's interesting to think about nonetheless because if they were so inclined, they could tell something about how we view ourselves.


My strong suspicion is that schools only ask this for statistical purposes, because they want to know what schools applicants see them as being comparable to. Only about half of the schools that I applied to asked this question, and I chose not to answer it every time. Nobody ever asked me about it in interviews or at any other time. Schools know if it's a reach school based on other application data, i.e. if you have a 165, the T-13s are all reach schools, they don't need you to let them know that.

I'm really not trying to sound insulting here, but all of this just sounds to me like "how do I subtly let schools know how great I think I am," and the simple fact is that if you write a good statement, have strong softs, and have a good LSAT/GPA, then schools will think that your great. Nobody will care if you didn't take an LSAT review course or if you're applying to a lot of great schools. If you actually get into a lot of great schools, then that will help you out a lot when you are negotiating scholarships, but simply applying is meaningless. Anybody can apply to Harvard, big whoop. Call me when you get in.


Y'all make a lot of assumptions, man. I'm not going to apply to Harvard, because I am not on that level -- I never implied that I was. I enjoy writing playfully, sure -- take more pleasure in putting together sentences on an anonymous discussion thread than anyone would in their personal statement -- this is just philosophizing. Just kickin' around ideas because it seems fun to read and write and think about. Why's errbody so serious?


I didn't literally mean Harvard, my point was just that things like "I'm applying to a bunch of great schools because I see myself as someone who belongs at the top" are meaningless.


Hm. Ok. But I was thinking a phrase less like "belongs at the top" (sounds egotistical, self-important, bleck) and more like "values academic excellence," or "rigorous scholarship"; something that actually does characterize the way "top law schools" see themselves vis-a-vis the others.



Return to “Law School Admissions Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 17 guests