dresden doll wrote:
It's not about discriminating against T3 kids that take full rides for personal reasons. I can off hand think of three posters that went through the app cycle at the same time I did with decent, but not compelling numbers (i.e. numbers hovering around the 25th percentile LSAT wise and somewhat above median in terms of GPA). The acceptances they scored at certain schools plainly indicated they had put a fantastic app package together. (Just to note, none of them is a URM). If those posters applied for the position and submitted their numbers along with their acceptances, it'd be damn clear that they were capable of putting together compelling PSs. In fact, if I could go back in time, I'd have had all three of them review my PS before I submitted it to Berkeley - I think it may have made the difference.
The competent kid that goes to a T3 for the full ride would likely have gotten in absent a compelling PS. I don't object to submitting writing samples as a way of proving competence but I imagine that a comparison of numbers with acceptances gained would give the team a pretty fair and reasonable idea of who can write. Somewhat modest numbers coupled with compelling acceptances strongly imply that the person did a damn good job putting that app together. And there's no disagreeing with results either, the way there may be when multiple people are judging writing samples.
This is the absolute truth. If someone is capable of getting into a top law school, then they are capable of helping others get into a top law school. Where they choose to attend is irrelevant.
LOL? This is the best If-->Then statement I've ever encountered. The trouble with DD's line of reasoning is she thinks it was the PS that got these "three posters" into their schools. Without knowing more about these anonymous people, including WE, ability and extracurricular involvement, it's faulty to think their writing ability was the determining factor in achieving an unlikely admission.
Since it appears this position will require few to no computer science skills, qualificaitons should be based on writing ability, not logical or analytical reasoning (LSAT...) or how well you did in your engineering classes (GPA). But that's just my two cents.
PKSebben wrote: But If admissions (and thus GPA/LSAT) is used by Ken and Co. as a proxy for who will be a great content producer generally, then I think they will be disappointed in their results. I know enough "top" law student admits to know that a great many of them suck out loud.
Who is Tangerine Gleam? I've never seen this person on TLS ever. I don't like the world outside the lounge, it's cold and dismal and full of strange creatures.