Splitters in law school

(Please Ask Questions and Answer Questions)
whymeohgodno
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby whymeohgodno » Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:56 am

AssumptionRequired 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.


From what ive seen those who read ALOT whether it be for fun/free time or school seem to do much better on the LSAT as their RC starts high. The other 2 parts of the test are VERY easy to improve on. Really your cold diagnostic doesnt mean anything about your score. Its how much you missed on certain sections. Like me, RC killed my diag so i was auto screwed, but if you miss none on RC and games owns you then your score can increase dramatically with the right teaching


Not true at all for me. I almost never read and got a -2 on the RC. I don't think how much you read correlates much to RC section since how much you read doesn't really correlate to how fast you can process and retain the information you read. Some people just genuinely enjoy reading but wouldn't be good at it under the conditions which the LSAT is given.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby whymeohgodno » Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:58 am

I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


You really hate Georgetown don't you.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:59 am

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?

I didn't know anyone planning on doing law school in science. We all appear to be people who flammed out of our previous careeers.

There isn't a big market for people with a BS in Bio, Chem and Physics with poor GPAs. And it's hard as fuck to get into a good PhD program with shit grades.

I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


This made me lol.

I totally understand and agree with it, it just makes me laugh to see people use it.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:00 am

whymeohgodno wrote:
I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


You really hate Georgetown don't you.


Ehh as of right now, it should really be T11

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:00 am

whymeohgodno wrote:
I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


You really hate Georgetown don't you.


Best Law Center in America.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby whymeohgodno » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:01 am

Desert Fox wrote:
whymeohgodno wrote:
I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


You really hate Georgetown don't you.


Best Law Center in America.


I'm surprised you don't hate Cornell so much as to make it a t12.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:02 am

whymeohgodno wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
whymeohgodno wrote:
I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


You really hate Georgetown don't you.


Best Law Center in America.


I'm surprised you don't hate Cornell so much as to make it a t12.


Which school is ranked 12? i forget....

czelede
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby czelede » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:03 am

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.

czelede
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby czelede » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:04 am

AssumptionRequired wrote:
whymeohgodno wrote:
I'm surprised you don't hate Cornell so much as to make it a t12.


Which school is ranked 12? i forget....


No 12. Duke and NU tied for 11.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby D. H2Oman » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:08 am

Desert Fox wrote:
whymeohgodno wrote:
I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


You really hate Georgetown don't you.


Best Law Center in America.



I don't know the Southern Poverty Law Center is tough competition.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:09 am

whymeohgodno wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
whymeohgodno wrote:
I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.


You really hate Georgetown don't you.


Best Law Center in America.


I'm surprised you don't hate Cornell so much as to make it a t12.


I declared my T13 jihad back when employment data made it clear that Gtown was not as good as Cornell, and no better than Vandy. T13 made sense. Last years data looked like T12, but NYC associates of 2009 got fucking hammered which I don't expect to happen as much on going.

So as much as it pains me Cornell is a T13.

I think Cornell is a worse school, but it clearly has T13 placement.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby almostfamous » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:11 am

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.

User avatar
s0ph1e2007
Posts: 1054
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:37 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby s0ph1e2007 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:12 am

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

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby D. H2Oman » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:23 am

hi s0phie :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: <3

User avatar
flyingpanda
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:32 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby flyingpanda » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:44 am

dude, I'm not even joking... people can tell that I'm a splitter. It's like supremely obvious based on study habits.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:08 am

flyingpanda wrote:dude, I'm not even joking... people can tell that I'm a splitter. It's like supremely obvious based on study habits.


My tell is flopping cold calls harder than my belly flops at the pool.

User avatar
flyingpanda
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:32 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby flyingpanda » Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:12 am

Desert Fox wrote:
flyingpanda wrote:dude, I'm not even joking... people can tell that I'm a splitter. It's like supremely obvious based on study habits.


My tell is flopping cold calls harder than my belly flops at the pool.


Same here. I also forgot my civ pro book several times.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 09042014 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:12 am

flyingpanda wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
flyingpanda wrote:dude, I'm not even joking... people can tell that I'm a splitter. It's like supremely obvious based on study habits.


My tell is flopping cold calls harder than my belly flops at the pool.


Same here. I also forgot my civ pro book several times.


I even failed at knowing my own name. Apparently the other john got cold called and I stole from it him without knowing.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:33 am

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.

User avatar
prismz
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:01 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby prismz » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:46 am

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.


lol

User avatar
tea_drinker
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby tea_drinker » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:45 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.


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.

User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby acrossthelake » Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:52 pm

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?

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:40 pm

tea_drinker wrote:
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.


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

User avatar
tea_drinker
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby tea_drinker » Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:44 pm

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.

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

Re: Splitters in law school

Postby 005618502 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:45 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.


Why? u go there?




Return to “Law School FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests