Let's end the games section

User avatar
510Chicken
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby 510Chicken » Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:48 am

kill lsat wrote:I'm arguing for an LSAT that reflects academic preparedness, not the need to study for months or to spend $1500 for a course. Elimination of the games section would get us closer to that reality. (Abolition of the entire LSAT would be better, but I'm not arguing for that in this thread.) Even with today's LSAT there are numerous well-defined "soft" factors that law schools use to promote diversity and to ensure that they are really seeing who is prepared for success both in school and in the profession.

...except that unlike soft factors, the LSAT produces an objectively quantifiable and statistically significant metric for evaluating applicants. Again, it doesn't make any sense to single out the games section, given what the LSAT is measuring. Your use of the term "success" here is especially misleading, since the doing well on the LSAT does correlate with doing well as a 1L, and presumably a high GPA will aid in future endeavors. Instead you seem to think it means something much fuzzier, like the ability to hold hands and cry with clients.

I'm not necessarily saying that the LSAT is perfect, or that it doesn't receive too much attention. But that's a separate topic, and if this is the direction the thread is going in, the OP is misleading insofar as this is really just a laundry list of reasons why you think the LSAT and standardized testing as a whole are bad (self-derailment?), not reasons why the AR section itself is faulty within the context of what the LSAT is designed to do (which is clearly to discriminate against minorities. duh). Moreover, it's pretty disingenuous to blanket us with contrived stories of grief, disadvantage, and misfortune one after another, especially after making appeals for serious discussion and consideration. Instead, just bring the numbers to back your position. Otherwise, it just looks like another attempt to rationalize an inability to clear the streets of snow under constraints.

kill lsat
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby kill lsat » Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:52 am

feralinfant wrote:
kill lsat wrote:
PDaddy wrote:When you have to decide whom to sue and when and where based on a specific fact pattern, you will solve your answer by doing a one-hour logic game, though it won't be obvious to you right up front.

When you take your law school exams, you spend at least an hour just analyzing...sometimes drawing diagrams, etc with the important facts, elements and conditional scenarios.

Logic games will train you to approach your law school exams in a very efficient manner.


I appreciate your sincerity. But, you get an hour in the exam to do that? After you've had months of training? And that's analogous to the 8.5 minutes for a game in the most pressure-filled exam of your life? Why should a placement test serve to train you to be an "efficient" law school student? That's what your other degrees and your first semester of law school should teach you. I would bet you had your own share of heartache that you felt was needless torment preparing for the LSAT, particularly the games section. Can you remember back to the time? Was it fair to you, your family? Don't you want to look for a better way?


Your argument is most vulnerable on the grounds that ....it makes emotional appeals that seem exaggerated/irrelevant...

Do you beat your kids while you practice games or something? In all seriousness...You're acting like the problems that studying for LSAT games present with regard to your family aren't comparable to the problems presented by getting something like an undergraduate education. If you ask me, the onus of getting a four year degree would be a much bigger obstacle and much more disruptive to a family. So maybe we shouldn't have UG institutions either, especially since we all know there's people who don't do well in UG but do great in law school and vice versa, so they're not a perfect indicator either... For the record...I didn't take a KAPLAN course. I bought four tests from LSAC and a princeton review book. Approximate cost 60 dollars. And I wouldn't have had to do that if I would have found a whole freaking collection of prep books at a coffee shop soon enough. And I bet your UG institution might have some resources books. And I don't have a family, but I wasn't in a fraternity and was working 50+ hours a week hanging billboards in inclement weather/bird crap while I prepared. So anyway...Stop beating your kids while you practice games-I bet your score will improve.


My point was clearly that your analogy was not particularly helpful to your argument. And it required no emotion to make that case or to see it. I was just giving you an example. Why are you comparing LSAT prep with an undergraduate education? How much pain do you want to inflict on someone applying to law school? Your route was admirable. But it doesn't match the anxiety and torment most people go through. Their experience does matter. The example you cite of your coursework suggests that the games section bears only a superficial resemblance to the work of a law school student. If you think it is more significant than that, then it should be taught as part of a law school course, not a placement or entrance exam.

