Splitters in law school

(Please Ask Questions and Answer Questions)
005618502
Posts: 2577
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:56 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:48 pm

tea_drinker wrote:
AssumptionRequired wrote:
tea_drinker wrote:
Actually for people plan to major in hard science, Cal Tech is more desirable (Don't mean to look down on Stanford). Although no one really knows about it.


Of course cal Tech is better then Stanford in science. And everyone who knows Stanford is a decent school most likely knows about Cal Tech as well


Yeah, but I just wish more people know about Cal Tech and how good it is.


It is just to small of a school, and overall, stanford is the better university.

User avatar
rinkrat19
Posts: 13918
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:35 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby rinkrat19 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:53 pm

AssumptionRequired wrote:
almostfamous wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
almostfamous wrote:Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!


Lets be honest here. It was your intelligence that was lack. You were lazy as shit.

If you are lazy as shit in law school, you'll probably do just as bad. If not, you should do well.


I'm hoping you meant it WASN'T my intelligence that was lacking :P

No argument on the lazy as shit part, though. That combined with stupid major choice really did me in. I've actually done really well in the non-science courses I've taken, but seeing as I'm a science major, that didn't do me too much good.


Yes, science majors are much more difficult. I dont understand why so many people choose science planning on LS. Is it just because the degree is worth more? is it for IP?


Speaking just for myself, if I'd had to take 15-24 credits of humanities every term for four years, I would have killed myself by Christmas of sophomore year out of sheer boredom. I may not like engineering work, but at least the classes (mostly) kept me awake.

User avatar
rinkrat19
Posts: 13918
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:35 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby rinkrat19 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:56 pm

almostfamous wrote:
czelede wrote:
almostfamous wrote:I came in with a TON of science credits from high school and so kind of naturally stayed in the sciences. By the time I realized how bad of a decision this was, I was already a good bit of the way done with my major so just stuck it out. I do think having to read lots of science journals and textbooks, etc. helped me on the LSAT though.


Ah, story of my life. Except amend it with parents offering to fund my UG if I followed them into the sciences (apparently I was enlightened enough to figure out that law schools don't care what you majored in but too dumb to realize they also don't care if that major decides to operate on a 2.5 curve).

But yeah. I think engineering helped with the LSAT in its own way. Don't know if it was worth four years of pain though.


I'm environmental sciences, which sounds so nice and friendly. in actuality, it was made up of all the weed-out classes from every science/math major (physics, chem, biology, math, and computer science, all graded on a C/C- curve) plus a required minor in a science. To everybody on here who has managed a good GPA in a hard science (and engineering, omggg), I salute you for managing what I most certainly did not haha.


Environmental Science at my UG was made up of all the washouts from Environmental Engineering who couldn't hack the upper-level engr classes like fluid dynamics. We'd all already taken the hard science weed-out classes (chem/phys/bio/math) :wink:

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 6:01 pm

acrossthelake wrote:
prismz wrote:
AssumptionRequired wrote:
s0ph1e2007 wrote:
haha I got a 179. One would think you'd be able to extrapolate from that, that it is possible I did quite well on my SATs as well; lol I just wouldn't tell everyone my score.
Alright I'll give you that maybe it was only a somewhat subconscious self-call lol


Wow i LOVE how you give him a hard time about bragging, then take the chance to throw your 179 out there again, hmm sounds prettty hipocritical to me.
You pull this bragging shit whenever possible like talking about your 179 when its not needed or creating your own class of schools: HYPS <----- Blatant Stanford trolling because NO ONE thinks of stanford with that group, sorry. But unless you from the west coast Stanford's lay prestigue is very minimal and the other 3 you tried to create a new group with are all Super IVY's which all have HUGE lay prestigue world wide.
Nice going though.


lol


Lol @ how this thread devolved into a discussion of SATs & the lay prestige of Stanford & HYP undergrad.

DF, did you seriously accidentally poach somebody else's cold call? Did the prof decide to go with you?


Yes. The best part is nobody told me until two weeks later. I just started talking and she didn't stop me.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 6:03 pm

Unless you are talking about physics, Stanford > CalTech.

005618502
Posts: 2577
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:56 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:18 pm

Desert Fox wrote:Unless you are talking about physics, Stanford > CalTech.


Or EE

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:20 pm

AssumptionRequired wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Unless you are talking about physics, Stanford > CalTech.


Or EE


UIUC EE > CalTech EE

005618502
Posts: 2577
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:56 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:21 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
AssumptionRequired wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Unless you are talking about physics, Stanford > CalTech.


Or EE


UIUC EE > CalTech EE>Stanford EE

005618502
Posts: 2577
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:56 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:22 pm

^^ was kind of a Joke, i have no idea what i am talking about here. Being from California, people always boasted that Cal Tech had the best hard sciences and Engineering programs. But what do people in HS know

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:25 pm

AssumptionRequired wrote:^^ was kind of a Joke, i have no idea what i am talking about here. Being from California, people always boasted that Cal Tech had the best hard sciences and Engineering programs. But what do people in HS know


It depends on if you are talking about undergrad or PhD.

All three are top EE PhD programs. As a UIUC EE grad I'll never admit Stanford is better.

However Cal Tech and Stanford are probably more selective than UIUC for undergrad. But I'd assume the quality of education is virtually identical. Same goes for Berkeley, GTech and Michigan.

krad
Posts: 1897
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:33 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby krad » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:30 pm

The kids in HS know what's up. Worked next door at NASA JPL for a while, those CalTech kids are genius...

Image

almostfamous
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:08 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby almostfamous » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:36 pm

AssumptionRequired wrote:
s0ph1e2007 wrote:
almostfamous wrote:you must have missed the rest of my post where I admitted that I did really shitty in undergrad and thus fully realize that my SAT score means nothing--I'm not a freshman anymore...I believe other people were posting their scores as well, and since this is a conversation about how standardized test scores affect real-life performance, I thought it was relevant.

Sorry if it came across as bragging, but I really didn't think anybody (including myself) would still get touchy about who scored higher on a test 4 years ago.


haha I got a 179. One would think you'd be able to extrapolate from that, that it is possible I did quite well on my SATs as well; lol I just wouldn't tell everyone my score.
Alright I'll give you that maybe it was only a somewhat subconscious self-call lol


Wow i LOVE how you give him a hard time about bragging, then take the chance to throw your 179 out there again, hmm sounds prettty hipocritical to me.
You pull this bragging shit whenever possible like talking about your 179 when its not needed or creating your own class of schools: HYPS <----- Blatant Stanford trolling because NO ONE thinks of stanford with that group, sorry. But unless you from the west coast Stanford's lay prestigue is very minimal and the other 3 you tried to create a new group with are all Super IVY's which all have HUGE lay prestigue world wide.
Nice going though.



On a slightly unrelated side note, I am a girl :oops:

005618502
Posts: 2577
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:56 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:38 pm

Wow i LOVE how you give her a hard time about bragging, then take the chance to throw your 179 out there again, hmm sounds prettty hipocritical to me.
You pull this bragging shit whenever possible like talking about your 179 when its not needed or creating your own class of schools: HYPS <----- Blatant Stanford trolling because NO ONE thinks of stanford with that group, sorry. But unless you from the west coast Stanford's lay prestigue is very minimal and the other 3 you tried to create a new group with are all Super IVY's which all have HUGE lay prestigue world wide.
Nice going though.



On a slightly unrelated side note, I am a girl :oops:[/quote]

My bad, though it is usually unknown with usernames (though not always)

User avatar
MrKappus
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:46 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby MrKappus » Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:12 am

Desert Fox wrote:However Cal Tech and Stanford are probably more selective than UIUC for undergrad.


Hahahahahahahahahahaha...

Stanford: 8%
Caltech: 15%
UIUC: 65% 19.2% (for engineering)

I stand corrected. That's pretty legit, although I think you'd need a lobotomy (or therapy for masochistic tendencies) if you sign up for UG engins from the get-go.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:24 am

MrKappus wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:However Cal Tech and Stanford are probably more selective than UIUC for undergrad.


Hahahahahahahahahahaha...

Stanford: 8%
Caltech: 15%
UIUC: 65%


UIUC engineering college is a lot more selective than the liberal arts college, or the agriculture college.

The Engineering college 25/75 ACT score is 30/33

Stanford's University as a whole is 30/34

In graduate admissions I'd assume the difference is negligible.

