blaze1306 wrote:MarkinKansasCity wrote:blaze1306 wrote:joeyc328 wrote:You act as if, once again, higher tier schools have some "special sauce" no one else has. That simply is not true
Couldn't you argue that the "special sauce" is harder working students who got better LSAT score, a better GPA, and are more likely to pass the bar?
I think its just as possible this occurs..
Student X goes to Moderately ranked "easy" undergrad with a major in Poli Sci gets a 3.98 GPA studys for 6 months on how to take the LSAT gets a 160 goes to top tier school.
Me: Undegrad in Biology and Chemistry GPA 2.75, took the lSAT with 1 month notice did not study at all got a 148 and that got me into 3 low tier schools. I'm not going to toot my own horn but... harder working I doubt it. By the way student X is one of my best friends, I wish I followed his example. That doesn't make him a better student or smarter, guess which one of us has a patent.
Srinivasa Ramanujan was one of the most brilliant mathematicians of all time, in spite of having little or no formal education. Therefore there's no reason to have universities teach math.
No by your reasoning 2+2 at Harvard is not 2+2 any where else.....and everyone else is to stupid to get that
Look I agree with you but people always use this argument Harvard MIT etc... and granted there are brilliant people there but you cant tell me contracts at Notre Dame is better than contracts at UNM, or the rule against perpetuities is somehow easier at Florida than at Oklahoma.