Battle of the Washingtons! Forum

[yossarian]

Apology accepted, no worries man. I'll admit after re-reading: earlier in the thread you were fine, just thought your recent tone was a bit dimissive. Online sarcasm can be a tricky beast as well, I know.

Good luck with your decision, I think you have already come to the correct conclusion that for your purposes, UW>>>GW and W&L. Keep your costs down and try hard for that top of the class. Confidence on here is fine, but be prepared for ridicule from some. And I'm hoping you know to tone it down a notch in person once you get to LS

Cheers

What's great about Fiero is that his good-guyness matches his avatar perfectly

[Fiero85]

Don't be a dick

He's not. He's just...ice cold.

It's cooler than being cool.

"Alright, alright, alright, alright" you two

[Icecold62]

But with two months of studying I did get top 9%? So..... Lol I like your math though

Are you taking pride in under-preparing for a test that is worth six figures or more in scholarships and in the long run?

Don't be a dick to people who are trying to help you, with much more current info than most practicing attorneys have about a drastically changing field.

If you can go to UW cheap that's fine. The other schools listed are bad ideas for PNW area.

I never meant to be "a dick". Sorry if I came across as such. Humor and self confidence when going against the grain can be seen as poor form, I wish no disrespect to those who have posted, hence the thank you's. I am not boasting on my prep for the LSAT, I felt that two months was sufficient, I also felt ok (although a little let down) with a 165. All in all this is board that has helped me to thresh out ideas and come to conclusions. Although I can be sarcastic and confident I hope not to be misconstrued in my objectives or regard to which I hold those who have responded.

Apology accepted, no worries man. I'll admit after re-reading: earlier in the thread you were fine, just thought your recent tone was a bit dimissive. Online sarcasm can be a tricky beast as well, I know.

Good luck with your decision, I think you have already come to the correct conclusion that for your purposes, UW>>>GW and W&L. Keep your costs down and try hard for that top of the class. Confidence on here is fine, but be prepared for ridicule from some. And I'm hoping you know to tone it down a notch in person once you get to LS

Cheers

thanks, great avatar btw. Gotta love HIMYM

[Icecold62]

I feel like this topic is resolved, yet I miss having posts on here. Maybe I should apply to WUSTL, or befriend Denzel Washington....

[Mal Reynolds]

It seems odd to me that this many bright (granted an assumption) people have not yet looked harder at the numbers, thought of autocorrelation and selection bias. I mean no disrespect to the amazing schools around and let's be fair, if Stanford calls me I will be elated (stretch is an understatement I know). I know far too many attorneys who are wildly successful that went to schools ranked sub-50 to believe that you can only be successful at t14. I will be successful, it's just a question of how.

just lol

[Icecold62]

It seems odd to me that this many bright (granted an assumption) people have not yet looked harder at the numbers, thought of autocorrelation and selection bias. I mean no disrespect to the amazing schools around and let's be fair, if Stanford calls me I will be elated (stretch is an understatement I know). I know far too many attorneys who are wildly successful that went to schools ranked sub-50 to believe that you can only be successful at t14. I will be successful, it's just a question of how.

just lol

Lol ok that was not my best post.

The math is interesting though, in a study when controlled for SAT scores, there was no proven correlation between higher ranked schools and success. Granted that was undergrad I believe (hence SAT). Also success is ambiguous and more specifications are needed
But it is an interesting thought. Do better schools make better students or does self-selection have the blame due to selection bias? Regardless there is such a thing as prestige. But it is really a decent thought, if top one percent of this cycle went to TTT schools would they be unsuccessful?

That post was possibly written late at night, or at least I hope so... Lol

[Mal Reynolds]

It seems odd to me that this many bright (granted an assumption) people have not yet looked harder at the numbers, thought of autocorrelation and selection bias. I mean no disrespect to the amazing schools around and let's be fair, if Stanford calls me I will be elated (stretch is an understatement I know). I know far too many attorneys who are wildly successful that went to schools ranked sub-50 to believe that you can only be successful at t14. I will be successful, it's just a question of how.

just lol

Lol ok that was not my best post.

The math is interesting though, in a study when controlled for SAT scores, there was no proven correlation between higher ranked schools and success. Granted that was undergrad I believe (hence SAT). Also success is ambiguous and more specifications are needed
But it is an interesting thought. Do better schools make better students or does self-selection have the blame due to selection bias? Regardless there is such a thing as prestige. But it is really a decent thought, if top one percent of this cycle went to TTT schools would they be unsuccessful?

That post was possibly written late at night, or at least I hope so... Lol

If students who were qualified to get into the top 14 instead went to TTTTs, then yes, by and large they would fail to get legal jobs.

[Icecold62]

It seems odd to me that this many bright (granted an assumption) people have not yet looked harder at the numbers, thought of autocorrelation and selection bias. I mean no disrespect to the amazing schools around and let's be fair, if Stanford calls me I will be elated (stretch is an understatement I know). I know far too many attorneys who are wildly successful that went to schools ranked sub-50 to believe that you can only be successful at t14. I will be successful, it's just a question of how.

just lol

Lol ok that was not my best post.

The math is interesting though, in a study when controlled for SAT scores, there was no proven correlation between higher ranked schools and success. Granted that was undergrad I believe (hence SAT). Also success is ambiguous and more specifications are needed
But it is an interesting thought. Do better schools make better students or does self-selection have the blame due to selection bias? Regardless there is such a thing as prestige. But it is really a decent thought, if top one percent of this cycle went to TTT schools would they be unsuccessful?

That post was possibly written late at night, or at least I hope so... Lol

If students who were qualified to get into the top 14 instead went to TTTTs, then yes, by and large they would fail to get legal jobs.

Huh, you think? I mean it's all hypothetical and I have no idea but you really think the top say.... Ten students in the nation would be totally unsuccessful in TTT? I mean they would be top of their class obviously, most of the teachers favorites, any connection possibilities would go through them.... it is an interesting question I think. (Granted they would be stupid to do it). It's not really far from nature vs nurture.

[Mal Reynolds]

I think you might be retarded so I'm gonna stop resounding now.

[Icecold62]

Sorry for the interesting and legitimate question?

[052220151]

Sorry for the interesting and legitimate question?

It was a stupid question/hypo. I'm dialed into the PNW markets and for new hires in Seattle there are really only two types of candidates that are considered (barring nepotism): T14 with substantial (you're from there) ties or top 10% at UW. Seeing as there is a 90% chance that you won't be in the top 10% and they won't give you significant money, retaking the LSAT is the only sane option here.

[Icecold62]

Sorry for the interesting and legitimate question?

It was a stupid question/hypo. I'm dialed into the PNW markets and for new hires in Seattle there are really only two types of candidates that are considered (barring nepotism): T14 with substantial (you're from there) ties or top 10% at UW. Seeing as there is a 90% chance that you won't be in the top 10% and they won't give you significant money, retaking the LSAT is the only sane option here.

Lol your a bit late to the party.... Wrong question

[TheSpanishMain]

If students who were qualified to get into the top 14 instead went to TTTTs, then yes, by and large they would fail to get legal jobs.

Huh, you think? I mean it's all hypothetical and I have no idea but you really think the top say.... Ten students in the nation would be totally unsuccessful in TTT? I mean they would be top of their class obviously, most of the teachers favorites, any connection possibilities would go through them.... it is an interesting question I think. (Granted they would be stupid to do it). It's not really far from nature vs nurture.[/quote]

You think picking out the top 10 individuals really helps? It's such a small sample size at the extreme end that it doesn't really tell us much. But yes, in general, a really, really smart guy at Cooley would still struggle with finding a non-Wendy's job.

[052220151]

Sorry for the interesting and legitimate question?

It was a stupid question/hypo. I'm dialed into the PNW markets and for new hires in Seattle there are really only two types of candidates that are considered (barring nepotism): T14 with substantial (you're from there) ties or top 10% at UW. Seeing as there is a 90% chance that you won't be in the top 10% and they won't give you significant money, retaking the LSAT is the only sane option here.

Lol your a bit late to the party.... Wrong question

The first sentence was a separate idea and shoulda been it's own paragraph. But the whole 'what if top students went to TTTs' is a stupid question/hypo.

Sorry for being late and sorry for giving you experiential advice. You should go to UW bro, don't wait a year.

[rebexness]

Huh, you think? I mean it's all hypothetical and I have no idea but you really think the top say.... Ten students in the nation would be totally unsuccessful in TTT?

I mean they would be top of their class obviously, most of the teachers favorites, any connection possibilities would go through them.....

just lol.

[Kimikho]

Sorry for the interesting and legitimate question?

It was a stupid question/hypo. I'm dialed into the PNW markets and for new hires in Seattle there are really only two types of candidates that are considered (barring nepotism): T14 with substantial (you're from there) ties or top 10% at UW. Seeing as there is a 90% chance that you won't be in the top 10% and they won't give you significant money, retaking the LSAT is the only sane option here.

I'm so glad you finally found this thread.

[Otunga]

The guy isn't as dialed into things as many on TLS. I see it as him trying to gauge the market. That's more effort than most people make going "NO FUCK RETAKE. BYE I GO TO TTT".

[Icecold62]

This isn't going as planned but oh well, another random thought, poor student at Yale (manages to graduate). Vs best student in the nation who decided to go to... William and Mary (it was his moms firing wish or something)? Anyways, who does better?

In no way is this supposed to be a fight or critique etc. nor some kind of justification. it just is an interesting thought to me. Exactly how much success is the schools fault and how much is the students (clearly not all of it as Yale has had at least one failure I assume and William and Mary has had one success)?

[patogordo]

There is no "best student in the nation" dude. Grades are practically random.

[Icecold62]

There is no "best student in the nation" dude. Grades are practically random.

Oh it's hypothetical anyways, there is a best it's just nearly impossible to determine with merely grades and LSAT. Regardless for the sake of argument assume there was one student who was the best.

[TheSpanishMain]

There is no "best student in the nation" dude. Grades are practically random.

Oh it's hypothetical anyways, there is a best it's just nearly impossible to determine with merely grades and LSAT. Regardless for the sake of argument assume there was one student who was the best.

Best how? I don't think you even understand what you're saying.

Anyway, yes, a really smart guy at W&M who is first in his class and awesome at job interviewing will probably end up with some great opportunities. The point is that who ends up being first in his/her class is almost arbitrary.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove....that there is no correlation between school prestige and graduate success? You're just positing an anecdote involving an extreme case ("best in the nation"*) which doesn't really help your case.

*How would we even know who is the "best in the nation"? You can only be the best in your class. The student who is the "best in the nation" at W&M will never get a chance to be ranked against every other student at every other school. The degree to which this wunderkind dominates his/her classmates becomes irrelevant at a certain point.

[sublime]

..

[timbs4339]

ITT: Econ professor proves that humans are not rational actors, debunking decades of common wisdom.

[Icecold62]

There is no "best student in the nation" dude. Grades are practically random.

Oh it's hypothetical anyways, there is a best it's just nearly impossible to determine with merely grades and LSAT. Regardless for the sake of argument assume there was one student who was the best.

Best how? I don't think you even understand what you're saying.

Anyway, yes, a really smart guy at W&M who is first in his class and awesome at job interviewing will probably end up with some great opportunities. The point is that who ends up being first in his/her class is almost arbitrary.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove....that there is no correlation between school prestige and graduate success? You're just positing an anecdote involving an extreme case ("best in the nation"*) which doesn't really help your case.

*How would we even know who is the "best in the nation"? You can only be the best in your class. The student who is the "best in the nation" at W&M will never get a chance to be ranked against every other student at every other school. The degree to which this wunderkind dominates his/her classmates becomes irrelevant at a certain point.

Not trying to prove anything, just trying to have a nice discussion on exactly how much much of a role prestige plays, it interests me.

Rational... Lol usually saying someone is unrational means you merely do not have all the pertinent info

[Icecold62]

So follow up,
UW: 20k a year w/o stips
W&L: Full ride (including grants)
GW: 10k a year

Other interesting offers

Asu: full ride
Arizona: full ride

Still waiting on Stanford but UW at 10k (tuition) a year sounds really nice. Good plan? Or should I consider asu for free? Once again I want to end up in Seattle.