For a friend: Fulbright, good GPA ok LSAT Forum

[Shaggier1]

X

[Lyov Myshkin]

You're an idiot.

+1

did you actually just +1 yourself?

[housie07]

.

[Shaggier1]

Retake.

[uknowme]

You're an idiot.

+1

did you actually just +1 yourself?

this feels like a game of 'quit hitting yourself'

[schnecke]

all of the speculation about the relative "prestige" of various fulbright awards and the award in general seems beside the point to me (and pretty obnoxious, but whatev). the point is how you spent your year and what you got out of it. i mean, adcomms have access to the very same credentials that get you a fellowship in the first place. it's not like those credentials magically become better if you used them to beat out 500 people in one program rather than 50 in another. of course a rhodes is more impressive in this context than a fulbright -- not because of the numbers of competitors, but because a rhodes is a longer and arguably richer experience.

that said, i agree with people who are skeptical about her chances in the top 14, except for Berkeley, which I could imagine happening. i disagree with the people crowing "retake retake!!" -- plenty of competition already for the t14 next year already. :p

[playhero]

Asian Female
3.9 from a Top 10 Undergrad
162 LSAT
Fulbright, and another giant big post grad fellowship

I told her to blanket the top 20 and throw in some CA schools

But specifially

Harvard
Berkeley
NYU
Hastings
Davis
UCLA
BC
BU

With Berkeley being her top choice

Ding at all. Try a few mid T1's and 40-60s.

of course a rhodes is more impressive in this context than a fulbright -- not because of the numbers of competitors, but because a rhodes is a longer and arguably richer experience.

They hand out Fulbrights like candy. I've had both a professor and an ex-roommate win them. Fulbright scholars don't have anything on Rhodes scholars. Rhodes scholars are gods amongst men.

A fulbright in the UK is very impressive

I find the fact that you can get a fulbright to the UK ironic. Though your assertion is most likely correct.

[schnecke]

Asian Female
3.9 from a Top 10 Undergrad
162 LSAT
Fulbright, and another giant big post grad fellowship

I told her to blanket the top 20 and throw in some CA schools

But specifially

Harvard
Berkeley
NYU
Hastings
Davis
UCLA
BC
BU

With Berkeley being her top choice

Ding at all. Try a few mid T1's and 40-60s.

of course a rhodes is more impressive in this context than a fulbright -- not because of the numbers of competitors, but because a rhodes is a longer and arguably richer experience.

They hand out Fulbrights like candy. I've had both a professor and an ex-roommate win them. Fulbright scholars don't have anything on Rhodes scholars. Rhodes scholars are gods amongst men.

A fulbright in the UK is very impressive

I find the fact that you can get a fulbright to the UK ironic. Though your assertion is most likely correct.

you seem pretty insufferable, and not just on account of the icon. hth.

[playhero]

Asian Female
3.9 from a Top 10 Undergrad
162 LSAT
Fulbright, and another giant big post grad fellowship

I told her to blanket the top 20 and throw in some CA schools

But specifially

Harvard
Berkeley
NYU
Hastings
Davis
UCLA
BC
BU

With Berkeley being her top choice

Ding at all. Try a few mid T1's and 40-60s.

of course a rhodes is more impressive in this context than a fulbright -- not because of the numbers of competitors, but because a rhodes is a longer and arguably richer experience.

They hand out Fulbrights like candy. I've had both a professor and an ex-roommate win them. Fulbright scholars don't have anything on Rhodes scholars. Rhodes scholars are gods amongst men.

A fulbright in the UK is very impressive

I find the fact that you can get a fulbright to the UK ironic. Though your assertion is most likely correct.

you seem pretty insufferable, and not just on account of the icon. hth.

You seem pretty ignorant. Both on the subject of award qualifications and the law school admissions game. If you found me sufferable, that would be the shock.

[schnecke]

Asian Female
3.9 from a Top 10 Undergrad
162 LSAT
Fulbright, and another giant big post grad fellowship

I told her to blanket the top 20 and throw in some CA schools

But specifially

Harvard
Berkeley
NYU
Hastings
Davis
UCLA
BC
BU

With Berkeley being her top choice

Ding at all. Try a few mid T1's and 40-60s.

of course a rhodes is more impressive in this context than a fulbright -- not because of the numbers of competitors, but because a rhodes is a longer and arguably richer experience.

They hand out Fulbrights like candy. I've had both a professor and an ex-roommate win them. Fulbright scholars don't have anything on Rhodes scholars. Rhodes scholars are gods amongst men.

A fulbright in the UK is very impressive

I find the fact that you can get a fulbright to the UK ironic. Though your assertion is most likely correct.

you seem pretty insufferable, and not just on account of the icon. hth.

You seem pretty ignorant. Both on the subject of award qualifications and the law school admissions game. If you found me sufferable, that would be the shock.

care to elaborate? i'm pretty familiar with the award qualifications for both programs - law school admissions, less so.

[housie07]

.

[FlightoftheEarls]

.

QFT

[conn09]

Just thought I'd update this thread due to the rampant speculation and pessimism for her cycle.

She got into Georgetown and Berkeley, w/l at NYU and straight rejection from Harvard.
She also had 15K/year Davis and Hastings.

[FuManChusco]

Just thought I'd update this thread due to the rampant speculation and pessimism for her cycle.

She got into Georgetown and Berkeley, w/l at NYU and straight rejection from Harvard.
She also had 15K/year Davis and Hastings.

It's more realism than pessimism. The LSAT is the most important part of an application and quite frankly, her's wasn't very good. She's really lucky she got B imho. No chance getting in anywhere higher with that LSAT. Good for her though. Great school.

[observationalist]

Just thought I'd update this thread due to the rampant speculation and pessimism for her cycle.

She got into Georgetown and Berkeley, w/l at NYU and straight rejection from Harvard.
She also had 15K/year Davis and Hastings.

Glad to see at least two of the top programs were willing to give her a shot.

[bilbobaggins]

Just thought I'd update this thread due to the rampant speculation and pessimism for her cycle.

She got into Georgetown and Berkeley, w/l at NYU and straight rejection from Harvard.
She also had 15K/year Davis and Hastings.

It's more realism than pessimism. The LSAT is the most important part of an application and quite frankly, her's wasn't very good. She's really lucky she got B imho. No chance getting in anywhere higher with that LSAT. Good for her though. Great school.

Except, in this case, it was realism to bet she'd get into a T14. She got into two and got waitlisted at a T6.

[FuManChusco]

Just thought I'd update this thread due to the rampant speculation and pessimism for her cycle.

She got into Georgetown and Berkeley, w/l at NYU and straight rejection from Harvard.
She also had 15K/year Davis and Hastings.

It's more realism than pessimism. The LSAT is the most important part of an application and quite frankly, her's wasn't very good. She's really lucky she got B imho. No chance getting in anywhere higher with that LSAT. Good for her though. Great school.

Except, in this case, it was realism to bet she'd get into a T14. She got into two and got waitlisted at a T6.

Semantics. Hindsight is 20/20.

[FlightoftheEarls]

it was realism to bet she'd get into a T14. She got into two and got waitlisted at a T6.

Logic. Does. Not. Follow.

She's an exception, not the rule. Congrats to her on the great cycle though!

[09042014]

sounds like she doesn't care enough about law school to take the LSAT a little bit more seriously. She obviously had to have had a good SAT or ACT score to get into a top 10 UG so she's no dummy.

Legacies, sports, musical, performance or artistic talent. There are plenty of people with average intelligence at top schools. Hell the median LSAT for several Top 10 schools is 162. Meaning half do as well or worse.

She very well could have topped out.

[bilbobaggins]

it was realism to bet she'd get into a T14. She got into two and got waitlisted at a T6.

Logic. Does. Not. Follow.

She's an exception, not the rule. Congrats to her on the great cycle though!

Yes. An exception because of her Fulbright. So, the logic does follow.

[270910]

it was realism to bet she'd get into a T14. She got into two and got waitlisted at a T6.

Logic. Does. Not. Follow.

She's an exception, not the rule. Congrats to her on the great cycle though!

Yes. An exception because of her Fulbright. So, the logic does follow.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc! You're going to tear up law school, kid.

[bilbobaggins]

it was realism to bet she'd get into a T14. She got into two and got waitlisted at a T6.

Logic. Does. Not. Follow.

She's an exception, not the rule. Congrats to her on the great cycle though!

Yes. An exception because of her Fulbright. So, the logic does follow.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc! You're going to tear up law school, kid.

True, we don't know the cause, but that doesn't change the accuracy of the prediction. And I'm doing quite fine at Boalt, thanks.

[FlightoftheEarls]

Yes. An exception because of her Fulbright. So, the logic does follow.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc! You're going to tear up law school, kid.

True, we don't know the cause, but that doesn't change the accuracy of the prediction. And I'm doing quite fine at Boalt, thanks.

The accuracy of the prediction after the fact does not mean what you said was a logical conclusion.

[bilbobaggins]

Yes. An exception because of her Fulbright. So, the logic does follow.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc! You're going to tear up law school, kid.

True, we don't know the cause, but that doesn't change the accuracy of the prediction. And I'm doing quite fine at Boalt, thanks.

The accuracy of the prediction after the fact does not mean what you said was a logical conclusion.

No shit. But it does mean the prediction was accurate.

[09042014]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc! You're going to tear up law school, kid.

True, we don't know the cause, but that doesn't change the accuracy of the prediction. And I'm doing quite fine at Boalt, thanks.

The accuracy of the prediction after the fact does not mean what you said was a logical conclusion.

No shit. But it does mean the prediction was accurate.

Technically it just means it was precise.