How are these softs Forum

[wert3813]

true ... but still ... really anyone can form a "passion" for X , Y , Z . Partake in extensive research, volunteer work, etc. with the poor, victims, etc. Study in a diff. country. At least to me this is not very attractive. When I see that someone has a 170+ LSAT, then that's incredibly attractive.

If that 17O+ does not have a sound reason to go to law school, yeah that would be a negative, but I will overlook it. Kind of like a very attractive girl goes on a date with me and she looks like a mess that night and embarrasses me in front of my friends by her weird behavior. Sure, It'd be a negative, but something that can be overlooked because there are few women that look like her. She's a diamond in the rough. Just like the 170+ w/o WE, volunteer werk, reason 2 go to law school.

Again softs are all about your margins. I thought I stressed that. Take me. I'm 4.0 171. That gets into Harvard a whopping 56% of the time. Columbia 50% of the time. http://www.mylsn.info/hcu8tx Suddenly, its all about softs. I've done some stuff that's okay, I'd "rank" my softs in the 65th percentile. (Count up not down.) Suddenly it's all about how do your present your softs. And how can they show your desire for law school.

Lest anyone think I'm arguing softs over LSAT I retook a 170. LSAT matters so much more. But softs, if presented correctly can help.

[ZVBXRPL]

Poetic.

[wert3813]

Excluding Yale and Stanford, most softs work like tie breakers - they won't help if your scores are too low, and you'd already be accepted if they're really high, but if you're in the grey area, it'll boost you above another applicant without such softs.

Y andS and Cal are in a different category, where softs matter, but very few people will be realistically considered

Cal is as holistic as they come.

[Dr. Dre]

my problem with softs: too subjective.

also, not everyone has the luxury of doing some awesome stuff because they prob lack connections, or need to work to get $$$ to pay for tuition.

[wert3813]

my problem with softs: too subjective.

also, not everyone has the luxury of doing some awesome stuff because they prob lack connections, or need to work to get $$$ to pay for tuition.

Eh. Come on now. That's called life. Are some people dealt better hands? Absolutely. Did I have way more opportunities that the kids I teach? Yep. That's life. Overcome. Rise to the top. Be great. Do not count the things people have done in life because they had more chances is not possible.

[ZVBXRPL]

true ... but still ... really anyone can form a "passion" for X , Y , Z . Partake in extensive research, volunteer work, etc. with the poor, victims, etc. Study in a diff. country. At least to me this is not very attractive. When I see that someone has a 170+ LSAT, then that's incredibly attractive.

If that 17O+ does not have a sound reason to go to law school, yeah that would be a negative, but I will overlook it. Kind of like a very attractive girl goes on a date with me and she looks like a mess that night and embarrasses me in front of my friends by her weird behavior. Sure, It'd be a negative, but something that can be overlooked because there are few women that look like her. She's a diamond in the rough. Just like the 170+ w/o WE, volunteer werk, reason 2 go to law school.

Again softs are all about your margins. I thought I stressed that. Take me. I'm 4.0 171. That gets into Harvard a whopping 56% of the time. Columbia 50% of the time. http://www.mylsn.info/hcu8tx Suddenly, its all about softs. I've done some stuff that's okay, I'd "rank" my softs in the 65th percentile. (Count up not down.) Suddenly it's all about how do your present your softs. And how can they show your desire for law school.

Lest anyone think I'm arguing softs over LSAT I retook a 170. LSAT matters so much more. But softs, if presented correctly can help.

If you feel comfortable doing so, what were your softs?
What percentile would my softs rank in?

[wert3813]

true ... but still ... really anyone can form a "passion" for X , Y , Z . Partake in extensive research, volunteer work, etc. with the poor, victims, etc. Study in a diff. country. At least to me this is not very attractive. When I see that someone has a 170+ LSAT, then that's incredibly attractive.

If that 17O+ does not have a sound reason to go to law school, yeah that would be a negative, but I will overlook it. Kind of like a very attractive girl goes on a date with me and she looks like a mess that night and embarrasses me in front of my friends by her weird behavior. Sure, It'd be a negative, but something that can be overlooked because there are few women that look like her. She's a diamond in the rough. Just like the 170+ w/o WE, volunteer werk, reason 2 go to law school.

Again softs are all about your margins. I thought I stressed that. Take me. I'm 4.0 171. That gets into Harvard a whopping 56% of the time. Columbia 50% of the time. http://www.mylsn.info/hcu8tx Suddenly, its all about softs. I've done some stuff that's okay, I'd "rank" my softs in the 65th percentile. (Count up not down.) Suddenly it's all about how do your present your softs. And how can they show your desire for law school.

Lest anyone think I'm arguing softs over LSAT I retook a 170. LSAT matters so much more. But softs, if presented correctly can help.

If you feel comfortable doing so, what were your softs?
What percentile would my softs rank in?

Maybe. I get to ask a question first. What is your LSAT and GPA and where to you want to go?