The part you left out is that you do get analytical training in your law school which goes far beyond anything that appears on the LSAT -- and is far more relevant to the real world. So, AR isn't necessary as a primer and with an r-squared of .16, chance is a better predictor of law school performance than the overall LSAT. Hence, the LSAT, particularly AR, is a needless barrier.

If you choose to respond, please be intellectually honest and dispense with the name-calling. I will be happy to reply if that's the case.

User avatar
well-hello-there
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:38 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby well-hello-there » Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:54 am

kill lsat wrote:Forum Questions: Is the Analytical Reasoning section so artificial and removed from the actual practice of law that it renders the LSAT an unnecessary and unhelpful barrier to selecting qualified and diverse students?
Nope
Is it inherently unfair to those without the funds to take a great prep course or those who just don't have the time to do endless examples?
nope
Does it pose an onerous burden on prospective law students?
nope
Does it harm the reputation of law schools that de-emphasize it?
yep
Should we campaign for its elimination or drastic modification?
nope
What can we do to make this happen?


Background/Argument: I am a professional with a solid engineering background. I fully understand that law schools need to know how well prospective students can apply the rules of logic and deductive reasoning to solve problems they will face as lawyers. However, AR tests nothing of the sort.
yes it does

In just 8.5 minutes, you are expected to learn about an artificial world, with bizarre rules, and then draw inferences that will enable you to answer questions that require further inferences. There simply is no analog in legal work.
of course there is
Lawyers have weeks to write briefs, not minutes.
because writing briefs is a whole lot harder than doing logic games
Even oral argument is based on a known set of cases and specific background. Going 3 levels deep into inferences would lose everyone in the courtroom.
but if you can't score well on the LSAT, you're less likely to have the mental capacity to understand the law, much less put forth a cogent argument to support your case
You would be called supercilious, an idiot or irritating. And, if you were wrong, ....
sticks & stones...

I might be able to understand 1 game in 35 minutes, with 23 questions -- the vast majority of which test your understanding of basic logic. You would have a reasonable opportunity to adjust to a brave new (artificial) world and demonstrate that you have a basic, intermediate or advanced knowledge of logic and reasoning.
that's exactly what the AR section does already.

Unfortunately, 4 games in 35 minutes is more like a cruel joke. Only through quality instruction and significant practice, then a little luck on test day can all but the exceptionally gifted among us do well on that section.
over generalization & over simplification of reality
If you have neither the money to attend a solid prep course nor the time to do much prep, then you have nothing. Your innate intelligence, academic background and professional experience will not help you -- unlike in the other sections.
i'm guessing you did poorly on the LR section as well. your argument here is a 1 star difficulty flaw question

In the end, the games section (and, more generally, the entire LSAT)
guess confirmed
is little more than a con having the effect of preventing the vast majority of people from getting into the law school of their choice
would you force harvard to accept all 9K applicants?
-- and of sewing a bright red letter of inferiority across the coat-of-arms of law schools who dare to de-emphasis LSAT scores.
because the students at those schools aren't as bright

Since our entire system of justice depends (in theory) on application of the law and having a good lawyer to represent you, this profession is simply too important to leave the weeding out process to the inequities and vagaries of time and money.

Law schools should be picking the best-prepared candidates
they already do this by favoring high LSAT scores.
and/or those who are likely to make a significant difference in society or on campus (diversity).
they already do this by favoring high LSAT scores
The best way to do that is to kill the games section in its current form (and hopefully, the entire LSAT, but I won't argue that for now).
^this is the conclusion of your argument. It does not follow from the premises.

Any suggestions on how we can make this happen?

it's not going to happen.
Last edited by well-hello-there on Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

jeremysen
Posts: 241
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:07 am

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby jeremysen » Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:56 am

my previous post?

