Gotti wrote:DanInALionsDen wrote:Gotti wrote:DanInALionsDen wrote:Pretty sure the only people on LSN who got into Boalt with those numbers were URMs, a combat veteran, and guy who seems to have had a crazy life story about overcoming obstacles. Also pretty sure (actually completely certain) that all law schools have moved towards weighing LSAT more heavily in the last 2-3 years - this even includes Stanford. I'm glad that you feel free to call people fools based on nothing more than your own speculation regarding admissions standards. That's fun.
EDIT: Here's the link:
do you understand that there are fewer people on LSN than on TLS? lol 3 ppl with 164s got in last year and that's supposed to be representative?? yeah right. TLS isn't representative at all either.
You're below Berkley's 25th percentile for LSAT. You're not getting in. To answer your question, I believe that LSN is representative of law school applicants generally. Believe what you'd like though.
read my above post. Last year's 25th was 163. I'm not below that. You'll be the first one to know if I get into Boalt
Edit: and no way is LSN representative of everyone applying to law school. There are thousands of applicants to each law school..there's no way LSN is representative in any way shape or form.
Could you define your notion of representativeness?
There are thousands of applicants to each law school, and hundreds of applicants to each represented on LSN. They appear to be from varying racial groups, social strata, and geographic regions. This appears to satisfy both the quantity and quality elements of representativeness. Note that presidential election polls deemed to be representative of the voting population might survey 10,000 people out of millions who will vote - and that would be a broad poll.