LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:21 pm

AriGoldButNicer wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:I realize the potential gains of getting admitted to a top tier school but I also believe law school is what you make it to a certain extent.


Yeah, and your LSAT score is what you make it to a certain extent, but you shit the bed when it came to that, so.....


Oh my bad, I forgot the LSAT was a perfect predictor of how you will do in law school...

that's not what he was suggesting. he was pointing to another entity similar in 1 key regard, and pointing out you failed to make very well of it.

also, refusal to make a sacrifice to get a great lsat score is a pretty decent predictor that you won't make sacrficies to do great in law school.


So because I was taking a full load of graduate level mathematical economics classes, was working 20-30 hours a week, and commuting to and from school and work - all things that I won't be facing while in law school - you are comfortable making a comparison between the sacrifice I had to make then and what I am willing to make in the future? Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions... you have no clue what your talking about!

AriGoldButNicer
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:19 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby AriGoldButNicer » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:25 pm

OP, it's admirable you're the first in your family to go to college, and it's understandable why being the first in your family to accomplish a particular feat, particularly something like college on your own dime will make you really confident about your capacity to succeed anywhere. However, what you need to or at least should understand is that in this world none of this counts for two cents, no one will really care you paid your way through college or will be impressed that you graduated college. These are all basic necessary conditions. You're entering one of the most competitive fields, and nothing about your accomplishments suggests you'll be really different from your classmates. I also come from a poor family, and did things like sometimes pay for my parents food, and bought them gym memberships while supporting myself in college. Nobody gives two shits. If I didn't get a good LSAT score, I would not go to law school.

AriGoldButNicer
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:19 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby AriGoldButNicer » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:26 pm

thorntonjm2 wrote:
AriGoldButNicer wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:
also, refusal to make a sacrifice to get a great lsat score is a pretty decent predictor that you won't make sacrficies to do great in law school.


So because I was taking a full load of graduate level mathematical economics classes, was working 20-30 hours a week, and commuting to and from school and work - all things that I won't be facing while in law school - you are comfortable making a comparison between the sacrifice I had to make then and what I am willing to make in the future? Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions... you have no clue what your talking about!

And you're assuming, you will do much better without them.

I think assuming the same human being (you) will continue to do what you've done is less of an assumption than assuming you'll go from being an average student to being in the top 10% if you had a shorter drive.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby Helmholtz » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:28 pm

thorntonjm2 wrote:So because I was taking a full load of graduate level mathematical economics classes, was working 20-30 hours a week, and commuting to and from school and work - all things that I won't be facing while in law school - you are comfortable making a comparison between the sacrifice I had to make then and what I am willing to make in the future? Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions... you have no clue what your talking about!


I was going to school full-time (taking some phd-level courses in econ and philosophy), working 20-30 hours per week, and commuting 70 minutes each way to school M-F during UG. Also, first-generation college student. I never felt like I had some kind of special-snowflake advantage in law school because of my experience during my UG years. The law school curve is scary is hell and median is filled with people who assumed they would be top 10 percent. You would be shocked by how loose the correlation can be at times between amount of work and high grades. Some of it seems random. I would be terrified to go to any school in which I needed to be top 10 percent or so just to achieve a semblance of the level of success I wanted.

thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:29 pm

AriGoldButNicer wrote:OP, it's admirable you're the first in your family to go to college, and it's understandable why being the first in your family to accomplish a particular feat, particularly something like college on your own dime will make you really confident about your capacity to succeed anywhere. However, what you need to or at least should understand is that in this world none of this counts for two cents, no one will really care you paid your way through college or will be impressed that you graduated college. These are all basic necessary conditions. You're entering one of the most competitive fields, and nothing about your accomplishments suggests you'll be really different from your classmates. I also come from a poor family, and did things like sometimes pay for my parents food, and bought them gym memberships while supporting myself in college. Nobody gives two shits. If I didn't get a good LSAT score, I would not go to law school.


