If you think that you take 100 tests in law school then I honestly can't help you discern what is reality and what is not.
Obviously I was exaggerating to prove a point. If you have no argument other than to nitpick then I guess I'm right?
Why does having a longer personal statement make them less stat based? Being able to write concisely is a non stat based factor. What objective factors prove your statement to be true?
Their admissions process is far less predictable based on stats than other schools' are.
So...you can't actually refute anything I said?
The lsat is the ONLY objectively fair standard in the entire process, and you discredit it? Think about it, grade inflation, hard majors, rich parents
I don't discredit it. It definitely should matter. But a single point difference should not be the difference between having a great chance and having a poor chance, and I don't know why anyone in their right mind would argue the other way. How does the LSAT account for rich parents? lol
Law schools can account for different colleges' grading and difficult majors. Just open the transcript and look at the median grade. Law schools know the academic reputation of 99% of the schools and 100% of the majors they are getting applicants from.
Every person takes the same lsat at the same time in the whole country, you sit in that desk,I'll sit in this desk, and let's see who's better...why on earth is this not fair?
Because it's (basically) a one shot deal? Because it doesn't necessarily accurately measure one's ability to study law?
The LSAT should matter the same as, if not less than, the SAT mattered for undergraduate admissions: ~30%, with no guarantees in either direction (great score or bad score). It actually should matter even less, since a high school's academic reputation is far less known than a college's.