Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby BruceWayne » Thu Dec 29, 2011 2:21 pm

No disrespect to the OP but this is a terrible question. The two test formats are entirely different to a point where they are almost incomparable. One of them is a predominately objective written exam and based on logical reasoning. The other is highly subjective and often about who can type up the most in the shortest period of time. They are almost completely incomparable.

vtoodler
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:19 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby vtoodler » Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:09 pm

BruceWayne wrote:No disrespect to the OP but this is a terrible question. The two test formats are entirely different to a point where they are almost incomparable. One of them is a predominately objective written exam and based on logical reasoning. The other is highly subjective and often about who can type up the most in the shortest period of time. They are almost completely incomparable.


No offense taken. The question might not make sense to you but it does to me.

Thanks for all the responses.

User avatar
sandwiches5000
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:54 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby sandwiches5000 » Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:38 pm

BruceWayne wrote:No disrespect to the OP but this is a terrible question. The two test formats are entirely different to a point where they are almost incomparable. One of them is a predominately objective written exam and based on logical reasoning. The other is highly subjective and often about who can type up the most in the shortest period of time. They are almost completely incomparable.


LOL. But meanwhile, schools love to say it's a predictor of law school success. Hmmm.

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby BruceWayne » Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:46 pm

sandwiches5000 wrote:LOL. But meanwhile, schools love to say it's a predictor of law school success. Hmmm.


What are you talking about? LSAC themselves says it has a .35 median correlation. Do you know what you're talking about?

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/LSAT-Score- ... rmance.pdf

User avatar
D'Angelo
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby D'Angelo » Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:51 pm

BruceWayne wrote:
sandwiches5000 wrote:LOL. But meanwhile, schools love to say it's a predictor of law school success. Hmmm.


What are you talking about? LSAC themselves says it has a .35 median correlation. Do you know what you're talking about?

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/LSAT-Score- ... rmance.pdf

schools tout it as the highest correlation!
because there is nothing that predicts law school success...

User avatar
Bildungsroman
Posts: 5548
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby Bildungsroman » Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:56 pm

arism87 wrote:added stress knowing you don't have the option to retake them..

This is huge. The LSAT is easy because there's effectively no clock on it. You can study for years and take it as many times as you want (and the score that matters most by an enormous margin is your highest one). Any given dumbass can eventually do really well and have the results be useful, while you can't really study for law school exams until you start law school and you only get one shot per exam to make it count, so everything is more condensed and the stakes are of a completely different nature.

User avatar
ilovesf
Posts: 11743
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby ilovesf » Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:27 am

Law school exams are a marathon. You're taking multiple tests in a short amount of time - maybe you can't really understand that until you go through it. After you take one test, part of you wants desperately to sit back, relax, evaluate how you did, freak out about it, and/or celebrate... but you can't. In the next couple of days, you have to take another test. And repeat. And if you say this is like college - law school exams are not like any college tests I've ever taken.

User avatar
zanda
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:36 am

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby zanda » Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:40 am

LSAT was a joke. 1L exams are not. 2L and 3L exams are somewhere in between.

User avatar
sandwiches5000
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:54 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby sandwiches5000 » Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:47 am

BruceWayne wrote:
sandwiches5000 wrote:LOL. But meanwhile, schools love to say it's a predictor of law school success. Hmmm.


What are you talking about? LSAC themselves says it has a .35 median correlation. Do you know what you're talking about?

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/LSAT-Score- ... rmance.pdf


I was being sarcastic. The LSAT clearly is not an accurate predictor of law school success and this is supported by what you said, that the law school exams and the LSAT are too dissimilar for comparison. It seems ironic that the test is afforded such weight and hailed as this "predictor of law school success" when clearly it is not. But lacking a better alternative, I see it's use in itself as a measure of some sort of intellectual ability. Just not as a predictor of law school success.

User avatar
cinephile
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby cinephile » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:14 am

^besides, if everyone in your class has roughly the same LSAT, how is that a predictor of anything? I'd rather be competing against random college kids taking the LSAT for fun rather than compete against my peers.

User avatar
Borhas
Posts: 4852
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby Borhas » Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:18 am

they're both relatively easy depending on your goals

User avatar
Philosopher King
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:25 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby Philosopher King » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:45 pm

sandwiches5000 wrote:
BruceWayne wrote:
sandwiches5000 wrote:LOL. But meanwhile, schools love to say it's a predictor of law school success. Hmmm.


What are you talking about? LSAC themselves says it has a .35 median correlation. Do you know what you're talking about?