You obviously need to go back a read a little deeper... I have two jobs lined up if I so choose to take them upon passing the bar. Nobody needs to give a shit about my background because you're right, it doesn't matter - I ALREADY HAVE JOBS LINED UP. Will I be making 160K, no, but I will be making 6 digits starting which is fine by me. The risk is relative small here - that is unless both of my connections get fired or die.

thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:32 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:So because I was taking a full load of graduate level mathematical economics classes, was working 20-30 hours a week, and commuting to and from school and work - all things that I won't be facing while in law school - you are comfortable making a comparison between the sacrifice I had to make then and what I am willing to make in the future? Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions... you have no clue what your talking about!


I was going to school full-time (taking some phd-level courses in econ and philosophy), working 20-30 hours per week, and commuting 70 minutes each way to school M-F during UG. Also, first-generation college student. I never felt like I had some kind of special-snowflake advantage in law school because of my experience during my UG years. The law school curve is scary is hell and median is filled with people who assumed they would be top 10 percent. You would be shocked by how loose the correlation can be at times between amount of work and high grades. Some of it seems random. I would be terrified to go to any school in which I needed to be top 10 percent or so just to achieve a semblance of the level of success I wanted.


Again, as I just mentioned - I don't need to graduate at the top of my class - I would like that and I am going to do my best to do so, but it is not necessary because I already have jobs lined up. This is a relatively low risk decision for me.

AriGoldButNicer
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:19 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby AriGoldButNicer » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:33 pm

thorntonjm2 wrote:
AriGoldButNicer wrote:OP, it's admirable you're the first in your family to go to college, and it's understandable why being the first in your family to accomplish a particular feat, particularly something like college on your own dime will make you really confident about your capacity to succeed anywhere. However, what you need to or at least should understand is that in this world none of this counts for two cents, no one will really care you paid your way through college or will be impressed that you graduated college. These are all basic necessary conditions. You're entering one of the most competitive fields, and nothing about your accomplishments suggests you'll be really different from your classmates. I also come from a poor family, and did things like sometimes pay for my parents food, and bought them gym memberships while supporting myself in college. Nobody gives two shits. If I didn't get a good LSAT score, I would not go to law school.


You obviously need to go back a read a little deeper... I have two jobs lined up if I so choose to take them upon passing the bar. Nobody needs to give a shit about my background because you're right, it doesn't matter - I ALREADY HAVE JOBS LINED UP. Will I be making 160K, no, but I will be making 6 digits starting which is fine by me. The risk is relative small here - that is unless both of my connections get fired or die.

well, my thing wasn't about 160k or bust employment. i personally do not see it like that, but it's one valuable statistic. if my goal is to make at least 90k, knowing what schools place students in 160k jobs also is relevant to my interests.

you have 100,000 jobs lined up after law school? are you positive they're locked in?

i mean, supposedly i have multiple jobs waiting for me. one middle aged lawyer family friend who went to a TTT told me he'd give me a job when I graduate law school after he asked where i was going to law school. however, this was at a party, and in front of his wife, and it seems more likely he just wanted to boost his ego than offer some guy he has no idea if they'll be a somewhat competent lawyer a job.

AriGoldButNicer
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:19 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby AriGoldButNicer » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:33 pm

if OP truly does have a 100k job waiting regardless of school or grades then good for him. whatever religion he practices, please tell me so i can convert.

thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:38 pm

AriGoldButNicer wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:
AriGoldButNicer wrote:OP, it's admirable you're the first in your family to go to college, and it's understandable why being the first in your family to accomplish a particular feat, particularly something like college on your own dime will make you really confident about your capacity to succeed anywhere. However, what you need to or at least should understand is that in this world none of this counts for two cents, no one will really care you paid your way through college or will be impressed that you graduated college. These are all basic necessary conditions. You're entering one of the most competitive fields, and nothing about your accomplishments suggests you'll be really different from your classmates. I also come from a poor family, and did things like sometimes pay for my parents food, and bought them gym memberships while supporting myself in college. Nobody gives two shits. If I didn't get a good LSAT score, I would not go to law school.


You obviously need to go back a read a little deeper... I have two jobs lined up if I so choose to take them upon passing the bar. Nobody needs to give a shit about my background because you're right, it doesn't matter - I ALREADY HAVE JOBS LINED UP. Will I be making 160K, no, but I will be making 6 digits starting which is fine by me. The risk is relative small here - that is unless both of my connections get fired or die.

well, my thing wasn't about 160k or bust employment. i personally do not see it like that, but it's one valuable statistic. if my goal is to make at least 90k, knowing what schools place students in 160k jobs also is relevant to my interests.

you have 100,000 jobs lined up after law school? are you positive they're locked in?

i mean, supposedly i have multiple jobs waiting for me. one middle aged lawyer family friend who went to a TTT told me he'd give me a job when I graduate law school after he asked where i was going to law school. however, this was at a party, and in front of his wife, and it seems more likely he just wanted to boost his ego than offer some guy he has no idea if they'll be a somewhat competent lawyer a job.


Haha again with assumptions. I worked for my uncle and did very well for him. He wants to pass his firm on to someone in the family, and guess what, I am the only one with a degree and aspirations of practicing law. My next door neighbor essentially raised me and played a huge role in my decision to pursue law. I have also worked for him so he knows my capabilities.

I said 2 jobs, not 100,000. Seems like my connections might be a little more solid than your drunk at a party offer.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby Helmholtz » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:40 pm

thorntonjm2 wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:So because I was taking a full load of graduate level mathematical economics classes, was working 20-30 hours a week, and commuting to and from school and work - all things that I won't be facing while in law school - you are comfortable making a comparison between the sacrifice I had to make then and what I am willing to make in the future? Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions... you have no clue what your talking about!


I was going to school full-time (taking some phd-level courses in econ and philosophy), working 20-30 hours per week, and commuting 70 minutes each way to school M-F during UG. Also, first-generation college student. I never felt like I had some kind of special-snowflake advantage in law school because of my experience during my UG years. The law school curve is scary is hell and median is filled with people who assumed they would be top 10 percent. You would be shocked by how loose the correlation can be at times between amount of work and high grades. Some of it seems random. I would be terrified to go to any school in which I needed to be top 10 percent or so just to achieve a semblance of the level of success I wanted.


Again, as I just mentioned - I don't need to graduate at the top of my class - I would like that and I am going to do my best to do so, but it is not necessary because I already have jobs lined up. This is a relatively low risk decision for me.


Why did you start this thread? Go where you get the most money since you have a guaranteed job and stfu about "law school is whatever you make it lol."

And by the way, considering the fact that you're placing such hope on sucking the metaphorical tit of a successful relative or neighbor, you should be saying that "success is whatever is given to me."

god, this thread is retarded

AriGoldButNicer
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:19 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby AriGoldButNicer » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:40 pm

thorntonjm2 wrote:
AriGoldButNicer wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:
AriGoldButNicer wrote:OP, it's admirable you're the first in your family to go to college, and it's understandable why being the first in your family to accomplish a particular feat, particularly something like college on your own dime will make you really confident about your capacity to succeed anywhere. However, what you need to or at least should understand is that in this world none of this counts for two cents, no one will really care you paid your way through college or will be impressed that you graduated college. These are all basic necessary conditions. You're entering one of the most competitive fields, and nothing about your accomplishments suggests you'll be really different from your classmates. I also come from a poor family, and did things like sometimes pay for my parents food, and bought them gym memberships while supporting myself in college. Nobody gives two shits. If I didn't get a good LSAT score, I would not go to law school.


You obviously need to go back a read a little deeper... I have two jobs lined up if I so choose to take them upon passing the bar. Nobody needs to give a shit about my background because you're right, it doesn't matter - I ALREADY HAVE JOBS LINED UP. Will I be making 160K, no, but I will be making 6 digits starting which is fine by me. The risk is relative small here - that is unless both of my connections get fired or die.

well, my thing wasn't about 160k or bust employment. i personally do not see it like that, but it's one valuable statistic. if my goal is to make at least 90k, knowing what schools place students in 160k jobs also is relevant to my interests.

you have 100,000 jobs lined up after law school? are you positive they're locked in?

i mean, supposedly i have multiple jobs waiting for me. one middle aged lawyer family friend who went to a TTT told me he'd give me a job when I graduate law school after he asked where i was going to law school. however, this was at a party, and in front of his wife, and it seems more likely he just wanted to boost his ego than offer some guy he has no idea if they'll be a somewhat competent lawyer a job.


Haha again with assumptions. I worked for my uncle and did very well for him. He wants to pass his firm on to someone in the family, and guess what, I am the only one with a degree and aspirations of practicing law. My next door neighbor essentially raised me and played a huge role in my decision to pursue law. I have also worked for him so he knows my capabilities.

I said 2 jobs, not 100,000. Seems like my connections might be a little more solid than your drunk at a party offer.

okay, so your logic seems to be that you already have guaranteed employment, and that you want to work for your uncle or whatever. therefore, why does the question matter? just go where you get the most $.

thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:43 pm

Here is what I don't understand: do you guys have nothing better to do than to try your hardest to put someone down. The post has nothing to do with what you are trying to argue or whatever point you're trying to make. Let it go - unless you know me, which you clearly don't - you have no backing to make predictions as to what lies ahead in my future - none.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby Helmholtz » Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:45 pm

thorntonjm2 wrote:Here is what I don't understand: do you guys have nothing better to do than to try your hardest to put someone down. The post has nothing to do with what you are trying to argue or whatever point you're trying to make. Let it go - unless you know me, which you clearly don't - you have no backing to make predictions as to what lies ahead in my future - none.


Damn, bro, I'm sorry. You're right. Didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I predict you will succeed at whatever you set your heart to and whatever you may be given by family members in the future. Godspeed.

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

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby law4vus » Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:02 pm

Dude, you're asking people on an INTERNET FORUM who have law school experience about your chances and realistic odds of success. Obviously none of us know who you are, so we talk in generalizations about how law school is FOR THE MOST PART FOR MOST PEOPLE.

If you want the advice of people who know you, then go ask them and maybe they'll tell you what you want to hear. If you ask it on this site, you'll get the same response we tell ANYONE who comes in with a 3.38 and 160 - to not go to law school.

Again, just to repeat what others have said - if you already have a job lined up then why do you care about what we think of your chances? Look at LSN and go to the school that you have the best chance of money at.

Mal Reynolds
Posts: 12630
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby Mal Reynolds » Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:32 am

You have an MA in economics so this should be easy to understand: you fell on the wrong side of opportunity cost here bro. Why would you take the time to write a super long OP-which could have been condensed to your lsat and gpa-if you were just going to disagree with the advice given? You also forgot to add the one key piece of info that made most of this advice moot: that you have a secure job lined up. Just do whatever the hell is cheapest. And law school is absolutely not "what you make it." Law school for you is whatever your friends/connections make it.

nsbane
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:35 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby nsbane » Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:41 am

thorntonjm2 wrote:
pugilistjd wrote:
YourCaptain wrote:
90% chance this wont happen. the costs of attending a bad school outweigh the benefits.

as an econ major (behavior too) you should realize your current trajectory is awful.


LOL I love how, on TLS, not having a coin-flip's chance at the absolute best possible job opportunities in (any) legal market based on grades alone= AWFUL TRAJECTORY/RETAKE/DON'T GO. What a bunch of life-averse babies.


It is REALLY pissing my off haha. I am glad someone else noticed it. They argue that because I am 0L, I don't know what law school is like. But then on the same token they tell me that I have no chance on getting money to the schools I applied to..yet they are not on the admissions board.


You are not discounting their advice because they are not on the admissions board. By that logic, you would have never asked for advice in the first place. You are discounting the advice because you don't like it.

User avatar
pugilistjd
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 6:28 am

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby pugilistjd » Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:20 pm

YourCaptain wrote:It is REALLY pissing my off haha. I am glad someone else noticed it. They argue that because I am 0L, I don't know what law school is like. But then on the same token they tell me that I have no chance on getting money to the schools I applied to..yet they are not on the admissions board. In fact, you can go look at some of the statistics for acceptance and scholarship figures and see that some with LSAT and GPA worse then mine have received a great amount of money.