[Dr. Dre]

Eh. Come on now. That's called life. Are some people dealt better hands? Absolutely. Did I have way more opportunities that the kids I teach? Yep. That's life. Overcome. Rise to the top. Be great. Do not count the things people have done in life because they had more chances is not possible.

Exactly. The only way I can overcome this is by beating them on an even playing field, with no biases, no prejudices, everything is fair, black and white: the LSAT.

That's why I love it. It can compare me (an AA from a low income family to someone with more privileged background)

[ZVBXRPL]

havent taken yet/3.9.

Where I want to go is an unrealistic question. What matters is (I want to go) where I can get in. I want a great education.

[wert3813]

Eh. Come on now. That's called life. Are some people dealt better hands? Absolutely. Did I have way more opportunities that the kids I teach? Yep. That's life. Overcome. Rise to the top. Be great. Do not count the things people have done in life because they had more chances is not possible.

Exactly. The only way I can overcome this is by beating them on an even playing field, with no biases, no prejudices, everything is fair, black and white: the LSAT.

That's why I love it. It can compare me (an AA from a low income family to someone with more privileged background)

Eh. there are problems there too. My teachers were probably better growing up. I had more time to study. Prep courses. More access to literature.

Look man I hear you. I think the process is remarkably fair all things considered. My point was if done the right way you can make your softs help you.

[wert3813]

havent taken yet/3.9.

Where I want to go is an unrealistic question. What matters is (I want to go) where I can get in. I want a great education.

What are you PTesting at?

[Dr. Dre]

My point is that they can help you marginally. So little that you best focus on what truly matters: LSAT.

[wert3813]

My point is that they can help you marginally. So little that you best focus on what truly matters: LSAT.

Agree.

[Dr. Dre]

Law school is not about getting an education. That's college. Law school is about training you to become a lawyer and to get a job in this shitty legal job market. And probably pay your student loans till your kids are 20.

[ZVBXRPL]

Mid 160's. Studying daily. Taking test in October

[wert3813]

Mid 160's. Studying daily. Taking test in October

Score a 174 and don't worry about this stuff

Your softs are fine. If you thread them together in the right way they could help a bit. I know it's tough but you have got to try to singularly focus on the LSAT.

My softs:

Are now poof.

Again non of this in and of itself says "take a below median kid", but the idea is to present it in a way that makes clear what you have done and how that has clear led you to law school.

Please don't quote this post. I'm going to delete my softs in a few because I'm weird about stuff like that and my cycle isn't over just yet.

[ManOfTheMinute]

people seem to disregard their PS and LORs as softs sometimes... i actually think they are the most important (unless you are a rhodes scholar)

[wert3813]

people seem to disregard their PS and LORs as softs sometimes... i actually think they are the most important (unless you are a rhodes scholar)

Yep. Being a crappy writer is a great way to hurt yourself. Writing a strong PS that is substantive is a definite plus

[ZVBXRPL]

Wert: Thanks for advice.

P.S. You could of told me to Google you.

[wert3813]

Wert: Thanks for advice.

P.S. You could of told me to Google you.

Wut?

[sinfiery]

Exactly. The only way I can overcome this is by beating them on an even playing field, with no biases, no prejudices, everything is fair, black and white: the LSAT.

That's why I love it. It can compare me (an AA from a low income family to someone with more privileged background)

Noodelyone had a good post about how softs can be perceived as something that is largely determined by socioeconomic factors.

I mean, if most people were offered to go help kids in Africa every summer they went to college at no cost, most would have jumped at it.

[Ave]

If most people were offered to go help kids in Africa every summer they went to college at no cost, most would have jumped at it.

You must have a higher opinion of people than I do

[Dr. Dre]

Plus, really let's be honest, how much of a help can you be going to a low income community and helping the underprivileged? You're a fucken college student. I've met many of them when I was a kid growing up in the projects. They never did shit, all they did was talk "nice", allegedly inspiring us to attend college, feeding the homeless, etc.

While this is good work, no doubt, no REAL change has occurred. That's why I dislike those type of programs.

[CyanIdes Of March]

As is a recurring theme on TLS, everyone who doesn't do better than their numbers claims that softs don't matter. The reality is that those people's softs are just not as good as other people's softs. Lifes a bitch

Meh. Everyone who outperforms their numbers got dat special snowflake syndrome . It goes both ways. Yet, if I were to get into H under both medians I'd have the same outlook as you do.

173 is Harvard's median.

[LexLeon]

true ... but still ... really anyone can form a "passion" for X , Y , Z . Partake in extensive research, volunteer work, etc. with the poor, victims, etc. Study in a diff. country. At least to me this is not very attractive. When I see that someone has a 170+ LSAT, then that's incredibly attractive.

If that 17O+ does not have a sound reason to go to law school, yeah that would be a negative, but I will overlook it. Kind of like a very attractive girl goes on a date with me and she looks like a mess that night and embarrasses me in front of my friends by her weird behavior. Sure, It'd be a negative, but something that can be overlooked because there are few women that look like her. She's a diamond in the rough. Just like the 170+ w/o WE, volunteer werk, reason 2 go to law school.

Speaking about putting carts before horses...

An LSAT score alone is worthless.