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/LSAT-Score- ... rmance.pdf


I was being sarcastic. The LSAT clearly is not an accurate predictor of law school success and this is supported by what you said, that the law school exams and the LSAT are too dissimilar for comparison. It seems ironic that the test is afforded such weight and hailed as this "predictor of law school success" when clearly it is not. But lacking a better alternative, I see it's use in itself as a measure of some sort of intellectual ability. Just not as a predictor of law school success.


I'm glad I'm not the only one who knows this around here. The LSAT is worth very little but the law school community pretends otherwise. They think it works because it hasn't failed miserably is all.

adonai wrote:My exams were a lot easier than the LSAT. The only thing "harder" about exams are that there's a lot of pressure, plus a forced curve. LSAT was a lot more difficult for me just because it was not learnable for me. I don't even see a connection between the two, but I'll save that rant for another thread.


There is no connection. The LSAT is scandalous.
Last edited by Philosopher King on Mon Jan 16, 2012 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
stab master arson
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:23 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby stab master arson » Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:32 pm

The LSAT is harder because it starts earlier in the day and imposes all sorts of gay restrictions that make no sense, e.g., no earplugs.

Also, it's little more than a money-making scheme of the legal-industrial-academic complex. But then again, so is law school.

adonai
Posts: 1033
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:09 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby adonai » Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:39 pm

I think it would be a BIT more accurate if they used law school MC exams instead. Perhaps create fictional statutes and present a fact pattern with a series of 5-10 questions following. At least this method will have SOME relation to law school as it will test applying law to fact in a law school type exam.

User avatar
Kirk
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 2:58 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby Kirk » Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:03 pm

If by harder, you mean anxiety. . .the level is about the same. Right now I am waiting for exam grade results, so the stress meter is off the charts. On the really hard exam tests you think you blew it and on the easier tests the curse (I mean curve) definitely freaks you out (if it was ez for me, it was probably ez for everyone else). To borrow a line from Herman Cain, lots things are twirling in your head.

That said, the LSAT places you on the same field with everyone trying to get into the best law schools in the nation. If you don’t get the LSAT right, you are relegated to the basement league at a time when this economy even has the major T school students panicky.

The biggest difference is that exams take place after you have made a serious time commitment, shelled out $ for moving, living expense and possibly tuition.

User avatar
Philosopher King
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:25 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby Philosopher King » Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:17 pm

stab master arson wrote:The LSAT is harder because it starts earlier in the day and imposes all sorts of gay restrictions that make no sense, e.g., no earplugs.

Also, it's little more than a money-making scheme of the legal-industrial-academic complex. But then again, so is law school.


I can see the no earplugs rule but the epitome of nonsensical rules is the ban on mechanical pencils. I wonder if LSAC sees how ironic it is that these rules make no sense yet the LSAT is supposed to test us to see if we can make sense. No mechanical pencils. What a joke. These pinheads can't think logically to save their pathetic lives yet they think they have this great exam to test us? LOL!

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby AreJay711 » Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:21 pm

I think the LSAT is harder even though there is less pressure. Law school exams aren't "hard" it is just the curve against people that are all have the same academic ability as you makes it difficult to do well.

User avatar
NYC Law
Posts: 1569
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:33 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby NYC Law » Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:30 pm

AreJay711 wrote:I think the LSAT is harder even though there is less pressure. Law school exams aren't "hard" it is just the curve against people that are all have the same academic ability as you makes it difficult to do well.


+1

So far none of my LS exams have been as objectively difficult as the LSAT, there's just more pressure.

User avatar
cinephile
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby cinephile » Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:54 pm

Philosopher King wrote:
I can see the no earplugs rule but the epitome of nonsensical rules is the ban on mechanical pencils. I wonder if LSAC sees how ironic it is that these rules make no sense yet the LSAT is supposed to test us to see if we can make sense. No mechanical pencils. What a joke. These pinheads can't think logically to save their pathetic lives yet they think they have this great exam to test us? LOL!


There is a logic to banning mechanical pencils. People could stuff little strips of paper into the pencil and have a cheat sheet. When I taught middle school, I saw kids try this several times.

User avatar
Philosopher King
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:25 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby Philosopher King » Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:58 pm

cinephile wrote:
Philosopher King wrote:
I can see the no earplugs rule but the epitome of nonsensical rules is the ban on mechanical pencils. I wonder if LSAC sees how ironic it is that these rules make no sense yet the LSAT is supposed to test us to see if we can make sense. No mechanical pencils. What a joke. These pinheads can't think logically to save their pathetic lives yet they think they have this great exam to test us? LOL!


There is a logic to banning mechanical pencils. People could stuff little strips of paper into the pencil and have a cheat sheet. When I taught middle school, I saw kids try this several times.


I'm on the Academic Integrity board. I'm not going to cheat on an exam. I pass judgement others who cheat.

User avatar
D'Angelo
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby D'Angelo » Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:59 pm

Philosopher King wrote:
cinephile wrote:
Philosopher King wrote:
I can see the no earplugs rule but the epitome of nonsensical rules is the ban on mechanical pencils. I wonder if LSAC sees how ironic it is that these rules make no sense yet the LSAT is supposed to test us to see if we can make sense. No mechanical pencils. What a joke. These pinheads can't think logically to save their pathetic lives yet they think they have this great exam to test us? LOL!


There is a logic to banning mechanical pencils. People could stuff little strips of paper into the pencil and have a cheat sheet. When I taught middle school, I saw kids try this several times.


I'm on the Academic Integrity board. I'm not going to cheat on an exam. I pass judgement others who cheat.

congratulations?

User avatar
Philosopher King
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:25 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby Philosopher King » Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:06 am

D'Angelo wrote:
Philosopher King wrote:
cinephile wrote:
Philosopher King wrote:
I can see the no earplugs rule but the epitome of nonsensical rules is the ban on mechanical pencils. I wonder if LSAC sees how ironic it is that these rules make no sense yet the LSAT is supposed to test us to see if we can make sense. No mechanical pencils. What a joke. These pinheads can't think logically to save their pathetic lives yet they think they have this great exam to test us? LOL!


There is a logic to banning mechanical pencils. People could stuff little strips of paper into the pencil and have a cheat sheet. When I taught middle school, I saw kids try this several times.


I'm on the Academic Integrity board. I'm not going to cheat on an exam. I pass judgement others who cheat.

congratulations?


Seriously, how the hell is a piece of paper from a mechanical pencil going to help? That's assuming you wouldn't get caught, which you would. You are better off writing on tissues, which are allowed in. There is no reason for this stupid rule. It's useless just like the LSAT itself.

User avatar
stab master arson
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:23 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby stab master arson » Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:15 am

Philosopher King wrote:
stab master arson wrote:The LSAT is harder because it starts earlier in the day and imposes all sorts of gay restrictions that make no sense, e.g., no earplugs.

Also, it's little more than a money-making scheme of the legal-industrial-academic complex. But then again, so is law school.


I can see the no earplugs rule but the epitome of nonsensical rules is the ban on mechanical pencils. I wonder if LSAC sees how ironic it is that these rules make no sense yet the LSAT is supposed to test us to see if we can make sense. No mechanical pencils. What a joke. These pinheads can't think logically to save their pathetic lives yet they think they have this great exam to test us? LOL!

The only possible reason for the mechanical pencil ban is that they don't want a room full of people click-click-clicking their pencils. But if that's true, so what? There's no shortage of irritating little sonic distractions when you take that test in an otherwise-quiet room. That's why I think the proctors should bring in a diesel generator and just let it run the entire time. The engine would drown out the sound of the girl sitting behind me who won't stop tapping her foot and the guy next to me whistling through the massive boogers in his nostrils. Think about it.

User avatar
cinephile
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby cinephile » Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:17 am

You really don't think there should be any type of gatekeeper for getting into law school? You'd rather anyone who wanted to go could go and the market could be flooded and there wouldn't be enough jobs? Kind of like how it is now, but worse.

If you're not happy with how you did, you can always retake it. And going into the test with a negative attitude probably won't help.

User avatar
D'Angelo
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Which is harder: a 1L law school exam or the LSAT?

Postby D'Angelo » Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:31 am

Philosopher King wrote:Hi all, I'm new here but I have been reading these posts for a few days now and I'm glad I'm not the only tortured soul out there. I really thought we would have to wait until the 6th! Anyway, I'm glad to be a part of this likeable group of future law students. In case anyone is curious, my score is a 155. I was hoping for a 160 but there were just too many problems including a ridiculously lengthy and involved LR section, A really hard RC section (during which I had to go to the bathroom worse than I ever have in my entire life), and a numbering issue in the other LR section. The AR section was normal but I did horrible just like on the preptests. I got a 164 on the last preptest I took and that was under timed conditions.

If the LSAT isn't unfair then I don't know what is.

Philosopher King wrote:I don't know how you did but hopefully you used better logic during the test then what you have presented here. Seriously you have no idea the situation I'm in. The LSAT is unfair for me for several good reasons. Rather than criticize me why not ask what my arguments are?

Philosopher King wrote:The LSAT is fundamentally unfair because it matters so much more at most schools than the many thousands of hours of hard work put into four years of undergraduate study. It is a multiple choice test of strange questions that are not always directly linkable to real life (I'm mainly talking about AR here--the other two sections are okay) that is taken under totalitarian and absurd conditions (no scrap paper or mechanical pencils, etc.) where so much can go wrong (my bathroom problem being exhibit A and I have heard horror stories of marching bands playing outside, etc.). It is three hours one morning of filling in bubbles versus four years of writing essays, studying, taking tests, attending classes, etc. And even multiple choice tests! But other great stuff like essays too, of course. It is scandalous that this dumb test counts so much. And those responsible need to be brought to justice.

Philosopher King wrote:It is unfair to everyone. There are special circumstances that make it unfair to me personally above and beyond these reasons but this thread is not about me--it's about all of us. Nonetheless, I will say that I am not "neurotypical" because I have mild Autism. My cognitive abilities are all over the place. One cognitive ability, processing speed, is below the 10th percentile if I remember my psychological testing properly. I am strong in many other areas but it is impossible for those to shine with the draconian time limits on the LSAT. It is especially unfair to me for this reason. It may be an OKAY predictor of law school success for "neurotypical" people (but to a MUCH lesser degree than the LSAC pinheads claim) because neurotypical people tend to have fairly consistent cognitive abilities across the board not drastic strengths in some areas and drastic weaknesses in others. And if anyone wants to know why I don't get extra time accommodations it is because LSAC, possibly illegally, tells law schools to interpret such scores "with great sensitivity and flexibility," thinly veiled code for "disregard this score because the candidate got extra time because we just have to pretend to follow the law." Any other questions?!

Philosopher King wrote:Well I never took the SAT and I'm doing just fine and so is the world of academia so that's where I'm coming from. I'm sure I would have not done very well on the SAT either.

Philosopher King wrote:If you're referring to me, then have you read my earlier posts? Like the one at the top of this page? I have reasons for what I say. The LSAT is just bad news and I know that my less-than-stellar score says nothing about my abilities. Nothing. It is wrong and LSAC ought to be ashamed of themselves and the scam they have running. They ought to be locked up just like all the other scam artists that ruin people's lives unjustly.

Philosopher King wrote:So then I'm an idiot? Really, it's blanket statements like this that make me angry.

Philosopher King wrote:EDIT: But who are "they," the people that decide it is so important? "They" were "us" a few years ago, no? Same thing with the LSAC pinheads. What happens to "us" once we become lawyers? "We" are just going to become like "them"? NOOO! Say it isn't so!

Philosopher King wrote:Actually, I'm trying to help you see clearly and if you paid attention to some of the things I was saying then maybe you would learn something. I have arguments that support my position. If you think I'm wrong then attack my arguments and explain to me where I am wrong.

Philosopher King wrote:Most importantly, they can put more emphasis on a candidate's major. I am a senior at a selective and excellent university (in this article it says my university is more selective than Temple and Penn State and I read somewhere that the median high school gpa for freshman is about 3.5. --LinkRemoved-- ... ain-campus).

I have two majors: philosophy and political science. These two majors, especially philosophy, heavily emphasize the very same skills that the LSAT does: the ability to be analytical, think logically, comprehend complex readings, etc. I have demonstrated the skills the LSAT tests for through multiple choice tests plus short answer and essay tests. I have written countless essays and papers that required these skills. I have attended countless hours of class lectures where these skills were emphasized and required.

Philosopher King wrote:Someday I may file a lawsuit against LSAC for violating the American with Disabilities Act and I should probably talk to a lawyer now about that. I will in fact do that soon. The arguments I make now are not in vain but my platform to force future changes. I won't let LSAC or anyone else that screws me in my life get away with it. LSAC may think they're a bunch of gods but I will dethrone them should I get the chance. I have drafted a statement making my arguments. Here is an example of what I have written. This just a draft of course:


I feel the need to explain my relatively low LSAT score and why that should not affect my admissions chances. I am not a standard person and, as I see it, there is no standard life, no standard day, no standard court case, etc. thus rendering any standardized test as a measurement of anything important questionable. Besides, there is no reason why filling in bubbles with a pencil for three hours one Saturday morning should count so much more than my performance for over three years and countless thousands of hours of undergraduate work. I'm not anti-LSAT but I think a 4.0 (out of 4.0) cumulative GPA with majors in philosophy and political science from a well-respected and highly selective university serve as better measures of my ability to reason, analyze, think logically, formulate good arguments, comprehend information, and other such skills than any three hour multiple choice standardized test ever could. I have mastered the skills that the LSAT tests for and that law schools rightly want their students to possess. There would be no way to get the grades I did without having done so.

I never took the SAT or the ACT. If I had taken the ACT or SAT I may not have done very well since standardized tests are not my forte. Nonetheless my undergraduate performance was excellent. In other words, the SAT or ACT probably would not not have reflected such an ability to succeed in college. I don't see why this same logic can''t be applied to my LSAT score and my performance in law school.

Philosopher King wrote:By all means be argumentative. I love to argue--I'm a philosophy student! I guess my point boils down to this: If I don't have good analytical skills, good logical reasoning skills, good reading comprehension, and other skills the LSAT tests then how did I get an "A" in my Logic class from this past semester? How did I get an A in my History of Ancient Philosophy class, which involved being able to understand very hard readings about abstract concepts by Aristotle, among others? How did I get an "A" in Constitutional Law or Political Theory? How did I get an "A" (I never got any A-minuses even) in every course that I have ever taken in college if I don't have these skills? I'm going to call the LSAC pinheads tomorrow and ask them why any reasonable person should think that their dopey little test is a better indicator of my possession of the aforementioned skills than my GPA. I can't wait to hear what they say.

Philosopher King wrote:Of course it's not a coincidence; it's a conspiracy. And no, I'm not "one of those guys..." Have you read my arguments? I presented evidence. A philosophy professor at my college called the weight put on the LSAT "scandalous" and he is absolutely right. He went to law school and was a lawyer then got a Ph.D in philosophy. The guy knows what he's talking about. It isn't just what I'm saying; it's the truth. I speak the truth. If you think otherwise then go ahead and make an argument as to why my GPA should not be considered above my LSAT score. Go ahead. I challenge you.

Philosopher King wrote:Actually, my arguments focus on three main areas: moral, practical, and legal issues. The LSAT is legally incorrect because LSAC openly admits that they do things in a manner that violates the ADA. It is morally incorrect and impractical for the reasons I have said so far. I have made extensive arguments on this matter.

Philosopher King wrote:Any system except for the whole damn country, which is built to protect minority rights from being trampled by the majority? Anyway, I never admitted that the LSAT was a "good" indication for "normal people," I just conceded that I personally have unique circumstances that further enhance my general arguments, which I think are somewhat compelling. The LSAT is just bad. It's like Osama bin Laden. There isn't anything good about it and only a select few pinheads would miss it if it were gone. Sorry, that's a weak analogy fallacy but I think it's funny. I'm actually not entirely anti-LSAT it should just matter less. It's scandalous.

Philosopher King wrote:That's how the Bar exam works and that test is even more important. In my case LSAT came nowhere near properly measuring my potential with the skills you just mentioned. My undergrad record does though but they don't care about that,

Philosopher King wrote:Don't worry I plan to send them a belated Christmas present: a lawsuit. But that's real good that you think we should bow down and thank them for giving us a -14 curve. They've conditioned you well.

Philosopher King wrote:Well the unjust status quo sure as hell isn't winning anything either. LSAC is breaking the law and I'm going to try to hold them accountable for it.

Philosopher King wrote:Yeah well I actually respected the Occupy cretin more than I do the LSAC people. Unfortunately LSAC gets away with what they do because it's such a small percentage of the population that is victimized. We're not the "99%" exactly, if you know what I mean. Within that small group of victims, almost everyone either agrees with LSAC (some on here want to shower them with presents for the -14 curve for example) or has been conditioned to accept unjust circumstances because they beleive change cannot be affected. But I have the better arguments and that's what's important to me. LSAC couldn't win an argument with me in court.

Philosopher King wrote:I didn't get accommodations precisely because I was dissuaded by LSAC's illegal practices.

Philosopher King wrote:I'm not going to play this absurd game. This whole LSAT is a huge injustice. I'm angry and feeling despondent right about now. My undergrad GPA has done literally nothing for me and I worked hard for it. Heck, I won't even be recognized for any type of honors at graduation at my university. I have just been screwed left and right and I should be done with academia about now. I have been a positive part of academia and wtf have I gotten in return? Rejection. Screw academia. What the hell else more do they want from me? What more must I do to prove myself?

Philosopher King wrote:What's tragic is the LSAT's very existence. LSAC people should get life in prison for the lives they have ruined.


...who are you?




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: addie1412, Gunner19, logical seasoning and 10 guests