LOL. Read this site for longer than five minutes and you will find roughly 1,000 things wrong with this.androstan wrote:Also, I don't actually want "biglaw". I don't want the 60-80 hour work weeks. I'd rather take 50 hour work weeks with a 100k salary.
2.87/163 Forum
-
kevin261186

- Posts: 113
- Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:45 pm
Re: 2.87/163
- androstan

- Posts: 4633
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am
Re: 2.87/163
= helpfulkevin261186 wrote:LOL. Read this site for longer than five minutes and you will find roughly 1,000 things wrong with this.androstan wrote:Also, I don't actually want "biglaw". I don't want the 60-80 hour work weeks. I'd rather take 50 hour work weeks with a 100k salary.
- sundance95

- Posts: 2123
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:44 pm
Re: 2.87/163
LSP isn't very useful for extreme splitters, which is what you would be if you obtained a 170+. It tends to be overly pessimistic. Check out lawschoolnumbers.com and review the school's admit graphs; they are very useful.
- merichard87

- Posts: 750
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:31 pm
Re: 2.87/163
Definitely apply to Duke but didn't you say you already have a master's? Why would you get another one? Also, as another poster said LSP is not the best for splitters. LSN gives a better outlook for those cases.
P.S. You can continue to tell us you want to go to Duke and we will continue to tell you our opinion on the best school your numbers are going to take you (i.e. NW w/ED). Stop this vicious cycle.
P.S. You can continue to tell us you want to go to Duke and we will continue to tell you our opinion on the best school your numbers are going to take you (i.e. NW w/ED). Stop this vicious cycle.
- androstan

- Posts: 4633
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am
Re: 2.87/163
Thanks Sun, LSP's site discusses splitters and claims that there is an internal correction for splitters. Although it admits that the predictions are still a little pessimistic, the claim is that they are not very pessimistic.sundance95 wrote:LSP isn't very useful for extreme splitters, which is what you would be if you obtained a 170+. It tends to be overly pessimistic. Check out lawschoolnumbers.com and review the school's admit graphs; they are very useful.
I checked out LSN. It looks like last year the lowest non URM LSAT admitted with a sub 3.0 GPA was 172. There was one more non URM sub 3.0 GPA with a 176 LSAT. The year before there's a non URM at 2.66/175, but it looks like they didn't have to ED to get in.
Not a lotta data to go on. I just want the ED to be worth it, not a knee-jerk decision because NWern is the place for WE/engineering/splitters/etc.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- androstan

- Posts: 4633
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am
Re: 2.87/163
My master's is in chemistry. A master's in biomedical engineering would double or even triple the number of patents I'd be qualified to work on. Duke's program is to get the JD/MS in THREE years, not four, so I don't see why not.merichard87 wrote:Definitely apply to Duke but didn't you say you already have a master's? Why would you get another one? Also, as another poster said LSP is not the best for splitters. LSN gives a better outlook for those cases.
P.S. You can continue to tell us you want to go to Duke and we will continue to tell you our opinion on the best school your numbers are going to take you (i.e. NW w/ED). Stop this vicious cycle.
- androstan

- Posts: 4633
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am
Re: 2.87/163
Well, the big day is tomorrow. I took December 2009 just now and got 175. Wish me luck.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login