Feb Waiters: is TODAY the DAY? [New Poll]

LSAT Release Date

Sometime in Feb
5
3%
March 1
10
5%
March 4
49
26%
March 5
46
24%
March 6
44
23%
March 7
8
4%
March 8
5
3%
March 11
2
1%
March 12 and/or Beyond
22
12%
 
Total votes: 191

User avatar
OliveBC
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby OliveBC » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:48 pm

eav1277 wrote:
TheMostDangerousLG wrote:
ws81086n wrote:All but two of the February administrations in that link were 3 days before the release date, which would make Monday the best guess.


WE'RE SO CLOSE.

Too bad I have two essays due after the weekend, or I'd spend all weekend in bed sedating myself with television and delivery.


Exactly how I feel. How am i suppose to concentrate on writing two papers? And seems like it'll be monday :( fingers crossed


I also have a ton of HW this weekend...yet don't really want to do anything but compulsively check my email :lol:

its only 2 more days though, we can do this guys!

bruin91
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:09 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby bruin91 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:55 pm

So crazy what a difference a few LSAT points can make. While a 75%+ GPA and a 165 will get you into a T20 with no money, a 75%+GPA and a 168 will get you substantial amount of money. (Basing this off LSN)

How can a few questions on the LSAT make a difference of $100,000? I don't get it.

kelliedn
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:01 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby kelliedn » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:14 pm

What's a 75% GPA? I'm new to all this lingo.....

fredmerz
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby fredmerz » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:16 pm

It's truly absurd. We all know any one of us could have scored within at least a +-3 on every LSAT we've ever taken. Guessing right on three 50-50s could, arguable, drastically alter one's future prospects. We should revolt.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:27 pm

fredmerz wrote:It's truly absurd. We all know any one of us could have scored within at least a +-3 on every LSAT we've ever taken. Guessing right on three 50-50s could, arguable, drastically alter one's future prospects. We should revolt.


LSAC acknowledges this which is why they release a 3 point score band with scores now, even though it probably has no effect on admission decisions. Unless you average a 180, luck, or lack of, plays a role in your LSAT score.

Arcticlynx
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 4:36 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby Arcticlynx » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:42 pm

bruin91 wrote:So crazy what a difference a few LSAT points can make. While a 75%+ GPA and a 165 will get you into a T20 with no money, a 75%+GPA and a 168 will get you substantial amount of money. (Basing this off LSN)

How can a few questions on the LSAT make a difference of $100,000? I don't get it.


Totally agree with this…

I feel like LSAT scores have taken on way more weight in law school admissions than they were ever meant too/should. I blame it on the rankings, the fact that the best students want to go to the highest ranked schools, and those schools have to complete for high LSAT averages to attract the best students and it creates one really screwed up feedback cycle. To the point that there are students spending thousands of dollars and months of their live, just to get a better LSAT score rather than pursuing real world experience, community service, work, research, scholarship. I find it completely lopsided that we’re talking about scoring +2 on a test as being more important than having the best recommendations, work experience, publications, character, career aspirations, etc… I mean I think that a test is important, but to the point that people are studying as much as we all do, it’s not like the LSAT measures intelligence or our capacity to perform well in law school, it’s measures how much time and money we can devote to learning the test… I just find it kind of ridiculous, but it’s not like we're going to change the system.

User avatar
facile princeps
Posts: 421
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby facile princeps » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:51 pm

kelliedn wrote:What's a 75% GPA? I'm new to all this lingo.....

A school's 75th percentile GPA. It's the GPA that's higher than 75% of the last entering class for a given school. Look here for an example.

fredmerz
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby fredmerz » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:07 pm

Arcticlynx wrote:I feel like LSAT scores have taken on way more weight in law school admissions than they were ever meant too/should. I blame it on the rankings, the fact that the best students want to go to the highest ranked schools, and those schools have to complete for high LSAT averages to attract the best students and it creates one really screwed up feedback cycle. To the point that there are students spending thousands of dollars and months of their live, just to get a better LSAT score rather than pursuing real world experience, community service, work, research, scholarship. I find it completely lopsided that we’re talking about scoring +2 on a test as being more important than having the best recommendations, work experience, publications, character, career aspirations, etc… I mean I think that a test is important, but to the point that people are studying as much as we all do, it’s not like the LSAT measures intelligence or our capacity to perform well in law school, it’s measures how much time and money we can devote to learning the test… I just find it kind of ridiculous, but it’s not like we're going to change the system.


This. Precisely. I think it is up to all of us not to buy into this as much as we possibly can. Of course one has to be realistic, especially when so much money is at stake, but to take NYC as an example: I have a friend who went to Columbia, absolutely despised it and now wants to do anything but the law; I have two friends who went to Cardoza, absolutely loved it, and are both making money hand over fist and totally satisfied with their careers. I'm not using these anecdotes to claim school or ranking doesn't matter, but it's foolish to think either will make or break you.

User avatar
chuckbass
Posts: 9957
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:29 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby chuckbass » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:20 pm

While there are problems with the test, I don't necessarily see a good alternative. There needs to be some way to weed out applicants besides GPA, and honestly I think that benefits most of us that didn't go to HYP or a similar school for undergrad. Also considering that the test is learnable, if you put in the time and really want to get into a top school you can.

User avatar
chuckbass
Posts: 9957
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:29 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby chuckbass » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:21 pm

Wormfather wrote:
Arcticlynx wrote:
bruin91 wrote:So crazy what a difference a few LSAT points can make. While a 75%+ GPA and a 165 will get you into a T20 with no money, a 75%+GPA and a 168 will get you substantial amount of money. (Basing this off LSN)

How can a few questions on the LSAT make a difference of $100,000? I don't get it.


Totally agree with this…

I feel like LSAT scores have taken on way more weight in law school admissions than they were ever meant too/should. I blame it on the rankings, the fact that the best students want to go to the highest ranked schools, and those schools have to complete for high LSAT averages to attract the best students and it creates one really screwed up feedback cycle. To the point that there are students spending thousands of dollars and months of their live, just to get a better LSAT score rather than pursuing real world experience, community service, work, research, scholarship. I find it completely lopsided that we’re talking about scoring +2 on a test as being more important than having the best recommendations, work experience, publications, character, career aspirations, etc… I mean I think that a test is important, but to the point that people are studying as much as we all do, it’s not like the LSAT measures intelligence or our capacity to perform well in law school, it’s measures how much time and money we can devote to learning the test… I just find it kind of ridiculous, but it’s not like we're going to change the system.


There is a correlation between LSAT score and 1L grades. Also, the LSAT evens the playing field with people who went to elite UGs, were able to afford awesome unpaid internships, etc.

In short, you (figurative you) may have had the best upbringing, the best schools, access to professors of note to write you LORs but here, in this three and a half hour test, I have a chance to prove that I have the same or better chops than you do.

Still if you think this is crazy, wait until you have to go to LS and do shit that will have nothing to do with actual law, or pass the bar.


Sorry didn't see this, obviously I agree haha!

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:33 pm

Arcticlynx wrote: I feel like LSAT scores have taken on way more weight in law school admissions than they were ever meant too/should. I blame it on the rankings.


There has to be a test, but if I answer 1 or 2 more questions correctly out of 100 than someone else am I really a better applicant? Considering the standard deviation for an applicant's LSAT score is 3, 1 or 2 points should not make that big of a difference, but in reality it makes a HUGE difference.

Ask yourself this question: would you rather have the best recommendation in the world or an extra point on the LSAT?

User avatar
TheMostDangerousLG
Posts: 1547
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:25 am

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby TheMostDangerousLG » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:40 pm

jvincent11 wrote:
Arcticlynx wrote: I feel like LSAT scores have taken on way more weight in law school admissions than they were ever meant too/should. I blame it on the rankings.


There has to be a test, but if I answer 1 or 2 more questions correctly out of 100 than someone else am I really a better applicant? Considering the standard deviation for an applicant's LSAT score is 3, 1 or 2 points should not make that big of a difference, but in reality it makes a HUGE difference.

Ask yourself this question: would you rather have the best recommendation in the world or an extra point on the LSAT?


I think you are overdetermining the difference of one or two points. An admissions committee is not automatically going to choose a 176 candidate over a 175 candidate. It's easy to make massive inferences from LSN, but you have to be careful.

At the end of the day, yes, a 169 and a 170 probably are evaluated quite differently. But I think as you move up, the difference becomes more slight.

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:47 pm

TheMostDangerousLG wrote: At the end of the day, yes, a 169 and a 170 probably are evaluated quite differently. But I think as you move up, the difference becomes more slight.


I imagine 169 is significantly worse than 170

TERS
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby TERS » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:48 pm

TheMostDangerousLG wrote:a 169 and a 170 probably are evaluated quite differently.


Probably not.

rebexness
Posts: 4163
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:24 am

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby rebexness » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:53 pm

TERS wrote:
TheMostDangerousLG wrote:a 169 and a 170 probably are evaluated quite differently.


Probably not.


Probably yes.

wannabelawstudent
Posts: 2588
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:33 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby wannabelawstudent » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:57 pm

I have a 167/2.5 and I just got a 25k/year a scholly at Minnesota (out of state), while a Minnesota UG with a 166/3.4 got waitlisted.....its all about those medians.

Not that I meant to put anymore pressure on you guys :D

TERS
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby TERS » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:01 pm

You're right. A 168 versus a 169 and a 170 versus a 171 are each completely different than a 169 versus a 170; admissions committees are completely unreasonable and have an irrational love of the aesthetics of numbers.

User avatar
OliveBC
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby OliveBC » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:02 pm

TERS wrote:You're right. A 168 versus a 169 and a 170 versus a 171 are each completely different than a 169 versus a 170; admissions committees are completely unreasonable and have an irrational love of the aesthetics of numbers.



I feel like 169 is the most painful lsat score

kelliedn
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:01 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby kelliedn » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:06 pm

You know....scores were released on Saturday in 2010, so.....it is possible.....

I'm just saying...

User avatar
jvincent11
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby jvincent11 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:07 pm

OliveBC wrote:
TERS wrote:You're right. A 168 versus a 169 and a 170 versus a 171 are each completely different than a 169 versus a 170; admissions committees are completely unreasonable and have an irrational love of the aesthetics of numbers.



I feel like 169 is the most painful lsat score


Not as painful as 168

User avatar
OliveBC
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby OliveBC » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:10 pm

kelliedn wrote:You know....scores were released on Saturday in 2010, so.....it is possible.....

I'm just saying...



is this for real?!?!

wannabelawstudent
Posts: 2588
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:33 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby wannabelawstudent » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:11 pm

OliveBC wrote:
kelliedn wrote:You know....scores were released on Saturday in 2010, so.....it is possible.....

I'm just saying...



is this for real?!?!

Yes it actually is.

User avatar
OliveBC
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby OliveBC » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:18 pm

wannabelawstudent wrote:
OliveBC wrote:
kelliedn wrote:You know....scores were released on Saturday in 2010, so.....it is possible.....

I'm just saying...



is this for real?!?!

Yes it actually is.

:D

User avatar
TheMostDangerousLG
Posts: 1547
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:25 am

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby TheMostDangerousLG » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:18 pm

OliveBC wrote:
TERS wrote:You're right. A 168 versus a 169 and a 170 versus a 171 are each completely different than a 169 versus a 170; admissions committees are completely unreasonable and have an irrational love of the aesthetics of numbers.



I feel like 169 is the most painful lsat score


I would think a 179 is.

ws81086n
Posts: 318
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 9:47 pm

Re: Feb Waiters: LSAC.org ragequit [New Poll]

Postby ws81086n » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:20 pm

For Oct 2010, scores were released on Saturday. Seems like an aberration though. Not getting my hopes up.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests