custom_concern wrote: observationalist wrote:
Tell her to apply to the T10 and Vanderbilt
A Fulbright is a very strong soft, though it might come down to where she went and what she did (research project in Germany, for example, probably carries more weight than teaching English in Thailand because of the increased competition). We had just one scholar in last year's class, out of 190 or so students. I'm actually staying with three former Fulbrights in India... the director of our Social Justice Program is a legal scholar on development issues in India and also handles the Fulbright LLM program. A school like Vandy would probably throw $$ her way, with the very top schools giving her a serious look. Her gpa is above just about everyone's 75th which means her numbers are a wash everywhere. The primary consideration will be how her scholarship and essay stacks up compared to the Rhodes scholars out there deciding to go to law school.
I understand that a Fulbright is a strong soft, but if you are suggesting she apply only to the T10 and your school -- and if you're not ONLY kidding/trolling -- then I think this is very bad, very dangerous advice.
You don't know Observationalist, but he is kidding. Well, probably about 56% kidding. He is a very strong advocate for Vanderbilt and has a wealth of great information about the school he attends. He also has a bias (with good reason), acknowledges that bias, and jokes about it on occasion (as seen here).
He is also dead on about the Fulbright's strength depending on where it is. Some Fulbright scholarship applicants are relatively unchallenged in their applications, depending on the location. Some (like in most European countries, esp. the UK) are nearly impossible and incredibly prestigious.
SolarWind wrote:While I know the importance of the LSAT is crucial in admissions is there really no exceptions?? I know about all the normal cases but if someone has a 3.9 GPA, Fulbright, and that other unmentioned fellowship but paired with a 162 is the best she can get into outside of T20?
That just seems a little extreme to me as clearly its been shown that she can perform at a very high academic level... I think one of the problems here (huge conjecture from her Chinese ethnicity) is the possibility that she was born outside of the US and may not have as strong verbal skills. It is extremely hard to make up for this weakness if English is not your native language & with 3/4 sections of the LSAT depending on advanced reading skills she might just not be able to score high... Do Law Schools just not acknowledge this large flaw in the predictive powers of a LSAT score??
She has accomplished a lot, but how does an adcom view that when they compare another applicant who took the same test as her and was able to outperform her 85th percentile (that's a guess) with a performance in the 98th percentile? If that is the only objective measure between the two, the adcom can't help but wonder how well the 98th percentile candidate would have performed at the same tasks. Whether that is right or wrong, do you see the issue?
As for part two, how is that a flaw in the predictive powers of the LSAT score? The LSAT has a lot of flaws, granted, but I don't think this is one of them. Law school is taught in English, and law in the United States is conducted almost exclusively in English, whether we like it or not. It isn't going to get any easier once she has her nightly readings in law school, nor any easier when she is preparing documents once she is a practicing attorney.