Top Law Schools

In all the blogs and writings I've read by every dean they say that the LSAT is not that important. Why does everyone on here insist that it is the only thing? I don't think there is some secret cabal where they go around saying one thing and doing another just to mess with applicants.

Because it is the only thing (except of course UGPA).

All AdComms want people to think they look at apps holistically when in truth only Y/S do.

It's not evil, it is merely trying to maintain good PR and outward image.

I understand what you are saying in that deans say that the LSAT is one of considerations but not a primary one when assessing a candidate. I think they say they take a holistic approach to be more politically correct. In the end, LSAT and GPA are what counts the most (for the rankings and thus the decision) even though most law school deans claim that the LSAT is not the most important.

Hey-O wrote:In all the blogs and writings I've read by every dean they say that the LSAT is not that important. Why does everyone on here insist that it is the only thing? I don't think there is some secret cabal where they go around saying one thing and doing another just to mess with applicants.

Empirical evidence > what Dean's claim in blogs and interviews.

Because it isn't. Who you are as a person is of far greater value to schools than any score could ever show. Concentrate on your PS and don't worry about the test. The LSAT advantage is a red herring invented by TLS to scare others away from the profession. Don't become another victim!

bk187 wrote: All AdComms want people to think they look at apps holistically when in truth only Y/S do.

actually i think you can make a strong case for northwestern being very holistic

.

jayn3 wrote:

bk187 wrote: All AdComms want people to think they look at apps holistically when in truth only Y/S do.

actually i think you can make a strong case for northwestern being very holistic

Also Berkeley.

jayn3 wrote:actually i think you can make a strong case for northwestern being very holistic

Maybe. Though I think it's more along the lines of "work experience or GTFO," i.e. they only look at applicants with work experience. That doesn't necessarily seem holistic to me (though it depends on your definition of the word) as to me it means taking everything into account rather than merely adding one more black and white factor.

Hey-O wrote:In all the blogs and writings I've read by every dean they say that the LSAT is not that important. Why does everyone on here insist that it is the only thing? I don't think there is some secret cabal where they go around saying one thing and doing another just to mess with applicants.

They lied srry k thx bai

Mr. Matlock wrote:Because it isn't. Who you are as a person is of far greater value to schools than any score could ever show. Concentrate on your PS and don't worry about the test. The LSAT advantage is a red herring invented by TLS to scare others away from the profession. Don't become another victim!

Are you deliberately trying to be an asshole or are you being sarcastic?

Hey-O wrote:

jayn3 wrote:

bk187 wrote: All AdComms want people to think they look at apps holistically when in truth only Y/S do.

actually i think you can make a strong case for northwestern being very holistic

Also Berkeley.

Just because Berkeley admits a 150er each app season doesn't mean they aren't just as full of shit.

Daytukrjabs wrote:

Mr. Matlock wrote:Because it isn't. Who you are as a person is of far greater value to schools than any score could ever show. Concentrate on your PS and don't worry about the test. The LSAT advantage is a red herring invented by TLS to scare others away from the profession. Don't become another victim!

Are you deliberately trying to be an asshole or are you being sarcastic?

If I told you, would you really give a shit?

Mr. Matlock wrote:

Daytukrjabs wrote:

Mr. Matlock wrote:Because it isn't. Who you are as a person is of far greater value to schools than any score could ever show. Concentrate on your PS and don't worry about the test. The LSAT advantage is a red herring invented by TLS to scare others away from the profession. Don't become another victim!

Are you deliberately trying to be an asshole or are you being sarcastic?

If I told you, would you really give a shit?

it was a rhetorical question

jayn3 wrote:

bk187 wrote: All AdComms want people to think they look at apps holistically when in truth only Y/S do.

actually i think you can make a strong case for northwestern being very holistic

LOL'd

Hey-O wrote:In all the blogs and writings I've read by every dean they say that the LSAT is not that important. Why does everyone on here insist that it is the only thing? I don't think there is some secret cabal where they go around saying one thing and doing another just to mess with applicants.

They lie through their fucking teeth.

D. H2Oman wrote:

jayn3 wrote:

bk187 wrote: All AdComms want people to think they look at apps holistically when in truth only Y/S do.

actually i think you can make a strong case for northwestern being very holistic

LOL'd

I would bet against them actually having read my personal statement.

"LSAT is necessary but not sufficient." I think this is pretty common knowledge around these parts. If most of the apps that top schools receive have 170+ LSAT scores, the LSAT becomes less relevant, and adcomms begin to focus on other factors in your application to make a distinction between applicants.

slider wrote:"LSAT is necessary but not sufficient." I think this is pretty common knowledge around these parts. If most of the apps that top schools receive have 170+ LSAT scores, the LSAT becomes less relevant, and adcomms begin to focus on other factors in your application to make a distinction between applicants.

But they don't.

and LSAT is sufficient until proven otherwise through bad writing, bad gpa, bad disclosure etc.

One of the toughest lessons you will learn is that the folks here at TLS are almost always right. You will not likely be the recipient of flowery words or false hope on these boards. The LSAT is the most important factor in law school admissions, followed by GPA. There are exceptions, yes, but do not count on being one.

Daytukrjabs wrote:

slider wrote:"LSAT is necessary but not sufficient." I think this is pretty common knowledge around these parts. If most of the apps that top schools receive have 170+ LSAT scores, the LSAT becomes less relevant, and adcomms begin to focus on other factors in your application to make a distinction between applicants.

But they don't.

and LSAT is sufficient until proven otherwise through bad writing, bad gpa, bad disclosure etc.

You gotta be pretty fail to have a 170 and not get t14.

Hey-O wrote:

jayn3 wrote:

bk187 wrote: All AdComms want people to think they look at apps holistically when in truth only Y/S do.

actually i think you can make a strong case for northwestern being very holistic

Also Berkeley.

I think Berkley might just be gpa whores instead of LSAT whores

Daytukrjabs wrote:

Mr. Matlock wrote:

Daytukrjabs wrote:

Mr. Matlock wrote:Because it isn't. Who you are as a person is of far greater value to schools than any score could ever show. Concentrate on your PS and don't worry about the test. The LSAT advantage is a red herring invented by TLS to scare others away from the profession. Don't become another victim!

Are you deliberately trying to be an asshole or are you being sarcastic?

If I told you, would you really give a shit?

it was a rhetorical question

Well, FYI, I was being an asshole. You and your question fail. Next.

.

Mr. Matlock wrote: Well, FYI, I was being an asshole. You and your question fail. Next.

rhetorical question
n. A question to which no answer is expected, often used for rhetorical effect.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ ... l+question