----

kill lsat wrote:we should start listening to researchers who've studied standardized tests.

...many of whom put the LSAT in high regard

kill lsat wrote:and I know that virtually everyone on this blog believed that at one point in his/her life. But, once they committed to the LSAT and things worked out for them, they started to sing a different tune.

Rather than view such people negatively, consider that this is the case for obstacles that nearly everyone faces. (e.g. sports, music, research, etc.)
Your comment here is a bit narrow-minded.

Here are my comments on your proposal:

A. The way you phrased this recommendation is confusing/kinda illogical - doesn't make sense how you jumped from basing academic preparedness on diversity criteria to "law schools always [being] part preparedness, part luck" and to "[producing] far less trauma for prospective students." If you care to clarify, please do.

B. I think the games section tests whether law students can sort through a number of items/elements and understand how rules apply to them. This type of analytical/organizational skill seems pretty valuable, and the test prep books that teach it are not prohibitively expensive.

C. To a certain extent, every exam needs some learned knowledge to strategically approach it. I don't think mastering the games section = test-taking ability. I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that if I am presented a bunch of rules & variables, because I have done well on logic games, I can better (and more quickly) apply those rules.
Also, learning something new from preparing for the LSAT is not a bad thing. If it were, we should strike the math sections from the GMAT & GRE, as well as the entire vocab portion from the GRE. (not to say that those exams were well formulated - just pointing out that the LSAT is probably one of the better exams out there)

D. You mentioned in your reasoning for this "time argument" that lawyers have a bunch of time to research, draw conclusions, and write memos. But this is not the case at all.

Hopefully I addressed your arguments/points well? If you perceived any of my language as pejorative, I don't mean to belittle you or your remarks.

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:03 am

Is there a tl;dr for this thread or should I just start from page 1?

User avatar
well-hello-there
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:38 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby well-hello-there » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:05 am

Mickey Quicknumbers wrote:Is there a tl;dr for this thread or should I just start from page 1?

it's not worth it....!!!!!!!get out now!!!!!!!!1

User avatar
well-hello-there
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:38 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby well-hello-there » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:09 am

Mickey Quicknumbers wrote:Is there a tl;dr for this thread or should I just start from page 1?

okay, okay, i'll save you the time.

OP is pissed b/c s/he sux at taking the LSAT despite his/er "professional status" as an engineer!

now op is trying to convince him/herself that the problem is not him/her but the problem is the test.

not a single other person so far has agreed.

if op is egged on enough, this might turn into a shitshow.

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:11 am

well-hello-there wrote:
Mickey Quicknumbers wrote:Is there a tl;dr for this thread or should I just start from page 1?

it's not worth it....!!!!!!!get out now!!!!!!!!1

Please, I live for petty wall-o-text arguments where unsubstantiated claims clash together and I decide who's wrong in ~35 seconds based which argument most disassociates from the norm.

User avatar
feralinfant
Posts: 887
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:54 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby feralinfant » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:11 am

kill lsat wrote:
feralinfant wrote:
kill lsat wrote:
PDaddy wrote:When you have to decide whom to sue and when and where based on a specific fact pattern, you will solve your answer by doing a one-hour logic game, though it won't be obvious to you right up front.

When you take your law school exams, you spend at least an hour just analyzing...sometimes drawing diagrams, etc with the important facts, elements and conditional scenarios.

Logic games will train you to approach your law school exams in a very efficient manner.


I appreciate your sincerity. But, you get an hour in the exam to do that? After you've had months of training? And that's analogous to the 8.5 minutes for a game in the most pressure-filled exam of your life? Why should a placement test serve to train you to be an "efficient" law school student? That's what your other degrees and your first semester of law school should teach you. I would bet you had your own share of heartache that you felt was needless torment preparing for the LSAT, particularly the games section. Can you remember back to the time? Was it fair to you, your family? Don't you want to look for a better way?


Your argument is most vulnerable on the grounds that ....it makes emotional appeals that seem exaggerated/irrelevant...

Do you beat your kids while you practice games or something? In all seriousness...You're acting like the problems that studying for LSAT games present with regard to your family aren't comparable to the problems presented by getting something like an undergraduate education. If you ask me, the onus of getting a four year degree would be a much bigger obstacle and much more disruptive to a family. So maybe we shouldn't have UG institutions either, especially since we all know there's people who don't do well in UG but do great in law school and vice versa, so they're not a perfect indicator either... For the record...I didn't take a KAPLAN course. I bought four tests from LSAC and a princeton review book. Approximate cost 60 dollars. And I wouldn't have had to do that if I would have found a whole freaking collection of prep books at a coffee shop soon enough. And I bet your UG institution might have some resources books. And I don't have a family, but I wasn't in a fraternity and was working 50+ hours a week hanging billboards in inclement weather/bird crap while I prepared. So anyway...Stop beating your kids while you practice games-I bet your score will improve.


My point was clearly that your analogy was not particularly helpful to your argument. And it required no emotion to make that case or to see it. I was just giving you an example. Why are you comparing LSAT prep with an undergraduate education? How much pain do you want to inflict on someone applying to law school? Your route was admirable. But it doesn't match the anxiety and torment most people go through. Their experience does matter. The example you cite of your coursework suggests that the games section bears only a superficial resemblance to the work of a law school student. If you think it is more significant than that, then it should be taught as part of a law school course, not a placement or entrance exam.

The part you left out is that you do get analytical training in your law school which goes far beyond anything that appears on the LSAT -- and is far more relevant to the real world. So, AR isn't necessary as a primer and with an r-squared of .16, chance is a better predictor of law school performance than the overall LSAT. Hence, the LSAT, particularly AR, is a needless barrier.

If you choose to respond, please be intellectually honest and dispense with the name-calling. I will be happy to reply if that's the case.


I don't think I've been intellectually dishonest but I am sorry about the name calling.

1.You said "My point was clearly that your analogy was not particularly helpful to your argument." As far as I can tell, this is your first response after that post. So I don't know what you're referring to.

2. I'm comparing LSAT prep to undergrad work because they're both things that are used to predict your performance in law school, and they both aren't entirely adequate. That's why. So, an undergrad gpa which is a good indicator of law school performance, in my case isn't really. But that's no reason to throw out gpa as a consideration. I also compare them because you seem to think that studying for the LSAT is practically criminal, but I bet you studied for all sorts of things that are way less relevant to law school in undergrad. Especially if you're an engineer in fact. Those calc courses are only going to help in an indirect way, study skills, abstract reasoning etc. There's no reason studying for the LSAT wouldn't do the same thing. Another reason I compared them is that the burden of undergrad is huge, and probably a way bigger obstacle to people with families, URMs etc. Now, if this argument applies to the LSAT then there's no reason it shouldn't apply to UG. Does that sort of make sense?

3. I don't want people to go through pain and torment. These are intellectually dishonest questions sir. And honestly if you think logic games are pain and torment law school seems like a poor choice. My friend at Columbia is very smart, worked very hard/stressed on the LSAT but is way closer to her breaking point now that she's in 1L then she was while prepping for the test.

4. I forgot I also bought another book of the first ten prep tests. So bump that estimate up to 80 dollars. And I wouldn't say it was superficial. I did games. A lot. When I had 15 mins I would do a game.

5. When you say you get training that goes far beyond the LSAT, you're right. Which is why if you struggle with the games, you're surely going to struggle more with certain aspects of law school than other people. Nothing wrong with that, you'll just have to work harder, just like you'll have to work harder than others on the LSAT games.

Anyways. Does all of that make sense?

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:12 am

well-hello-there wrote:
Mickey Quicknumbers wrote:Is there a tl;dr for this thread or should I just start from page 1?

okay, okay, i'll save you the time.