Okay, as much as I find it funny how dramatic some of these TLSers are, what they are saying isn't unreasonable: Ideally, you should go either to a 1)T-14, 2) a non-T14 with a full scholarship without grade stipulations, or 3)regional school at in-state with ties. If you choose a different option, there is a relevant risk that you will end up with a large amount of debt and, at least initially, some bad job prospects, unless you are extremely fortunate to have a well-paying job lined up guaranteed regardless of your grades. If you have said job, then that risk is less relevant and the default TLS advice is also less relevant.

As a matter of fact, you did not even ask for the default TLS advice. You asked what your chances were for admission to a set of schools. Instead, you get a non-sequitur response. It's like asking your friend if you should buy a honda civic or a toyota camry, and he responds by saying "save up more money and buy a benz or don't buy a car." Perhaps, your friend is right, but he still has failed to answer your question. At the same time, you have posted in a public forum where people will post fuck-all and derail threads at will. Don't take it personally.

Also, most lawyers and would-be lawyers are extremely risk-averse and neurotic. Most law students are scared shitless given the uncertainty of the market, regardless of what school they are attending. So, say, your HYS TLSer or T14er is scared shitless of his/her job prospects. Obviously, they will shit all over your prospects with a sweaty-palmed fury as a form of catharsis. Just pat them on the head gently and say "everything is going to be okay." There is also your law student who, at some point during law school, decides its not for them. Obviously, these are the people who would scoff at "law school is what you make of it" because they, as it turns out, did not get much out of it. So, if you were unable to get anything out of law school, wouldn't you prefer to graduate without any debt or at least get a job that will pay off that debt quickly so you can get the fuck out of the legal industry? Certainly.

So, that's where, I assume, these guys are coming from, so it may help to keep that in mind when reading these responses.

Mal Reynolds
Posts: 12630
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby Mal Reynolds » Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:58 pm

People get so butt hurt when threads depart from the main topic. In all threads but especially the chances threads this is stupid. TCR for all chances and scholly info is LSN. This thread naturally evolved because the OP was being a special snowflake and saying extremely misinformed things about law school. So quit your rants they're not very good.

User avatar
pugilistjd
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 6:28 am

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby pugilistjd » Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:51 pm

Mal Reynolds wrote:People get so butt hurt when threads depart from the main topic. In all threads but especially the chances threads this is stupid. TCR for all chances and scholly info is LSN. This thread naturally evolved because the OP was being a special snowflake and saying extremely misinformed things about law school. So quit your rants they're not very good.

If I was OP, I'd like to know that most of my replies had come from failed law students, neurotic 1L gunners and 0Ls who knew just as much as I did about law school.

thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Tue Jan 17, 2012 6:00 pm

Ha again, I did not ask any of these people for advice on whether or not to go to law school... which is what they are so determined to answer for me. I simply asked for people to look over the list of schools I applied to and give some feedback as to their personal experience applying to those schools (especially if they had similar softs).

I could break it down even further, but at this point its a lost cause. Thanks to anyone who at least attempted to get a what I originally asked or provided some useful criticism (which I openly accept if it is well-founded btw).

Good luck to all those applying this cycle and if you do have similar softs and wouldn't mind discussing your application experience with me, PM me please.

Thanks.

User avatar
Mr. Somebody
Posts: 867
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 11:42 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby Mr. Somebody » Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:29 pm

double
Last edited by Mr. Somebody on Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mr. Somebody
Posts: 867
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 11:42 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby Mr. Somebody » Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:29 pm

thorntonjm2 wrote:Ha again, I did not ask any of these people for advice on whether or not to go to law school... which is what they are so determined to answer for me. I simply asked for people to look over the list of schools I applied to and give some feedback as to their personal experience applying to those schools (especially if they had similar softs).

I could break it down even further, but at this point its a lost cause. Thanks to anyone who at least attempted to get a what I originally asked or provided some useful criticism (which I openly accept if it is well-founded btw).

Good luck to all those applying this cycle and if you do have similar softs and wouldn't mind discussing your application experience with me, PM me please.

Thanks.

Looking at those schools you have a good chance at most of them and should get scholly money from several. Use http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com for reference. The only critical soft I see in your original post would be the economic hardship. If you write a killer PS you may be able to outperform your numbers.

If you had included the fact that you have employment lined up after graduating law school, you would not have had so many posts and so much discussion telling you to retake. It's a critical piece of information and a luxury that the vast majority of 0L's do not have. Just a thought.

thorntonjm2 wrote:
moneybagsphd wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:LSAT: 160
UGPA: 3.76 (Economics - Virginia Commonwealth Univ)
Cumul GPA: 3.38
Graduate Degree: MA Economics (3.75)

Unfortunately, Cum GPA is the only one LSs care about. 3.38/160 prospects aren't great.


I have heard this, but have met with a few admission officers who have told me otherwise. Hopefully the admission officers weren't just telling me what I wanted to hear. Then again I don't see why they would, they have nothing to gain from it being that they had already waived my application fee.


Admissions officers rarely lie but they are also rarely honest or upfront about anything. Beyond basic logistical questions their advice or insight is not useful. They will be looking at your undergraduate GPA, not your cumulative. You should be trying to assess your chances based on your 3.38

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby paratactical » Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:04 pm

FOR FUCK'S SAKE OP, YOU'RE (as in "You are fucking retarded") V. YOUR (as in "Your mom should have had an abortion) - LEARN THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.

thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:03 pm

paratactical wrote:FOR FUCK'S SAKE OP, YOU'RE (as in "You are fucking retarded") V. YOUR (as in "Your mom should have had an abortion) - LEARN THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.


I remember the first time I tried to bash someone random on a thread that had nothing whatsoever to do with me... oh wait no I don't because I am not a douchebag. But hey you gotta keep those posting numbers up right? 28 a day? YOU'RE such a tool.

thorntonjm2
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: LSAT: 160 UGPA: 3.76 Cumul GPA: 3.38 (Economics) + MA (Econ)

Postby thorntonjm2 » Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:08 pm

Mr. Somebody wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:Ha again, I did not ask any of these people for advice on whether or not to go to law school... which is what they are so determined to answer for me. I simply asked for people to look over the list of schools I applied to and give some feedback as to their personal experience applying to those schools (especially if they had similar softs).

I could break it down even further, but at this point its a lost cause. Thanks to anyone who at least attempted to get a what I originally asked or provided some useful criticism (which I openly accept if it is well-founded btw).

Good luck to all those applying this cycle and if you do have similar softs and wouldn't mind discussing your application experience with me, PM me please.

Thanks.

Looking at those schools you have a good chance at most of them and should get scholly money from several. Use http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com for reference. The only critical soft I see in your original post would be the economic hardship. If you write a killer PS you may be able to outperform your numbers.

If you had included the fact that you have employment lined up after graduating law school, you would not have had so many posts and so much discussion telling you to retake. It's a critical piece of information and a luxury that the vast majority of 0L's do not have. Just a thought.

thorntonjm2 wrote:
moneybagsphd wrote:
thorntonjm2 wrote:LSAT: 160
UGPA: 3.76 (Economics - Virginia Commonwealth Univ)
Cumul GPA: 3.38
Graduate Degree: MA Economics (3.75)

Unfortunately, Cum GPA is the only one LSs care about. 3.38/160 prospects aren't great.


I have heard this, but have met with a few admission officers who have told me otherwise. Hopefully the admission officers weren't just telling me what I wanted to hear. Then again I don't see why they would, they have nothing to gain from it being that they had already waived my application fee.


Admissions officers rarely lie but they are also rarely honest or upfront about anything. Beyond basic logistical questions their advice or insight is not useful. They will be looking at your undergraduate GPA, not your cumulative. You should be trying to assess your chances based on your 3.38


I appreciate the feedback. I have checked out LSN, but have some issues with its reliability since its self reported and only represents those who know of and actively use it. That being said, it has been good to use as a baseline predictor.

I regret not mentioning the job prospects now, but that was not relevant to the question being asked at the time - that is why it was left out. If I would have know that all of the above could have been avoided by that submission I would have definitely included it.

Again, thanks for the feedback.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: tinafeyclone and 1 guest