Debunking the auto-reject theory

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
ProfitsProphets
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:02 am

Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby ProfitsProphets » Fri May 06, 2011 5:29 am

Applied on the very last day applications were open, I have a 136 LSAT, and I have been in review 10 weeks now (and counting).

Now before the "retake the test" comments come flooding in, I'm retaking the test on 10/1, barring the unexpected.

3.65/136
URM
Strong app
5 years paralegal exp.

Applied to 1 school - Hastings LEOP.

No one thinks I'll get in, but what's so wrong with me feeling excited about the possibility? Trust me, my app isn't simply, "Let me in because I'm a minority." I get attacked because the idea of URM and Low LSAT score seems to bring out the worst in some people.

I'm just pointing out that contrary to popular belief a 136 did not get auto-rejected. And I would like to "share my experience" without the backlash.

User avatar
Kabuo
Posts: 1114
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:53 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby Kabuo » Fri May 06, 2011 5:42 am

At least it's not in the splitter thread anymore. GL OP, but I really don't think the fact that you've been in review for 10 weeks means anything at all. Hopefully it does though, and then this thread will probably be a great help to someone.

User avatar
Lawquacious
Posts: 2037
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:36 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby Lawquacious » Fri May 06, 2011 5:51 am

I think a lot of ppl acknowledge that there are some fairly extreme exceptions to normal trends in admissions. It's just that when it happens it is a rare event, and I think it is either tied to extremely good softs or some other special status. Otherwise, admissions is fairly formulaic as far as I can tell (predictably based on numbers). But I don't think that schools generally 'auto-reject' applicants in the sense of basically tossing the app if the numbers aren't at a certain level; I think all apps are at least (cursorily) reviewed. But in general, certain numbers can place a person in what is for all intents and purposes "auto-reject" land (in that it is just a matter of time before the rejection).
Last edited by Lawquacious on Fri May 06, 2011 3:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
theturkeyisfat
Posts: 236
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 2:04 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby theturkeyisfat » Fri May 06, 2011 9:12 am

--ImageRemoved--

Eponymous
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:56 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby Eponymous » Fri May 06, 2011 9:25 am

exceptio regulam probat.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby aliarrow » Fri May 06, 2011 9:36 am

Just because it's in review for 10 weeks doesn't mean it isn't auto-reject...
What is this?

mrwarre85
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby mrwarre85 » Fri May 06, 2011 10:26 am

I'm still convinced he is a troll.

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

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby whymeohgodno » Fri May 06, 2011 10:31 am

aliarrow wrote:Just because it's in review for 10 weeks doesn't mean it isn't auto-reject...
What is this?


+1

It's probably reasoning like this which contributed to your amazing LSAT score.

User avatar
geoduck
Posts: 890
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:29 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby geoduck » Fri May 06, 2011 10:36 am

You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....

mrwarre85
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby mrwarre85 » Fri May 06, 2011 10:44 am

geoduck wrote:You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....


True story: because my dad is a bad guy, he took the LSAT with me the first time I took it, simply to mind fuck me. He lucked out and was placed one row behind me and the whole time he kept clearing his throat real loud and making awkward comments to the girls sitting by him at every break. My dad is a 60 year old alcoholic and he didn't give two shits to the wind about his score-- he got a 137.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby ahduth » Fri May 06, 2011 10:45 am

geoduck wrote:You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....


I did one point better than that. It was awesome.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby aliarrow » Fri May 06, 2011 10:45 am

mrwarre85 wrote:
geoduck wrote:You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....


True story: because my dad is a bad guy, he took the LSAT with me the first time I took it, simply to mind fuck me. He lucked out and was placed one row behind me and the whole time he kept clearing his throat real loud and making awkward comments to the girls sitting by him at every break. My dad is a 60 year old alcoholic and he didn't give two shits to the wind about his score-- he got a 137.


180.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby ahduth » Fri May 06, 2011 10:46 am

mrwarre85 wrote:
geoduck wrote:You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....


True story: because my dad is a bad guy, he took the LSAT with me the first time I took it, simply to mind fuck me. He lucked out and was placed one row behind me and the whole time he kept clearing his throat real loud and making awkward comments to the girls sitting by him at every break. My dad is a 60 year old alcoholic and he didn't give two shits to the wind about his score-- he got a 137.


That's some twisted shit right there.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby aliarrow » Fri May 06, 2011 10:47 am

And wtf? You were applying to Cornell in 09 with a 136? Yous Trollin

BeaverHunter
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:05 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby BeaverHunter » Fri May 06, 2011 10:48 am

You haven't been accepted anywhere. It is May. This does not bode well for your cycle. Please update us when and if you do get accepted. Until that time, no numbers "myth" has been debunked. A 136 is a dreadful score and should make you honestly assess your ability to be successful in a competitive law program.
Last edited by BeaverHunter on Fri May 06, 2011 11:23 am, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby whymeohgodno » Fri May 06, 2011 10:48 am

mrwarre85 wrote:
geoduck wrote:You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....


True story: because my dad is a bad guy, he took the LSAT with me the first time I took it, simply to mind fuck me. He lucked out and was placed one row behind me and the whole time he kept clearing his throat real loud and making awkward comments to the girls sitting by him at every break. My dad is a 60 year old alcoholic and he didn't give two shits to the wind about his score-- he got a 137.


Was this your dad by any chance?

Image

User avatar
Ginj
Posts: 531
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:53 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby Ginj » Fri May 06, 2011 10:49 am

BeaverHunter wrote:You haven't been accepted anywhere. It is May. This does not bode well for your cycle. Please update us when and if you do get accepted. Until that time, no numbers "myth" has been debunked.

Additionally, when the likely outcome is finally revealed, you may want to reconsider law school. A 136 is a horrible, horrible score. Even if it isn't a perfect predictor of success, this score could be achieved by random guessing. A 136 means that your reading comprehension and logical reasoning skills are on par with an 11 year old. You are not prepared for law school, no offense.


Ha.

crit_racer
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby crit_racer » Fri May 06, 2011 10:49 am

mrwarre85 wrote:
geoduck wrote:You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....


True story: because my dad is a bad guy, he took the LSAT with me the first time I took it, simply to mind fuck me. He lucked out and was placed one row behind me and the whole time he kept clearing his throat real loud and making awkward comments to the girls sitting by him at every break. My dad is a 60 year old alcoholic and he didn't give two shits to the wind about his score-- he got a 137.


LOLOLOLOLOL

User avatar
ProfitsProphets
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:02 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby ProfitsProphets » Fri May 06, 2011 11:28 am

whymeohgodno wrote:
aliarrow wrote:Just because it's in review for 10 weeks doesn't mean it isn't auto-reject...
What is this?


+1

It's probably reasoning like this which contributed to your amazing LSAT score.


Actually what contributed to my amazing LSAT score was my lack of experience with standardized test. I'm a non-traditional applicant. Plus, I suppose having been unemployed for nearly a year at the time I took the test didn't help. I'm also a father (15 y/o daughter) and live in SF, so financial worries and family responsibilities trumped LSAT focus. I went blank, and I actually guessed a lot of answers. Sucks for me.

But I will retake, fret not.

User avatar
ProfitsProphets
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:02 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby ProfitsProphets » Fri May 06, 2011 11:31 am

mrwarre85 wrote:
geoduck wrote:You applied to Hastings LEOP, not regular Hastings admissions. Of course you weren't auto dinged.... You applied for their crappy-stats program! This proves nothing even if you get in.

I'm more amazed at that 136 though. You get 120 for writing your name....


True story: because my dad is a bad guy, he took the LSAT with me the first time I took it, simply to mind fuck me. He lucked out and was placed one row behind me and the whole time he kept clearing his throat real loud and making awkward comments to the girls sitting by him at every break. My dad is a 60 year old alcoholic and he didn't give two shits to the wind about his score-- he got a 137.


Sorry to hear that your dad is a loser. My daughter has a much different opinion about her dad who has been working really hard in life to get to this point.

mrwarre85
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby mrwarre85 » Fri May 06, 2011 11:32 am

ProfitsProphets wrote:
whymeohgodno wrote:
aliarrow wrote:Just because it's in review for 10 weeks doesn't mean it isn't auto-reject...
What is this?


+1

It's probably reasoning like this which contributed to your amazing LSAT score.


Actually what contributed to my amazing LSAT score was my lack of experience with standardized test. I'm a non-traditional applicant. Plus, I suppose having been unemployed for nearly a year at the time I took the test didn't help. I'm also a father (15 y/o daughter) and live in SF, so financial worries and family responsibilities trumped LSAT focus. I went blank, and I actually guessed a lot of answers. Sucks for me.

But I will retake, fret not.


This is all I heard. Then I laughed.

User avatar
law4vus
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:35 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby law4vus » Fri May 06, 2011 11:36 am

I feel bad for the OP, and this thread is headed to a bad place. I can tell already. lol

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby vanwinkle » Fri May 06, 2011 11:36 am

I think I'll need to watch this thread closely.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby aliarrow » Fri May 06, 2011 11:37 am

vanwinkle wrote:I think I'll need to watch this thread closely.


--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
ProfitsProphets
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:02 am

Re: Debunking the auto-reject theory

Postby ProfitsProphets » Fri May 06, 2011 11:38 am

I just received my rejection letter, eeehhhhhh, just kidding. I'm think my app is still sitting in a rejection pile, or maybe they lost my app....hmmm




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DoYouEvenTLS, SilverSurfer2020, uhwrestler and 13 guests