OP is pissed b/c s/he sux at taking the LSAT despite his/er "professional status" as an engineer!

now op is trying to convince him/herself that the problem is not him/her but the problem is the test.

not a single other person so far has agreed.

if op is egged on enough, this might turn into a shitshow.


okok, i'm in.

OP, if you had to make your argument in 50 words or less, what would it be?

User avatar
well-hello-there
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:38 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby well-hello-there » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:12 am

ajcollege wrote:OP, do you feel that we should accept students to graduate engineering programs based solely on subjective measurements? What about med school? Why should law be different? Are the stakes lower in law than in medicine?

LSAC and the majority of law schools are not fly-by-night organizations. If there was a better objective measurement tool than the LSAT to distinguish students, we would be using that tool instead of the LSAT. If there was a better subsection than AR to test the things AR tests, we would be using that better subsection. A standardized test where nearly every student takes it under similar controlled situations showcases each individual student's preparedness, ability, and reasoning skills.

No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't stop myself from hearing Samuel L. Jackson's voice in my head when I read this......And you will KNOW that I am the LORD, when I lay my vengeance UPON YOU!!! LOL

edit* simply b/c ajcollege has a Sam. L. Jax. pulp fiction avatar

benito
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:09 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby benito » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:24 am

I'm just surprised one person's nonsensical whining produced a thread of this length......You guys should have realized at some point that your reasoned cogent points were falling on the deaf ears of a person just believing what they really want to believe.

Ignatius Reilly
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:47 am

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Ignatius Reilly » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:26 am

To those of you who did well on the lsat, and are thus praying that you will maul your classmates in law school remember that the corelation between the lsat and grades is .4, which is a shitty corelation, and the corelation is actually worse, because law schools only select a tight band of acceptable scores.

I hate the LG section.....it has beat me down every time I did it for real. C'est la vie

User avatar
510Chicken
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby 510Chicken » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:27 am

benito wrote:I'm just surprised one person's nonsensical whining produced a thread of this length......You guys should have realized at some point that your reasoned cogent points were falling on the deaf ears of a person just believing what they really want to believe.
--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
feralinfant
Posts: 887
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:54 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby feralinfant » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:28 am

benito wrote:I'm just surprised one person's nonsensical whining produced a thread of this length......You guys should have realized at some point that your reasoned cogent points were falling on the deaf ears of a person just believing what they really want to believe.


I have noticed he seems to deliberately neglect addressing the best of the posts...I think I'm finally giving up. But I will do one more intellectually dishonest thing. If killlsat has enough time dick around with all of us, why doesn't he have enough time to study for the LSAT? Seems fishy.

Also ignatius reilly...I'm sorry to hear about your trouble with the games but I absolutely love Confederacy of Dunces and will now quote it with regard to this whole thread. "Who produced this abortion?"

A. killlsat for setting the trap and the rest of us for taking it

Ignatius Reilly
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:47 am

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Ignatius Reilly » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:33 am

feralinfant wrote:Also ignatius reilly...I'm sorry to hear about your trouble with the games but I absolutely love Confederacy of Dunces and will now quote it with regard to this whole thread. "Who produced this abortion?"



LMAO.

kill lsat
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby kill lsat » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:45 am

Veyron wrote:
kill lsat wrote:
Veyron wrote:Sorry man, reality bites.


Is anyone serious on this blog? Please respond intelligently by telling us what "bites" about this comparison. If you find fault with it, please explain why. If the analogs between AR and skills needed to practice law are there, as this lawyer asserted, please tell me what I missed.


Did you miss the bold font responses to your assertions in the quote? Maybe the LGs would go easier for you if you carefully read the question.


You breached blog etiquette and inserted your responses into what you passed off as a quotation of my reply. I never saw it because I didn't think I would have to look inside my own quotation. Your comment "Maybe the LGs would go easier for you if you carefully read the question" was beneath the tenor of this discussion and you should apologize.

In any event, your earlier comments simply miss my point entirely and aren't accurate. I've written dozens of briefs and read scores comprising various levels of quality. Perhaps my sample size is too small, but I've found that the application of statutes and procedure is largely linear and involves rare instances of layered inferences or even a single inference. Most of the lawyers I face in my very litigious town would never understand them if that weren't the case -- not an insult, just the reality you spoke of. In fact, the case law frequently serves the purpose of untangling those rare inferences in poorly written law or procedure. So more than looking at statutes and rules, a lawyer would always consult the case law to learn what a law or rule really means and how to apply it -- but maybe you haven't gotten that far in your coursework yet.

Reading civil procedure or a statute for the first time during an exam is somewhat more involved than what I understood from your original comment. But you've got many times the 8.5 minutes of an LSAT game, you've gone through an entire course where you were taught to do this (making the LSAT experience superfluous) and you're within a familiar realm -- no previously unimagined sequence of cities to decipher. The AR section is simply not analogous.

Also, memory is not always directly related to intelligence or analytical ability (e.g., some of our autistic friends), so your comment about memorizing rules was unnecessary and unhelpful.

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:47 am

Mickey Quicknumbers wrote:
OP, if you had to make your argument in 50 words or less, what would it be?

User avatar
feralinfant
Posts: 887
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:54 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby feralinfant » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:48 am

Killlsat, there's a book I think will help you. It's called The Consolations of Philosophy by Boethius. I wish you the best.

Curry

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Curry » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:48 am

This thread needs to STOP being the top thing on my active topics page...

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:54 am

Curry wrote:This thread needs to STOP being the top thing on my active topics page...

yeah!

jeremysen
Posts: 241
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:07 am

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby jeremysen » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:57 am

Mickey Quicknumbers wrote:
Mickey Quicknumbers wrote:
OP, if you had to make your argument in 50 words or less, what would it be?


==>Remove games from LSAT.

- Time allotted for games is not enough & not comparable to legal work in the real world
- LG discriminates against those who can't afford prep courses
- Unfairly prevents the masses from getting into LS of choice
- LS should pick candidates based on preparedness or diversity & getting rid of games helps accomplish this

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:13 am

jeremysen wrote:- Time allotted for games is not enough & not comparable to legal work in the real world
- LG discriminates against those who can't afford prep courses
- Unfairly prevents the masses from getting into LS of choice
- LS should pick candidates based on preparedness or diversity & getting rid of games helps accomplish this

thanks jeremysen,

Refutation by proxy:
1. It's very much comparable to law school exams where you are disentangling complex fact patterns as fast as your can over the course of 3-4 hours, which will determine your grades, which determine what kind of job you get (or don't get). So it's actually very relevant to your legal career, whether or not this is even a problem is entirely irrelevant because you're going to be filtered by this standard one way or another.

2. No it doesn't, I self studied to a perfect score on logic games in 5 weeks, the LGB and mass repetition will serve as completely adequate preparation, especially in the evolving LSAT form where the games are only getting easier.

3. Literally everything in life, starting with the genetic lottery, is immune to fairness. Get over it.

4. How? If AR were removed law schools would still adhere to the LSAT as the most efficient means of filtering out candidates, it would only push the other sections to be more important as a means of differentiating applications. Having great work experience and knowledge off-topic to the study of law will come to fruition for as much as it is worth during your job interviews, no need to unnecessarily inflate the value by making it an emphasis for LS admissions too.

lemme know if you need anything else, kthanks.

User avatar
kazu
Posts: 1602
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:35 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby kazu » Mon Feb 14, 2011 5:22 am

Just a couple of questions for the OP

1) Are you in law school?

2) How exactly did you prepare for the games? I really want to know what kind of unspeakable horrors you went through that made you not want to wish this on your friends/relatives.

User avatar
esq
Posts: 571
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Let's end the games section

Postby esq » Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:48 pm

After reading Kill LSAT's arguments, I think that the title of this thread should be renamed "The Ramblings of a Narcissistic (Slightly Retarded) 148'er." Who agrees?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests