grade school through High school rank vs. LS rank Forum

[rayiner]

Looks like Aeroplane got to you first.

[rayiner]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

0L?

Yes'r ... 0L Here.
I don't think that changes much though. From what I've seen and heard from several friends at T14 LSs (and their classmates when visiting/going to their classes sometimes) is that no single piece of LS is super hard (in the same way curing AIDS or cancer is hard). It's just the high workload of somewhat challenging stuff. I know that is super-subjective, but it seems like there are enough people who can track what I am talking about here ...

Super-Smart = Single Handedly wrote Google's search algorithms, invented+implemented the Euro Dollar, Discovered relativity.
Very smart+Very hard working = do good in LS, business, or some professional career.

I'm making a pretty simple point: There are only a few super-geniuses in the world, and that you don't have to be one to be a T14, V100 kind of person. There are more of these kind of people than super-geniuses in the world. Don't get offended. I mean, think about it: Einstein v Scalia on an IQ test. I'm sure Scalia is very smart, but his intelligence probably isn't on par with what Einstein's was. If you were able to get a candid answer out of him, he would probably recognize that too.

I only bring it up because people on here seem to think that smarts is by and large the main determining factor in LS success. If it were, then Einstein would could have gotten a 4.0 in LS without ever going to class, reading, or studying; even he would have had to work to succeed.

When it comes down to it, Mr. 165 could probably outperform Mr. 171 in T14 LS X if Mr. 165 puts in 12-15hrs/day of solid work, and Mr. 171 only puts in 8hrs/day of work.

I hate you. I'm sick and your post made me laugh then cough so hard I nearly lost a lung.

[RVP11]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

0L?

Yes'r ... 0L Here.
I don't think that changes much though. From what I've seen and heard from several friends at T14 LSs (and their classmates when visiting/going to their classes sometimes) is that no single piece of LS is super hard (in the same way curing AIDS or cancer is hard). It's just the high workload of somewhat challenging stuff. I know that is super-subjective, but it seems like there are enough people who can track what I am talking about here ...

Super-Smart = Single Handedly wrote Google's search algorithms, invented+implemented the Euro Dollar, Discovered relativity.
Very smart+Very hard working = do good in LS, business, or some professional career.

I'm making a pretty simple point: There are only a few super-geniuses in the world, and that you don't have to be one to be a T14, V100 kind of person. There are more of these kind of people than super-geniuses in the world. Don't get offended. I mean, think about it: Einstein v Scalia on an IQ test. I'm sure Scalia is very smart, but his intelligence probably isn't on par with what Einstein's was. If you were able to get a candid answer out of him, he would probably recognize that too.

I only bring it up because people on here seem to think that smarts is by and large the main determining factor in LS success. If it were, then Einstein would could have gotten a 4.0 in LS without ever going to class, reading, or studying; even he would have had to work to succeed.

When it comes down to it, Mr. 165 could probably outperform Mr. 171 in T14 LS X if Mr. 165 puts in 12-15hrs/day of solid work, and Mr. 171 only puts in 8hrs/day of work.

Yeah, from this post it's quite apparent you haven't been to law school.

171 doing 4 hours of work a day will probably beat 165 doing 12-15 hours of work a day. No one studies that much; that's absurd.

And from the people whose grades I know, the correlation between hours of study and grades was very weak.

[Mattalones]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

0L?

<what you said>

Here's the thing, from my perspective.

Nearly everyone's smarts are at a really really similar level. Nearly everyone works really really hard. Grades are curved. There will be smart people and hard workers and those that are both at all levels of the curve, in each class. Nature of the beast I think.

I totally agree! That is yet another reason that I think that "smarts" shouldn't be taken into consideration so crazily when people are thinking about how they will do in LS. I still believe, though, that the people who can just sit and do ALL of the work attentively without breaking much of a sweat are going to be the ones that make it out on top. There are a lot of super-neurotic people in LS who thrive off anxiety, and that isn't sustainable, it messes up interviews, and it just inferior to being able to calmly stick to your own realistic schedule. Being able to plan, time manage, and remain efficient and healthy will pay off (easier said than done, I know. But, if it is done, then that's a HUGE leg up).

[prezidentv8]

Here's what I do. I know the black letter. I try to figure out what profs want. I try to have fun. And I keep in mind that, in the grand scheme of things, law school grades aren't even close to the top of my list. And it will all turn out fine.

Also, the law of diminishing marginal returns is incredibly important.

[RVP11]

IDK what you guys are on about with this "everyone is really smart" business.

Let me preface by saying that I'm no cold call genius, and I certainly don't advocate spending any time preparing to be called on in class. But I hear people say some REALLY stupid stuff in class and I can't help but wonder what they have under the intellectual hood.

[Mattalones]

IDK what you guys are on about with this "everyone is really smart" business.

Let me preface by saying that I'm no cold call genius, and I certainly don't advocate spending any time preparing to be called on in class. But I hear people say some REALLY stupid stuff in class and I can't help but wonder about what they have under the intellectual hood.

+1

[prezidentv8]

IDK what you guys are on about with this "everyone is really smart" business.

Let me preface by saying that I'm no cold call genius, and I certainly don't advocate spending any time preparing to be called on in class. But I hear people say some REALLY stupid stuff in class and I can't help but wonder what they have under the intellectual hood.

I dunno, I say dumb ass shit in class more often than not. But mainly that's cause I don't really care how I sound in class, and often find my mind wandering.

[Oblomov]

HS<UG<LS

[rayiner]

Terrible grades in elementary school. Great grades in middle school + great score on entrance exam -> great magnet HS. Mediocre grades in HS + great SAT -> T50 UG. Terrible grades in UG + great LSAT -> T14 LS.

Good grades in LS -> Mattalones is confused.

[270910]

Super-Smart = Single Handedly wrote Google's search algorithms, invented+implemented the Euro Dollar, Discovered relativity.
Very smart+Very hard working = do good in LS, business, or some professional career.

I'm making a pretty simple point: There are only a few super-geniuses in the world, and that you don't have to be one to be a T14, V100 kind of person. There are more of these kind of people than super-geniuses in the world. Don't get offended. I mean, think about it: Einstein v Scalia on an IQ test. I'm sure Scalia is very smart, but his intelligence probably isn't on par with what Einstein's was. If you were able to get a candid answer out of him, he would probably recognize that too.

I only bring it up because people on here seem to think that smarts is by and large the main determining factor in LS success. If it were, then Einstein would could have gotten a 4.0 in LS without ever going to class, reading, or studying; even he would have had to work to succeed.

When it comes down to it, Mr. 165 could probably outperform Mr. 171 in T14 LS X if Mr. 165 puts in 12-15hrs/day of solid work, and Mr. 171 only puts in 8hrs/day of work.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

IDK what you guys are on about with this "everyone is really smart" business.

Let me preface by saying that I'm no cold call genius, and I certainly don't advocate spending any time preparing to be called on in class. But I hear people say some REALLY stupid stuff in class and I can't help but wonder about what they have under the intellectual hood.

+1

YOU ARE A 0L. WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU '+1'ING A COMMENT ABOUT WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE IN LAW SCHOOL?

asjhgfaskjgafs.

[Unemployed]

+1 to the 1L's, -1 to the 0L.

[TTT-LS]

.

[Mattalones]

Isn't there some way to make 0Ls wear a scarlet letter when posting in the "Forum for Law School Students." An immediate warning sign to would-be believers of dumb comments/advice?

I briefly ventured into the "Choosing a Law School" forum yesterday, was promptly horrified by the level of sheer overconfidence and stupidity, and will not return any time soon. It would be nice if we could keep the discussion here a little more focused/informed.

That was just my two cents, and it may be worth only one cent. You obviously have seen more than I have, as well as experienced it your self. Anyway, I openly admitted I am a 0L ... No secret. Can you describe it to me, so that I might have a slightly less speculative view? I would appreciate it.

[A'nold]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

0L?

<what you said>

Originally, I was going to ignore your posts after "Yes, I am a 0L" but I could not let this one slide. You will be singing a different tune one day. There are TONS of people that studied harder than me and others that did well. Yet, I was able to pick out the top 3-4 in my section within about a week to a month in class. These people did not study harder than anyone else, except the slackers, yet I had them pegged for the top and they were the top. Intelligence matters, IMO, more than hard work, but if you are more intelligent than the rest of your classmates and you work at least as hard as them, you should be at the top of the class.

Also, in law school, intelligence is NOT book smarts IMO. It is common sense and cleverness that gets you to the top, not how much you can memorize. You have to know what the professors wants, to be able to pick up on subteties in class and on the exam. You have to know when a professor is trying to trick you or see if you picked up on a certain subtelty or ambiguity. Plus, you have to be aware enough to know that "working hard" is not the way to go and instead focus on the prize: exam points.

Think of it this way: Students that laugh at professors with a sarcastic Conan O'brien/John Stewart kind of sense of humor will be at the top of the class. The people that look around confused or indignant are the lower half. They like Carrot Top humor.

[Mattalones]

Originally, I was going to ignore your posts after "Yes, I am a 0L" but I could not let this one slide. You will be singing a different tune one day. There are TONS of people that studied harder than me and others that did well. Yet, I was able to pick out the top 3-4 in my section within about a week to a month in class. These people did not study harder than anyone else, except the slackers, yet I had them pegged for the top and they were the top. Intelligence matters, IMO, more than hard work, but if you are more intelligent than the rest of your classmates and you work at least as hard as them, you should be at the top of the class.

Also, in law school, intelligence is NOT book smarts IMO. It is common sense and cleverness that gets you to the top, not how much you can memorize. You have to know what the professors wants, to be able to pick up on subteties in class and on the exam. You have to know when a professor is trying to trick you or see if you picked up on a certain subtelty or ambiguity. Plus, you have to be aware enough to know that "working hard" is not the way to go and instead focus on the prize: exam points.

Think of it this way: Students that laugh at professors with a sarcastic Conan O'brien/John Stewart kind of sense of humor will be at the top of the class. The people that look around confused or indignant are the lower half. They like Carrot Top humor.

I like that. Thanks!

[A'nold]

Originally, I was going to ignore your posts after "Yes, I am a 0L" but I could not let this one slide. You will be singing a different tune one day. There are TONS of people that studied harder than me and others that did well. Yet, I was able to pick out the top 3-4 in my section within about a week to a month in class. These people did not study harder than anyone else, except the slackers, yet I had them pegged for the top and they were the top. Intelligence matters, IMO, more than hard work, but if you are more intelligent than the rest of your classmates and you work at least as hard as them, you should be at the top of the class.

Also, in law school, intelligence is NOT book smarts IMO. It is common sense and cleverness that gets you to the top, not how much you can memorize. You have to know what the professors wants, to be able to pick up on subteties in class and on the exam. You have to know when a professor is trying to trick you or see if you picked up on a certain subtelty or ambiguity. Plus, you have to be aware enough to know that "working hard" is not the way to go and instead focus on the prize: exam points.

Think of it this way: Students that laugh at professors with a sarcastic Conan O'brien/John Stewart kind of sense of humor will be at the top of the class. The people that look around confused or indignant are the lower half. They like Carrot Top humor.

I like that. Thanks!

Anytime.

[prezidentv8]

Oh good, all I do is laugh in class.

YES, I KICK ASS!

[Aeroplane]

Think of it this way: Students that laugh at professors with a sarcastic Conan O'brien/John Stewart kind of sense of humor will be at the top of the class. The people that look around confused or indignant are the lower half. They like Carrot Top humor.

You reminded me of this:

My contracts professor explained that he grades by making a check mark whenever the student makes a "lawyer-like noise" and then tallying the check marks. When pressed on the question of what constitutes a lawyer-like noise, he further explained that it's the sound that causes his hand to make a check mark.

People who thought this was funny did much better than people who thought he was just an asshole.

--LinkRemoved--

[A'nold]

Think of it this way: Students that laugh at professors with a sarcastic Conan O'brien/John Stewart kind of sense of humor will be at the top of the class. The people that look around confused or indignant are the lower half. They like Carrot Top humor.

You reminded me of this:

My contracts professor explained that he grades by making a check mark whenever the student makes a "lawyer-like noise" and then tallying the check marks. When pressed on the question of what constitutes a lawyer-like noise, he further explained that it's the sound that causes his hand to make a check mark.

People who thought this was funny did much better than people who thought he was just an asshole.

--LinkRemoved--

I thought one of my professors was so freakin hilarious last semester. He was one of the biggest smart ass, satirical humor kind of guys I've ever seen. I was constantly laughing, along with like 1/4 of the class. He'd joke around with some students and they seriously did not know what he was talking about and they'd take him literally. Some students, like me, would play along so he loved messing w/ us. He was my fav. prof and it was my fav. class.

I found out towards the end of the semester that some students just despised him and called him a cockey, arrogant SOB. I was completely floored that some students did not like him. They also HATED his "all over the place" lecture teaching style and preferred the more boring, structured classes. I'm pretty sure they did not, as a group, do very well on exams but I think the ones that "got it" did pretty well in that class at least.


Ugh, sorry I'm making this post into a novel, but to the 0L in this thread: I used a crap ton of policy, out there kind of arguments and focused on analyzing in a more intellecual manner in this class, was rigid and rule oriented in one class and I used flashcards to black letter my ass off, I focused more on an element by element analysis in another, etc. It worked really well for me to write my exam for each kind of professor. The last professor, for example, absolutely slaughtered most people in my class on his exam and had an extremely tight curve, lower than the school's curve, and pretty much failed quite a few students. During the semester, I found a very old exam answer that most people did not know about and talked to a 3L. The professor likes UG essay kind of formats and uses gaudy and scholarly sounding transition words. Guess what? Those words and that exact format ended up being his grading rubric. Most people used IRAC. He was pissed.

[RVP11]

Originally, I was going to ignore your posts after "Yes, I am a 0L" but I could not let this one slide. You will be singing a different tune one day. There are TONS of people that studied harder than me and others that did well. Yet, I was able to pick out the top 3-4 in my section within about a week to a month in class. These people did not study harder than anyone else, except the slackers, yet I had them pegged for the top and they were the top. Intelligence matters, IMO, more than hard work, but if you are more intelligent than the rest of your classmates and you work at least as hard as them, you should be at the top of the class.

I think being able to "pick the top" is probably a non-T14 phenomenon.

[A'nold]

Originally, I was going to ignore your posts after "Yes, I am a 0L" but I could not let this one slide. You will be singing a different tune one day. There are TONS of people that studied harder than me and others that did well. Yet, I was able to pick out the top 3-4 in my section within about a week to a month in class. These people did not study harder than anyone else, except the slackers, yet I had them pegged for the top and they were the top. Intelligence matters, IMO, more than hard work, but if you are more intelligent than the rest of your classmates and you work at least as hard as them, you should be at the top of the class.

I think being able to "pick the top" is probably a non-T14 phenomenon.

I was going to qualify that comment earlier, haha. I don't even know if it is really a non-t14 phenomenon as much as it is a TTT truth. I'd bet people are pretty intelligent in the top 30 or so as well.

[Mattalones]

Originally, I was going to ignore your posts after "Yes, I am a 0L" but I could not let this one slide. You will be singing a different tune one day. There are TONS of people that studied harder than me and others that did well. Yet, I was able to pick out the top 3-4 in my section within about a week to a month in class. These people did not study harder than anyone else, except the slackers, yet I had them pegged for the top and they were the top. Intelligence matters, IMO, more than hard work, but if you are more intelligent than the rest of your classmates and you work at least as hard as them, you should be at the top of the class.

I think being able to "pick the top" is probably a non-T14 phenomenon.

I was going to qualify that comment earlier, haha. I don't even know if it is really a non-t14 phenomenon as much as it is a TTT truth. I'd bet people are pretty intelligent in the top 30 or so as well.

A'nold's comment was helpful, but I didn't think to contextualize it by school rank. If A'nold's school was not T14 or T30, is there anyone here who would be willing to share similar insights for his/her school? If so, I would appreciate it.

[270910]

Originally, I was going to ignore your posts after "Yes, I am a 0L" but I could not let this one slide. You will be singing a different tune one day. There are TONS of people that studied harder than me and others that did well. Yet, I was able to pick out the top 3-4 in my section within about a week to a month in class. These people did not study harder than anyone else, except the slackers, yet I had them pegged for the top and they were the top. Intelligence matters, IMO, more than hard work, but if you are more intelligent than the rest of your classmates and you work at least as hard as them, you should be at the top of the class.

I think being able to "pick the top" is probably a non-T14 phenomenon.

+1

[A'nold]

Actually, I will even further qualify the non-t14 thing by adding that my school is a small state school where there is a WIDE range in prelaw stats, especially for the LSAT. Some people just don't do their research or just want to live in the state forever, so they'll come here with a 160's LSAT score even though they could have gotten into much better law schools or they didn't really even try on the LSAT and took it cold or something and got an mid to upper 150's and they were really upper 160's to 170's quality if they would have studies. Thus, it is even easier to pick these students out from the ones that HAD to go here and they stand out even more than at most lower ranked schools.