User avatar
sundance95
Posts: 2123
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby sundance95 » Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:48 am

Did someone say Stanford UG has minimal lay prestige? And yeah, from what I understand Cal Tech is a trail of tears and sorrow.

User avatar
sundance95
Posts: 2123
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby sundance95 » Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:49 am

Desert Fox wrote:
MrKappus wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:However Cal Tech and Stanford are probably more selective than UIUC for undergrad.


Hahahahahahahahahahaha...

Stanford: 8%
Caltech: 15%
UIUC: 65%


UIUC engineering college is a lot more selective than the liberal arts college, or the agriculture college.

The Engineering college 25/75 ACT score is 30/33

Stanford's University as a whole is 30/34

In graduate admissions I'd assume the difference is negligible.


Are you quoting ACT splits? Man when I was in HS the ACT was the red headed step child of the standardized tests...

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby Bildungsroman » Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:55 am

sundance95 wrote:Are you quoting ACT splits? Man when I was in HS the ACT was the red headed step child of the standardized tests...


Hey man, as someone who went to high school in the western US I can tell you that the ACT is very much alive and well and being foisted upon students.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:25 am

sundance95 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
MrKappus wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:However Cal Tech and Stanford are probably more selective than UIUC for undergrad.


Hahahahahahahahahahaha...

Stanford: 8%
Caltech: 15%
UIUC: 65%


UIUC engineering college is a lot more selective than the liberal arts college, or the agriculture college.

The Engineering college 25/75 ACT score is 30/33

Stanford's University as a whole is 30/34

In graduate admissions I'd assume the difference is negligible.


Are you quoting ACT splits? Man when I was in HS the ACT was the red headed step child of the standardized tests...


SAT are similar too.

ACT made more sense to me as a test. I liked LSAT the best.

HeavenWood
Posts: 2915
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby HeavenWood » Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:30 pm

Bildungsroman wrote:
sundance95 wrote:Are you quoting ACT splits? Man when I was in HS the ACT was the red headed step child of the standardized tests...


Hey man, as someone who went to high school in the western US I can tell you that the ACT is very much alive and well and being foisted upon students.


I went to HS in suburban Philly, and the ACT was quite hip for being a "more holistic" measure of aptitude. Close to 1/3 of my classmates elected to take it. I took both tests, but scored in the exact same percentiles on each.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby Bildungsroman » Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:13 pm

HeavenWood wrote:
Bildungsroman wrote:
sundance95 wrote:Are you quoting ACT splits? Man when I was in HS the ACT was the red headed step child of the standardized tests...


Hey man, as someone who went to high school in the western US I can tell you that the ACT is very much alive and well and being foisted upon students.


I went to HS in suburban Philly, and the ACT was quite hip for being a "more holistic" measure of aptitude. Close to 1/3 of my classmates elected to take it. I took both tests, but scored in the exact same percentiles on each.


Everyone at my high school had to take the ACT their junior year. I think it's be a statewide requirement (CO).

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 2011Law » Fri Dec 03, 2010 10:17 pm

good to hear. one thing actually, does graduating with honors require anything other than just being in the top whatever %?

User avatar
dailygrind
Posts: 19667
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:08 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby dailygrind » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:06 pm

what's your cutoff for qualifying someone as a high LSAT splitter?

User avatar
dailygrind
Posts: 19667
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:08 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby dailygrind » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:22 pm

hot damn. here's hoping i can replicate a fraction of that success. slightly above 3.0 so i may be compromising my chances a little here, but i'd be pretty happy with anything above median, so there's that.

whymeohgodno
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby whymeohgodno » Sat Dec 04, 2010 3:18 am

Desert Fox wrote:
AssumptionRequired wrote:^^ was kind of a Joke, i have no idea what i am talking about here. Being from California, people always boasted that Cal Tech had the best hard sciences and Engineering programs. But what do people in HS know


It depends on if you are talking about undergrad or PhD.

All three are top EE PhD programs. As a UIUC EE grad I'll never admit Stanford is better.

However Cal Tech and Stanford are probably more selective most definitely more selective than UIUC for undergrad. But I'd assume the quality of education is virtually identical. Same goes for Berkeley, GTech and Michigan.




Return to “Law School FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests