Anybody Studying for the LSAT in Seoul? Forum

[Applying_Late]

Someone with at least a 3.7 has shown some form of dedication. Someone with a 3.7 and a 175+ shows dedication and intelligence.

Yeah, I'm going to join in with the others and say this is not really true. I have a ~3.9 and my roommate has a ~3.4, but she works way harder than me because she's an engineering major. Extenuating circumstances can severely affect your GPA, as can your undergrad institution, and I think you're forgetting that many if not most of the people applying to law school have spent quite a few years out of undergrad, and they and their work ethics are far removed from their crazy college selves.

OP, I understand you want to work with people with similar goals and study habits, which makes perfect sense. You might have a better study group, and risk offending less people, If you instead ask that people be PT'ing at a certain level, since it has a much more consistent correlation with LSAT performance than GPA.

Your roommate and I have something in common. Engineering isn't nice, but then again, if you get the math, if you get the problem solving, you should be OK. And by that I mean pulling a 3.7 at least. To get a 3.4 in engineering is not very good. You're not even pulling cum laude at most schools with that GPA, and by that I mean the engineering school's cum laude list.

I agree that extenuating circumstances, undergrad institution and all that jazz can affect your GPA, but I don't care and often times HYS doesn't either if you fall below a certain threshold. It's also nice that people learn how to discipline themselves after college, but again, HYS doesn't pity them as we see from their floors. OP wants kids who really had their shit together from day 1, and I don't blame them. If OP has a vision of creating this "elite" study team, why attack him for setting standards that don't appear to be arbitrary?

because they are arbitrary

Tell that to HYS. Maybe they will let you in with that argument.

[jkpolk]

Tell that to HYS. Maybe they will let you in with that argument.

146

[North]

I think everyone is intelligent in their own way. In regards to the LSAT, I think that the higher the scorer the more a specific skill set that person brings. I also think that the higher the GPA, the more of a specific skill set that person brings. If you combine two high scores (GPA + LSAT), you get a very specific type of person. I think getting a 3.7 these days is not very difficult except at some schools that actively pursue grade deflation and maybe even some majors but this is becoming less true as time goes by. I mean look at medical schools. They floor GPAs at about a 3.7 (if not more these days). They want individuals who are either bright and/or bring dedication. A 3.7 certainly speaks to some level of competence. I don't think someone is unintelligent simply because they don't have a 3.7, but I would question their history and certainly look at what factors made them fall below this line. Also, Columbia Penn and NYU aren't shit schools, they are damn good schools, but OP might be looking for HYS gunners and thus wants to set what I think is an OK bar (as past HYS numbers confirm).

You are an annoying troll.

[Applying_Late]

You are an annoying troll.

I'm glad you resort to name calling. I would think that someone who is pro citizen-police (ie tattling on farcical matters) would also refrain from silly name-calling posts. I was very wrong to think that.

[jkpolk]

I'm glad you resort to name calling. I would think that someone who is pro citizen-police (ie tattling on farcical matters) would also refrain from silly name-calling posts. I was very wrong to think that.

157

[dpk711]

You are an annoying troll.

I'm glad you resort to name calling. I would think that someone who is pro citizen-police (ie tattling on farcical matters) would also refrain from silly name-calling posts. I was very wrong to think that.

Wait, aren't you the one that started with the personal attacks?

Tell that to HYS. Maybe they will let you in with that argument.

[Applying_Late]

You are an annoying troll.

I'm glad you resort to name calling. I would think that someone who is pro citizen-police (ie tattling on farcical matters) would also refrain from silly name-calling posts. I was very wrong to think that.

Wait, aren't you the one that started with the personal attacks?

Tell that to HYS. Maybe they will let you in with that argument.

Well I was called a name, and I just stated that someone who is pro citizen-police shouldn't be name calling. I don't see it as a personal attack from my end, but from the other I don't know.

And the whole tell that to HYS was about those who don't like the concept/don't approve of/or find the concept silly of a 175+ 3.7+ group. I didn't set those standards at HYS, so they should appeal to HYS about lower GPAs/LSAT. That wasn't a personal attack, it was just a recommendation to the poster. Maybe HYS will explain why they want people with a 3.7+ GPA.

[Deep Trench]

The arguments about arbitrary rules bring back the memory of con law final. The following is meant to be a joke, but I apologize in advance if it is not funny.

Rational basis or heightened review
The rule here is facially discriminatory, but <3.7 is not a suspect class, and there is no fundamental right to study with OP, so rational basis review applies.

Legitimate end
It is unclear whether the purpose advanced by OP's counsel (forming friendship with hardworking HYS-bound students) was OP's actual intent, but hypothetical purpose is permissive under Lee Optical. Also, it does not appear that OP has animus against <3.7, unlike Moreno. Thus, there is a legitimate end.

Rational fit
The rule is over-inclusive (dedicated D1 athlete w/ engineering major who had cancer) and under-inclusive (a not-so-smart student from inflated-GPA school), but over and under-inclusive rule for administrative efficiency is permissive under Beazer. One may argue that the correlation between >3.7 and 175+ is not strong, but legislature is presumed to be a better fact-finder, and we should defer to it (Clover Leaf). The rule does not weed out students who have >3.7 GPA but have no hope of achieving 175+, but reform may take one step at a time under Railway Express (OP can create new rules later to kick those people out). Thus, mean and end appear rationally related here. I would say OP's rule is constitutional.

[jkpolk]

Well I was called a name, and I just stated that someone who is pro citizen-police shouldn't be name calling. I don't see it as a personal attack from my end, but from the other I don't know.

And the whole tell that to HYS was about those who don't like the concept/don't approve of/or find the concept silly of a 175+ 3.7+ group. I didn't set those standards at HYS, so they should appeal to HYS about lower GPAs/LSAT. That wasn't a personal attack, it was just a recommendation to the poster. Maybe HYS will explain why they want people with a 3.7+ GPA.

131

[Applying_Late]

Well I was called a name, and I just stated that someone who is pro citizen-police shouldn't be name calling. I don't see it as a personal attack from my end, but from the other I don't know.

And the whole tell that to HYS was about those who don't like the concept/don't approve of/or find the concept silly of a 175+ 3.7+ group. I didn't set those standards at HYS, so they should appeal to HYS about lower GPAs/LSAT. That wasn't a personal attack, it was just a recommendation to the poster. Maybe HYS will explain why they want people with a 3.7+ GPA.

131

I was hoping for a 120

[cc.celina]

1) Where is OP? Lol.

2) Applying Late, nobody is arguing with your point that one is unlikely to get HYS with a sub-3.7. This is true. Neither is anyone arguing that this is unfair, so no one particularly wants to "write HYS about it."

What they are trying to tell you is that, for the many reasons that have been discussed (difficulty of major/undergrad, illness or adversity, having graduated college five years ago and having matured since then, having one's GPA brought down by community college classes one failed in high school, etc.) there is a poor correlation between one's undergraduate GPA and how highly motivated and capable they are to achieve a very high score on the LSAT. Hence the huge amount of splitters on the board. "Gunning for HYS" and "Gunning for a good LSAT score" are two different things.

3) You reference one's likelihood of getting into HYS a lot. Harvard, arguably the easiest one of these to get into, has most recently reported a 25th percentile GPA of 3.78. This means that with a 3.7, you are still fairly unlikely to get into Harvard unless you have a 180 and lots of really good softs, and you are probably not going to get into Yale. Hence, this word "arbitrary" that everyone's throwing around. We were just wondering where OP came up with this number, which by no means secures you admission into those three schools.

That said, none of us are in Seoul, and almost all of us have already taken the LSAT, so feel free to ignore this and join the OP in your mini-Mensa study club.

[Applying_Late]

1) Where is OP? Lol.

I don't know.

2) Applying Late, nobody is arguing with your point that one is unlikely to get HYS with a sub-3.7. This is true. Neither is anyone arguing that this is unfair, so no one particularly wants to "write HYS about it."

While this may be true, I do have the sense that they are saying that the group standards are unfair/arbitrary. If I were to set up a group gunning for HYS, I would filter the members of the group by HYS standards, thus ask for 3.7+ and 175+ candidates only.

What they are trying to tell you is that, for the many reasons that have been discussed (difficulty of major/undergrad, illness or adversity, having graduated college five years ago and having matured since then, having one's GPA brought down by community college classes one failed in high school, etc.) there is a poor correlation between one's undergraduate GPA and how highly motivated and capable they are to achieve a very high score on the LSAT. Hence the huge amount of splitters on the board. "Gunning for HYS" and "Gunning for a good LSAT score" are two different things.

