So unfair that so much weight hinges on an lsat score Forum

[Patriot1208]

I have a 3.87 gpa from an Ivy Leauge . . . My starting lsat before I prepped was 153. Now, I can get anywhere from 159-165 on practice tests.

This may be a scathing indictment on your grade-inflated Ivy League rather than evidence of LSAT's inadequacy. Just saying, brah.

TBF, ivy league grade inflation is not much worse than the VAST majority of all schools.

[beachbum]

You have a sky-high GPA. You're a URM. You have way, way more leeway with this test than 99% of your peers. I mean this in the nicest way possible, but quit bitching and get back to studying.

[masterthearts]

My ivy league has no grade inflation..one of the few that does not

[Veyron]

My ivy league has no grade inflation..one of the few that does not

SAYTP Cornell diploma broseph Stalin. Enjoy yo' mad HOTEL skilz.

[IAFG]

Law school exams are really going to piss you off.

<3

[masterthearts]

My ivy league has no grade inflation..one of the few that does not

SAYTP Cornell diploma broseph Stalin. Enjoy yo' mad HOTEL skilz.

Nah, not a hotelie. I can't cook

[asoularisen]

Someone that gets a boost in admissions because of their ethnicity complaining about how unfair a standardized test is?

There are no words...

[Adjudicator]

On the contrary, the LSAT is arguably the fairest part of this whole process.

[Kobe_Teeth]

I can just as easily get a 159 as I can a 165 on Oct 9th when I take my first REAL lsat.

Or even a 153!

[masterthearts]

I did get a 169 on a pt recently, but I won't count that since it only happened once. i got more 159's on pt's than i can count

[ResolutePear]

Can I get a humor-ban exemption on this thread?

TYIA.

[bigben]

Actually it is more fair than anything else would be. /thread

[vanwinkle]

Law school exams are really going to piss you off.

[BruceWayne]

Law school exams are really going to piss you off.

Uh hell no. After having actually taken a law school exam this past week here at UVA, and looking back on all the LSAT studying I did, the two are not anywhere near as similar as a lot AA detractors make them out to be. Realistically, law school exams are: 1. More similar to undergrad essay tests than the LSAT and 2. much more fair and relevant to testing the skills needed by a lawyer (spotting issues, arguing multiple sides, and making persuasive arguments). Actually looking back on it....why the hell are logic games on the LSAT?????

OP you'll be fine. Pull of a 160 and you'll most likely get one of Harvard/Stanford. You'll get scholarship money throughout the rest of the top 14 excluding Yale.

[masterthearts]

Law school exams are really going to piss you off.

Uh hell no. After having actually taken a law school exam this past week here at UVA, and looking back on all the LSAT studying I did, the two are not anywhere near as similar as a lot AA detractors make them out to be. Realistically, law school exams are: 1. More similar to undergrad essay tests than the LSAT and 2. much more fair and relevant to testing the skills needed by a lawyer (spotting issues, arguing multiple sides, and making persuasive arguments). Actually looking back on it....why the hell are logic games on the LSAT?????

OP you'll be fine. Pull of a 160 and you'll most likely get one of Harvard/Stanford. You'll get scholarship money throughout the rest of the top 14 excluding Yale.

Bull

[Helmholtz]

Law school exams are really going to piss you off.

Uh hell no. After having actually taken a law school exam this past week here at UVA, and looking back on all the LSAT studying I did, the two are not anywhere near as similar as a lot AA detractors make them out to be. Realistically, law school exams are: 1. More similar to undergrad essay tests than the LSAT and 2. much more fair and relevant to testing the skills needed by a lawyer (spotting issues, arguing multiple sides, and making persuasive arguments). Actually looking back on it....why the hell are logic games on the LSAT?????

OP you'll be fine. Pull of a 160 and you'll most likely get one of Harvard/Stanford. You'll get scholarship money throughout the rest of the top 14 excluding Yale.

I don't think OP was complaining that the LSAT did not do a good enough job of testing his lawyering skills, bro. Also, WTF, AA detractors? I think I'm missing something.

[vanwinkle]

Actually looking back on it....why the hell are logic games on the LSAT?????

Because logical reasoning under extreme time pressure is exactly what you're doing when spotting and analyzing issues on a law school exam?

[Patriot1208]

Law school exams are really going to piss you off.

Uh hell no. After having actually taken a law school exam this past week here at UVA, and looking back on all the LSAT studying I did, the two are not anywhere near as similar as a lot AA detractors make them out to be. Realistically, law school exams are: 1. More similar to undergrad essay tests than the LSAT and 2. much more fair and relevant to testing the skills needed by a lawyer (spotting issues, arguing multiple sides, and making persuasive arguments). Actually looking back on it....why the hell are logic games on the LSAT?????

OP you'll be fine. Pull of a 160 and you'll most likely get one of Harvard/Stanford. You'll get scholarship money throughout the rest of the top 14 excluding Yale.

Bull

This depends on what type of URM you are. If you are African American then you can get Columbia with a 162. If you are mexican or native american it will be harder. This is the point people were making, being a URM gives you an astronomical boost so you shouldn't really be bitching. Getting a 164 on the LSAT is easy, do it, use your AA status to get into CCN, and profit.

[DearCan]

OP's post is the equivalent of a person sitting in the corner of a dimly lit room, wearing a sweater vest and donning an emo haircut, while a single tear trails down his cheek. OP you should know that what you consider to be "not fair" doesn't matter after your mom stops cutting the edges off your PB&J's. Harsh, I know, but considering you have a URM boost, you're not in much of a position to question what is "fair". Grr.

[kalvano]

[DearCan]

ASSIST!

[BruceWayne]

Actually looking back on it....why the hell are logic games on the LSAT?????

Because logical reasoning under extreme time pressure is exactly what you're doing when spotting and analyzing issues on a law school exam?

Yes but let's be honest, the way that the two test logical reasoning skills is not nearly as analagous as many in this thread are making it out to be. People are trying to scare him shitless. For one, the LSAT actually tests logic in the formal logic sense, that's really not analogous to spotting issues and arguing both sides. Now for the sake of making the test easy to administer and because they want to make it multiple choice, I understand why LSAC designs the test the way they do. But to make it seem like the LSAT and law school exams are practically identical in nature is disingenuous. I"m sorry but the logic games section is simply not closely aligned with law school exams. The reality is that the difficulty of the law school exam comes more from the curve and competing against your classmates.


In response to the bull comment: I'm assuming OP is Black.

I don't think OP was complaining that the LSAT did not do a good enough job of testing his lawyering skills, bro. Also, WTF, AA detractors? I think I'm missing something.

If you missed why I would say AA detractors in this thread, you must have only read the OP's post, and mine.

[whymeohgodno]

Actually looking back on it....why the hell are logic games on the LSAT?????

Because logical reasoning under extreme time pressure is exactly what you're doing when spotting and analyzing issues on a law school exam?

Yes but let's be honest, the way that the two test logical reasoning skills is not nearly as analagous as many in this thread are making it out to be. People are trying to scare him shitless. For one, the LSAT actually tests logic in the formal logic sense, that's really not analogous to spotting issues and arguing both sides. Now for the sake of making the test easy to administer and because they want to make it multiple choice, I understand why LSAC designs the test the way they do. But to make it seem like the LSAT and law school exams are practically identical in nature is disingenuous. I"m sorry but the logic games section is simply not closely aligned with law school exams. The reality is that the difficulty of the law school exam comes more from the curve and competing against your classmates.


In response to the bull comment: I'm assuming OP is Black.

I don't think OP was complaining that the LSAT did not do a good enough job of testing his lawyering skills, bro. Also, WTF, AA detractors? I think I'm missing something.

If you missed why I would say AA detractors in this thread, you must have only read the OP's post, and mine.

All things equal, I would put my money on the guy with the 170+ on the LSAT than the guy with a sub 160 score to ace his law school finals.

Hell I'd put my money on the 170+ guy even if all things weren't equal.

[lebroniousjames]

Law school exams are really going to piss you off.

haha

[Helmholtz]

I don't think OP was complaining that the LSAT did not do a good enough job of testing his lawyering skills, bro. Also, WTF, AA detractors? I think I'm missing something.

If you missed why I would say AA detractors in this thread, you must have only read the OP's post, and mine.

That is exactly what I did.

Anyway, it just seems to me that OP is bitching about one test playing such a huge part in determining where one goes to school. It's not like the experience of one or a small group of tests playing a huge part in career direction will change anytime soon for him.