The Official September 2014 Study Group

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2791
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:41 pm

smccgrey wrote:
BillPackets wrote:
smccgrey wrote:I love you guys. I hope you all get 180s.


Then we can all go to yale n act like 176 75th is nbd


Yeah but Yale rejects people with 180s. Not anecdotal.


Alrighty then buzzkill McGrey

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:42 pm

smccgrey wrote:
BillPackets wrote:
smccgrey wrote:I love you guys. I hope you all get 180s.


Then we can all go to yale n act like 176 75th is nbd


Yeah but Yale rejects people with 180s. Not anecdotal.


Were they convicted felons, these 180 applicants? Because, shittttt.

User avatar
Gray
Posts: 5991
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Gray » Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:47 pm

sfoglia wrote:
smccgrey wrote:
BillPackets wrote:
smccgrey wrote:I love you guys. I hope you all get 180s.


Then we can all go to yale n act like 176 75th is nbd


Yeah but Yale rejects people with 180s. Not anecdotal.


Were they convicted felons, these 180 applicants? Because, shittttt.


No, Yale is just ridiculous.

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:51 pm

smccgrey wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
smccgrey wrote:
Yeah but Yale rejects people with 180s. Not anecdotal.


Were they convicted felons, these 180 applicants? Because, shittttt.


No, Yale is just ridiculous.


Their employment numbers are lower than NYU. Can someone explain that to me?

User avatar
Gray
Posts: 5991
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Gray » Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:56 pm

sfoglia wrote:Their employment numbers are lower than NYU. Can someone explain that to me?

I think it has to do with pursuing more school instead of getting a job?

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:05 pm

smccgrey wrote:
sfoglia wrote:Their employment numbers are lower than NYU. Can someone explain that to me?

I think it has to do with pursuing more school instead of getting a job?


Ahhh. I see.

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2791
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:12 pm

smccgrey wrote:
sfoglia wrote:Their employment numbers are lower than NYU. Can someone explain that to me?

I think it has to do with pursuing more school instead of getting a job?


A lot of it is self-selection and the opportunities open to yale grads. 78% are In full time legal jobs, which is closer to 90% for schools like nyu Columbia etc. But when you include other full time work their number (Yale) jumps to 92%, Another 7% in school funded jobs as well. But that additional 15% of full time jobs are probably really good opportunities not open to your average legal grad that don't require bar passage so they aren't included in your traditional LST score report. /rant

Edit for there are plenty pursuing addtl school too I just don't know where they fall in the percentages

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:49 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
smccgrey wrote:
sfoglia wrote:Their employment numbers are lower than NYU. Can someone explain that to me?

I think it has to do with pursuing more school instead of getting a job?


A lot of it is self-selection and the opportunities open to yale grads. 78% are In full time legal jobs, which is closer to 90% for schools like nyu Columbia etc. But when you include other full time work their number (Yale) jumps to 92%, Another 7% in school funded jobs as well. But that additional 15% of full time jobs are probably really good opportunities not open to your average legal grad that don't require bar passage so they aren't included in your traditional LST score report. /rant

Edit for there are plenty pursuing addtl school too I just don't know where they fall in the percentages


Okay. So if I somehow win the luck lottery and get into Yale, and then I somehow win the money lottery to be able to pay for it, I should go.

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2791
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:55 pm

sfoglia wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
smccgrey wrote:
sfoglia wrote:Their employment numbers are lower than NYU. Can someone explain that to me?

I think it has to do with pursuing more school instead of getting a job?


A lot of it is self-selection and the opportunities open to yale grads. 78% are In full time legal jobs, which is closer to 90% for schools like nyu Columbia etc. But when you include other full time work their number (Yale) jumps to 92%, Another 7% in school funded jobs as well. But that additional 15% of full time jobs are probably really good opportunities not open to your average legal grad that don't require bar passage so they aren't included in your traditional LST score report. /rant

Edit for there are plenty pursuing addtl school too I just don't know where they fall in the percentages


Okay. So if I somehow win the luck lottery and get into Yale, and then I somehow win the money lottery to be able to pay for it, I should go.


If and only if.

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2791
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:38 am

charlesriver wrote:
You are so funny ! you are so smart !


QFNP

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:19 am

Good luck with the first round of Labor Day PTs everyone. It's an early 6:15 in MST right now. Up and prepping for this

User avatar
hillz
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:41 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hillz » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:30 am

BillPackets wrote:Good luck with the first round of Labor Day PTs everyone. It's an early 6:15 in MST right now. Up and prepping for this


I'm impressed. Good luck!!

BJS
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BJS » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:34 am

hillz wrote:
BillPackets wrote:Good luck with the first round of Labor Day PTs everyone. It's an early 6:15 in MST right now. Up and prepping for this


I'm impressed. Good luck!!


Isn't the test not until 10:30am?

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2791
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:43 am

BillPackets wrote:Good luck with the first round of Labor Day PTs everyone. It's an early 6:15 in MST right now. Up and prepping for this


Didja lose your watch bill

Edit: time zone outed

User avatar
flash21
Posts: 1536
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby flash21 » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:47 am

guys, someone please respond.

Going to be drilling idividual passages to day - when you guys drill and look for structure - should I basically be annotating the parahraphs like this?

Paragraph 1: Introduces theory
Parahraph 2: Author opinion
para 3- Critiques
para 4 -Suggestion to make theory better

Is the above correct for thinking of the passage in terms of structure? Its this type of idea, opposed to trying to memorize all the details correct?

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:51 am

flash21 wrote:guys, someone please respond.

Going to be drilling idividual passages to day - when you guys drill and look for structure - should I basically be annotating the parahraphs like this?

Paragraph 1: Introduces theory
Parahraph 2: Author opinion
para 3- Critiques
para 4 -Suggestion to make theory better

Is the above correct for thinking of the passage in terms of structure? Its this type of idea, opposed to trying to memorize all the details correct?


Yeah basically. You can pretty much predict what's coming in the next paragraphs. There are usually pretty big indicators. Obvs the passages won't all b like how you laid them out, but that's the right type of thinking. The one thing tho is that sometimes the authors opinion is not set of in a paragraph--it might just be one sentence in a paragraph

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:52 am

BJS wrote:
hillz wrote:
BillPackets wrote:Good luck with the first round of Labor Day PTs everyone. It's an early 6:15 in MST right now. Up and prepping for this


I'm impressed. Good luck!!


Isn't the test not until 10:30am?


I'm pretty sure the test is 8:30 AM. The June test starts later

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:53 am

hillz wrote:
BillPackets wrote:Good luck with the first round of Labor Day PTs everyone. It's an early 6:15 in MST right now. Up and prepping for this


I'm impressed. Good luck!!


Thx hillz fortunately my fiancé fell asleep at like 10 last night (unusual) so I was able to get to be early.

User avatar
flash21
Posts: 1536
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby flash21 » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:53 am

BillPackets wrote:
flash21 wrote:guys, someone please respond.

Going to be drilling idividual passages to day - when you guys drill and look for structure - should I basically be annotating the parahraphs like this?

Paragraph 1: Introduces theory
Parahraph 2: Author opinion
para 3- Critiques
para 4 -Suggestion to make theory better

Is the above correct for thinking of the passage in terms of structure? Its this type of idea, opposed to trying to memorize all the details correct?


Yeah basically. You can pretty much predict what's coming in the next paragraphs. There are usually pretty big indicators. Obvs the passages won't all b like how you laid them out, but that's the right type of thinking. The one thing tho is that sometimes the authors opinion is not set of in a paragraph--it might just be one sentence in a paragraph


Right - thanks. Yeah this was a completely hyptothetical example, just wanted to get across broader ideas. Cool man, appreciate the quick response, good luck in your studies.

BJS
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BJS » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:55 am

BillPackets wrote:
BJS wrote:Isn't the test not until 10:30am?


I'm pretty sure the test is 8:30 AM. The June test starts later


Whoops you're right. Damn, I've been PTing at 10:30am. Guess that will have to change!

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:56 am

flash21 wrote:
BillPackets wrote:
flash21 wrote:guys, someone please respond.

Going to be drilling idividual passages to day - when you guys drill and look for structure - should I basically be annotating the parahraphs like this?

Paragraph 1: Introduces theory
Parahraph 2: Author opinion
para 3- Critiques
para 4 -Suggestion to make theory better

Is the above correct for thinking of the passage in terms of structure? Its this type of idea, opposed to trying to memorize all the details correct?


Yeah basically. You can pretty much predict what's coming in the next paragraphs. There are usually pretty big indicators. Obvs the passages won't all b like how you laid them out, but that's the right type of thinking. The one thing tho is that sometimes the authors opinion is not set of in a paragraph--it might just be one sentence in a paragraph


Right - thanks. Yeah this was a completely hyptothetical example, just wanted to get across broader ideas. Cool man, appreciate the quick response, good luck in your studies.


Thx brotha good luck 2 u 2

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:57 am

BJS wrote:
BillPackets wrote:
BJS wrote:Isn't the test not until 10:30am?


I'm pretty sure the test is 8:30 AM. The June test starts later


Whoops you're right. Damn, I've been PTing at 10:30am. Guess that will have to change!


It would b cool if it started at 10:30

User avatar
hillz
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:41 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hillz » Sat Aug 30, 2014 9:03 am

BillPackets wrote:
BJS wrote:
BillPackets wrote:
BJS wrote:Isn't the test not until 10:30am?


I'm pretty sure the test is 8:30 AM. The June test starts later


Whoops you're right. Damn, I've been PTing at 10:30am. Guess that will have to change!


It would b cool if it started at 10:30


I would be happy with that. I didn't like the noon start time for June because I had too much time to sit around and be nervous + the timing of my food/caffeine was off, but I feel like 10:30 is optimal.

User avatar
bound
Posts: 1083
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:49 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby bound » Sat Aug 30, 2014 9:18 am

Realized I had already done PT 65 before. About to start PT 68!! I'll chime back in in a few hours. Good luck everyone PTing this morning!

User avatar
nmjensen
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 11:10 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby nmjensen » Sat Aug 30, 2014 9:20 am

The library and all classroom buildings at my UG (test center, too) don't open until 10. What is this?!? Going to Starbucks :cry:




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dontsaywhatyoumean, Tazewell and 2 guests