I know that's what some have been saying, and I'm not disagreeing with this statement. I'm just saying that the OP can set the bar at 175+ and 3.7+, which is an HYS-gunning group or at least those statistics have a good correlation with candidates getting into HYS.

3) You reference one's likelihood of getting into HYS a lot. Harvard, arguably the easiest one of these to get into, has most recently reported a 25th percentile GPA of 3.78. This means that with a 3.7, you are still fairly unlikely to get into Harvard unless you have a 180 and lots of really good softs, and you are probably not going to get into Yale. Hence, this word "arbitrary" that everyone's throwing around. We were just wondering where OP came up with this number, which by no means secures you admission into those three schools.

I know of many cases that got in with sub 3.8. Just look at who got off the waitlist this year on the forums (excluding URMs). Nevertheless, I agree that someone with just a 3.7 and a 175 and nothing else to show (no softs at all) might not get in to any of HYS. But again, we are talking about people in Seoul. If it's a non-Asian in Seoul, chances are he has some interesting softs already, which would probably explain why he is taking the exam in Seoul (maybe Fulbright or teaching english to korean students, maybe consulting, maybe banking, maybe military, etc).

That said, none of us are in Seoul, and almost all of us have already taken the LSAT, so feel free to ignore this and join the OP in your mini-Mensa study club.

I've taken the LSAT already, so I don't need to join the candidate's group, and while I understand that your mini-Mensa is not literal, I am OK with not being in this club.

[aekea]

Not arbitrary at all if the OP wants to make a lasting friend group with people who might end up at the same school. If you are studying with people who are gunning for HYS, why not limit the GPA to a minimum of a 3.7? I don't see anything arbitrary, and I think the OP is also looking for people who have shown some commitment throughout their college years. Maybe the kid who gets a 180 is a total slacker and doesn't know how to explain his way of thinking to the group. Someone with at least a 3.7 has shown some form of dedication. Someone with a 3.7 and a 175+ shows dedication and intelligence. That is why HYS has some sort of minimum for GPA and doesn't look just at the LSAT.

Are you kidding me? Let me break down how misguided you are bit by bit.

I'm not misguided at all. Regardless of whether or not OP is Korean, there are plenty of hardcore Koreans who meet his requirements. Also, Koreans take HYS seriously and getting into one of them is a dream of a lot of people there. If you have someone studying with you who is not of that caliber, well, they are simply not welcome.

Haha, totally agree with you here, Applying_Late. I'm not even sure why MillerTheThriller tried to say that you're misguided when everyone knows that plenty of Koreans take HYS seriously. What an excellent and relevant point!

Those that had cancer during UG, we are sorry for their situation, but sometimes that's all we can be.

lol

[Applying_Late]

Those that had cancer during UG, we are sorry for their situation, but sometimes that's all we can be.

lol

Care to share what else you'd do/feel as an administrator at HYS if you saw a 3.0 cancer applicant with a 180? I'm sure you'd argue you it all the way to the dean, then write an article to NYTimes/WSJ saying how unfair we are to cancer applicants who can't meet HYS gpa requirements, and maybe throw a balloon party for the cancer victim after you've convinced everyone to accept them.

[TheThriller]

Honestly dude, now you're just marginalizing people with cancer. Stop.

[jkpolk]

Care to share what else you'd do/feel as an administrator at HYS if you saw a 3.0 cancer applicant with a 180? I'm sure you'd argue you it all the way to the dean, then write an article to NYTimes/WSJ saying how unfair we are to cancer applicants who can't meet HYS gpa requirements, and maybe throw a balloon party for the cancer victim after you've convinced everyone to accept them.

So you bombed the LSAT huh? are you more disappointed by that or by your crippling lack of intelligence?

[Applying_Late]

Honestly dude, now you're just marginalizing people with cancer. Stop.

No, I am not. All I am saying is that there are certain things a cancer patient with a low GPA can't overcome and one of those things is law school admissions to HYS. I am sorry for those who have had cancer during their undergraduate years, but if I were an administrator at HYS, that's all I can be--sorry. I can't compromise the GPA floor because a candidate had cancer. It's a harsh reality and not a marginalization.

[Applying_Late]

Care to share what else you'd do/feel as an administrator at HYS if you saw a 3.0 cancer applicant with a 180? I'm sure you'd argue you it all the way to the dean, then write an article to NYTimes/WSJ saying how unfair we are to cancer applicants who can't meet HYS gpa requirements, and maybe throw a balloon party for the cancer victim after you've convinced everyone to accept them.

So you bombed the LSAT huh? are you more disappointed by that or by your crippling lack of intelligence?

No I either did better than you or performed equally as well.

[jkpolk]

Care to share what else you'd do/feel as an administrator at HYS if you saw a 3.0 cancer applicant with a 180? I'm sure you'd argue you it all the way to the dean, then write an article to NYTimes/WSJ saying how unfair we are to cancer applicants who can't meet HYS gpa requirements, and maybe throw a balloon party for the cancer victim after you've convinced everyone to accept them.

So you bombed the LSAT huh? are you more disappointed by that or by your crippling lack of intelligence?

No I either did better than you or performed equally as well.

so the latter?

[Applying_Late]

Care to share what else you'd do/feel as an administrator at HYS if you saw a 3.0 cancer applicant with a 180? I'm sure you'd argue you it all the way to the dean, then write an article to NYTimes/WSJ saying how unfair we are to cancer applicants who can't meet HYS gpa requirements, and maybe throw a balloon party for the cancer victim after you've convinced everyone to accept them.

So you bombed the LSAT huh? are you more disappointed by that or by your crippling lack of intelligence?

No I either did better than you or performed equally as well.

so the latter?

If by that you mean you got a perfect score, then yes.

[TheThriller]

Honestly dude, now you're just marginalizing people with cancer. Stop.

No, I am not. All I am saying is that there are certain things a cancer patient with a low GPA can't overcome and one of those things is law school admissions to HYS. I am sorry for those who have had cancer during their undergraduate years, but if I were an administrator at HYS, that's all I can be--sorry. I can't compromise the GPA floor because a candidate had cancer. It's a harsh reality and not a marginalization.

You talk about newspaper articles and balloon parties. Is this your perception of cancer? Not trying to get into an argument but come on.

[laxbrah420]

.

[aekea]

Those that had cancer during UG, we are sorry for their situation, but sometimes that's all we can be.

lol

Care to share what else you'd do/feel as an administrator at HYS if you saw a 3.0 cancer applicant with a 180? I'm sure you'd argue you it all the way to the dean, then write an article to NYTimes/WSJ saying how unfair we are to cancer applicants who can't meet HYS gpa requirements, and maybe throw a balloon party for the cancer victim after you've convinced everyone to accept them.

Um, I can't say what I'd do as a HYS admin. But, I can say that if I was trying to set up a study group I wouldn't say, "hey, I know you've been getting a 180 on all your pt's, guy who had cancer in UG, but that 3.0 GPA is going to keep you out of HYS, so you're not of our caliber and you're not welcome."

[Applying_Late]

Honestly dude, now you're just marginalizing people with cancer. Stop.

No, I am not. All I am saying is that there are certain things a cancer patient with a low GPA can't overcome and one of those things is law school admissions to HYS. I am sorry for those who have had cancer during their undergraduate years, but if I were an administrator at HYS, that's all I can be--sorry. I can't compromise the GPA floor because a candidate had cancer. It's a harsh reality and not a marginalization.

You talk about newspaper articles and balloon parties. Is this your perception of cancer? Not trying to get into an argument but come on.

It was a bit of sarcasm sprinkled with hyperbole. I talk about what aekna or however you spell the poster's alias said when I said that all we can be for cancer patients is sorry. What else can you be? The poster makes it sound like there is something more that the cancer patient can do with a low GPA/high LSAT when trying to gain admission to HYS. There is nothing that the cancer patient can do, and all that administrator can do that reads that cancer patient's app can do is feel sorry because there are certain things for which one cannot make exceptions.

[Applying_Late]

Those that had cancer during UG, we are sorry for their situation, but sometimes that's all we can be.

lol

Care to share what else you'd do/feel as an administrator at HYS if you saw a 3.0 cancer applicant with a 180? I'm sure you'd argue you it all the way to the dean, then write an article to NYTimes/WSJ saying how unfair we are to cancer applicants who can't meet HYS gpa requirements, and maybe throw a balloon party for the cancer victim after you've convinced everyone to accept them.

Um, I can't say what I'd do as a HYS admin. But, I can say that if I was trying to set up a study group I wouldn't say, "hey, I know you've been getting a 180 on all your pt's, guy who had cancer in UG, but that 3.0 GPA is going to keep you out of HYS, so you're not of our caliber and you're not welcome."

If your group's criteria strictly follows HYS admission criteria, then you will keep the cancer patient out of your group.