Early Decision W&M Forum

[Ferrisjso]

an addendum complaining about how the LSAT doesn't "play to your strengths" isn't going to help, and it's likely going to hurt....

Drop the addendum, and enjoy paying sticker.

Sounds like they already submitted it to everyone! I agree, though, an addendum saying the lsat doesn't play to your academic strengths sounds like something adcoms might see as a red flag and could hurt an application.

If any apps have not been submitted, I strongly agree with Cavalier and the addendum should be dropped!

I only submitted it to schools where I felt that it would be appropriate(like Michigan etc). I think I did two or three. I don't understand how writing an essay about how your LSAT score doesn't say everything about you, when they specifically give you that option, isn't a good thing? Why would they give you the option then?

[Ferrisjso]

Fair enough. The only thing I'll add is that an addendum complaining about how the LSAT doesn't "play to your strengths" isn't going to help, and it's likely going to hurt. The adcomms will be able to figure out that the LSAT isn't your strong suit, and since this is a numbers game, they aren't going to care very much at all.

Drop the addendum, and enjoy paying sticker.

Edit: I also feel ethically obliged to remind you that you are going to be graded on a curve in law school, and the skills the LSAT tests are precisely the skills that you'll be using on law school exams. I don't know how you've convinced yourself that you're going to outdo an entire class of people who are at least as smart as (if not smarter than) you, but you owe it to yourself to dunk your head in a reality bath. You aren't going to be at the top of the class at any of the schools you listed, assuming you get in.

I will disagree that the LSAT tests the skills you'll use in law school. Law school exams will use actual content that can be memorized. I never said I'll outdo the entire class, I just said I like my chances of being in the top 10% of my class better than I like my chances of getting a 165 on the LSAT(which is about 90th percentile right?) because I think law school exams play more to my strengths. I understand if some(or even a majority) of people feel differently about their own situations.

[lymenheimer]

Fair enough. The only thing I'll add is that an addendum complaining about how the LSAT doesn't "play to your strengths" isn't going to help, and it's likely going to hurt. The adcomms will be able to figure out that the LSAT isn't your strong suit, and since this is a numbers game, they aren't going to care very much at all.

Drop the addendum, and enjoy paying sticker.

Edit: I also feel ethically obliged to remind you that you are going to be graded on a curve in law school, and the skills the LSAT tests are precisely the skills that you'll be using on law school exams. I don't know how you've convinced yourself that you're going to outdo an entire class of people who are at least as smart as (if not smarter than) you, but you owe it to yourself to dunk your head in a reality bath. You aren't going to be at the top of the class at any of the schools you listed, assuming you get in.

I will disagree that the LSAT tests the skills you'll use in law school. Law school exams will use actual content that can be memorized. I never said I'll outdo the entire class, I just said I like my chances of being in the top 10% of my class better than I like my chances of getting a 165 on the LSAT(which is about 90th percentile right?) because I think law school exams play more to my strengths. I understand if some(or even a majority) of people feel differently about their own situations.

How do you know what a law school exam will test? Also, you think you can get in the 90 percentile for your class, but not for a standardized test?

[Ferrisjso]

Fair enough. The only thing I'll add is that an addendum complaining about how the LSAT doesn't "play to your strengths" isn't going to help, and it's likely going to hurt. The adcomms will be able to figure out that the LSAT isn't your strong suit, and since this is a numbers game, they aren't going to care very much at all.

Drop the addendum, and enjoy paying sticker.

Edit: I also feel ethically obliged to remind you that you are going to be graded on a curve in law school, and the skills the LSAT tests are precisely the skills that you'll be using on law school exams. I don't know how you've convinced yourself that you're going to outdo an entire class of people who are at least as smart as (if not smarter than) you, but you owe it to yourself to dunk your head in a reality bath. You aren't going to be at the top of the class at any of the schools you listed, assuming you get in.

I will disagree that the LSAT tests the skills you'll use in law school. Law school exams will use actual content that can be memorized. I never said I'll outdo the entire class, I just said I like my chances of being in the top 10% of my class better than I like my chances of getting a 165 on the LSAT(which is about 90th percentile right?) because I think law school exams play more to my strengths. I understand if some(or even a majority) of people feel differently about their own situations.

How do you know what a law school exam will test? Also, you think you can get in the 90 percentile for your class, but not for a standardized test?

Youtube videos from people online who've been to law school. The internet is full of them. Also, I know it will be legal related content and that while the exams are timed they are not as strictly timed as the LSAT's 35 minutes. For me this is super important. Also none of the schools I've applied to have nightmarish curves which was something that was important to me. Again i'd like to keep this thread on topic. I know it was probably a mistake responding to the LSAT related responses but the purpose of this thread is where my numbers can get me.

Also, I just got an unsolicited fee waiver from Stanford. I'm almost sure they're **** with me, but it can't hurt to apply, right? Has anyone with my numbers ever been admitted?

[A. Nony Mouse]

Actually, law school exams are absolutely strictly timed (there's a thing called a "racecourse [racehorse?] exam" where the way profs create a spread is make the exam too long to complete in the time allowed). And all schools curve and all curves are equally nightmarish - it doesn't matter whether the median is on B+ or a C, you're still top 10% or 25% or whatever, and rank is much more important than absolute GPA.

Getting a fee waiver does not mean a school thinks you're a competitive candidate.

[cavalier1138]

I only submitted it to schools where I felt that it would be appropriate(like Michigan etc). I think I did two or three. I don't understand how writing an essay about how your LSAT score doesn't say everything about you, when they specifically give you that option, isn't a good thing? Why would they give you the option then?

They give you the option in case someone has something like a documented medical condition that makes them objectively bad at standardized testing. It's also there if someone has a really strong GPA and college performance and wants to explain that their GPA is a better representation of their potential law school performance. Thus far, you have not claimed a medical condition, and your GPA is mediocre. So all your addendum will accomplish is to highlight that your LSAT is well below what these schools want.

I will disagree that the LSAT tests the skills you'll use in law school. Law school exams will use actual content that can be memorized. I never said I'll outdo the entire class, I just said I like my chances of being in the top 10% of my class better than I like my chances of getting a 165 on the LSAT(which is about 90th percentile right?) because I think law school exams play more to my strengths. I understand if some(or even a majority) of people feel differently about their own situations.

I will disagree that you know what the hell you're talking about. Why do you think law schools use the LSAT in the first place?

Did you have trouble with reading comprehension? A law school exam relies on your ability to read through a dense fact pattern and hone in on all the seemingly irrelevant facts that are vital to your interpretation.

Did you have trouble with logic games? Law school exams test your ability to apply legal rules and understand when you've encountered a potential exception to the rule.

Was the analytical section your downfall? Law school exams don't just ask you to analyze other people's arguments. You're expected to identify every potential argument raised by the fact pattern and apply rules to them.

Notice that not a single thing I just listed involves memorization (in fact, memorizing rules is very much not to your benefit). Oh, and as mentioned, this is all done under extremely strict time limits. And you're competing with all your classmates. So if you still like your chances of placing in the top 10% of your class better than you like your chances of getting a few extra points on the LSAT, I suggest doing some real research on what a forced curve actually is.

[Ferrisjso]

I only submitted it to schools where I felt that it would be appropriate(like Michigan etc). I think I did two or three. I don't understand how writing an essay about how your LSAT score doesn't say everything about you, when they specifically give you that option, isn't a good thing? Why would they give you the option then?

They give you the option in case someone has something like a documented medical condition that makes them objectively bad at standardized testing. It's also there if someone has a really strong GPA and college performance and wants to explain that their GPA is a better representation of their potential law school performance. Thus far, you have not claimed a medical condition, and your GPA is mediocre. So all your addendum will accomplish is to highlight that your LSAT is well below what these schools want.

I will disagree that the LSAT tests the skills you'll use in law school. Law school exams will use actual content that can be memorized. I never said I'll outdo the entire class, I just said I like my chances of being in the top 10% of my class better than I like my chances of getting a 165 on the LSAT(which is about 90th percentile right?) because I think law school exams play more to my strengths. I understand if some(or even a majority) of people feel differently about their own situations.

I will disagree that you know what the hell you're talking about. Why do you think law schools use the LSAT in the first place?

Did you have trouble with reading comprehension? A law school exam relies on your ability to read through a dense fact pattern and hone in on all the seemingly irrelevant facts that are vital to your interpretation.

Did you have trouble with logic games? Law school exams test your ability to apply legal rules and understand when you've encountered a potential exception to the rule.

Was the analytical section your downfall? Law school exams don't just ask you to analyze other people's arguments. You're expected to identify every potential argument raised by the fact pattern and apply rules to them.

Notice that not a single thing I just listed involves memorization (in fact, memorizing rules is very much not to your benefit). Oh, and as mentioned, this is all done under extremely strict time limits. And you're competing with all your classmates. So if you still like your chances of placing in the top 10% of your class better than you like your chances of getting a few extra points on the LSAT, I suggest doing some real research on what a forced curve actually is.

Again, this is the "what are my chances" section, if you want to comment about LSAT retaking this is not the place. One of my big concerns about putting up a thread was having this happen. Please stop. Insulting people by saying they have a mediocre GPA(a 3.51 is not a mediocre GPA, especially when your school doesn't have grade inflation) and that they don't know what the hell they are talking about, is super insulting and condescending. This thread is about my chances for admission and scholarships to my 8(or maybe 10 now) schools that I've applied to, with MY CURRENT NUMBERS! None of that "you owe it to yourself" stuff, save that for threads that is relevant to. I'm well aware of TLS's view on retakes which is why I took the LSAT three times instead of once. So please everyone, stay on topic! I'm having a bad day, the horse who I wrote my PS about lost badly in the BC yesterday and I'm pretty upset about that.

[cavalier1138]

Again, this is the "what are my chances" section, if you want to comment about LSAT retaking this is not the place. One of my big concerns about putting up a thread was having this happen. Please stop. Insulting people by saying they have a mediocre GPA(a 3.51 is not a mediocre GPA, especially when your school doesn't have grade inflation) and that they don't know what the hell they are talking about, is super insulting and condescending. This thread is about my chances for admission and scholarships to my 8(or maybe 10 now) schools that I've applied to, with MY CURRENT NUMBERS! None of that "you owe it to yourself" stuff, save that for threads that is relevant to. I'm well aware of TLS's view on retakes which is why I took the LSAT three times instead of once. So please everyone, stay on topic! I'm having a bad day, the horse who I wrote my PS about lost badly in the BC yesterday and I'm pretty upset about that.

I'm not commenting on LSAT retaking so much as I am trying to get you to realize that your conception of how law school grades work out is massively warped. You can retake or not, but you are absolutely delusional if you think that you have a good chance at being in the top 10% of your class for the reasons you've given so far. So regardless of whether you think it's relevant or not, I feel that I have a moral obligation to remind you that you are going to regret this decision in three years when you're struggling to find a job that will pay off your six-figure debt because you didn't place in the top 10% of your class. Please understand that I have no horse in this race. I gain nothing by you making a responsible decision here.

And yes, for law school purposes, 3.5 is a mediocre GPA. Sorry to be the one to break that news to you. Just imagine how insulted you'd feel if you were applying for med school and someone told you how much weight that GPA carries.

My condolences on "your" horse losing.

Edit: My LSAC GPA was barely a 3.6. My university did not inflate. I had a mediocre undergraduate GPA. Feel insulted if you like, but apparently no one in your life has smacked you upside the head with the reality of your situation. You're welcome.

[Ferrisjso]

Again, this is the "what are my chances" section, if you want to comment about LSAT retaking this is not the place. One of my big concerns about putting up a thread was having this happen. Please stop. Insulting people by saying they have a mediocre GPA(a 3.51 is not a mediocre GPA, especially when your school doesn't have grade inflation) and that they don't know what the hell they are talking about, is super insulting and condescending. This thread is about my chances for admission and scholarships to my 8(or maybe 10 now) schools that I've applied to, with MY CURRENT NUMBERS! None of that "you owe it to yourself" stuff, save that for threads that is relevant to. I'm well aware of TLS's view on retakes which is why I took the LSAT three times instead of once. So please everyone, stay on topic! I'm having a bad day, the horse who I wrote my PS about lost badly in the BC yesterday and I'm pretty upset about that.

I'm not commenting on LSAT retaking so much as I am trying to get you to realize that your conception of how law school grades work out is massively warped. You can retake or not, but you are absolutely delusional if you think that you have a good chance at being in the top 10% of your class for the reasons you've given so far. So regardless of whether you think it's relevant or not, I feel that I have a moral obligation to remind you that you are going to regret this decision in three years when you're struggling to find a job that will pay off your six-figure debt because you didn't place in the top 10% of your class. Please understand that I have no horse in this race. I gain nothing by you making a responsible decision here.

And yes, for law school purposes, 3.5 is a mediocre GPA. Sorry to be the one to break that news to you. Just imagine how insulted you'd feel if you were applying for med school and someone told you how much weight that GPA carries.

My condolences on "your" horse losing.

Edit: My LSAC GPA was barely a 3.6. My university did not inflate. I had a mediocre undergraduate GPA. Feel insulted if you like, but apparently no one in your life has smacked you upside the head with the reality of your situation. You're welcome.

My chance of getting into the top 10% of my class is about 10%, give or take a few points depending on the quality of the class. I feel those are better odds than me getting into the 90th percentile of LSAT test takers. For most of the schools I'm applying to a 3.51 is considerably north of median(it's 25th percentile for Vandy and below that for Michigan but otherwise it's pretty darn competitive)while the LSAT is considerably below for most of my schools. A 3.6 is even better. It is not mediocre. Again, I want to keep this on topic.

Thanks about the horse.