Should I even apply to law school? Forum

[DreamShake]

This, sort of. "Brilliant" + shitty grammar=probably not native English speaker-->significantly increased likelihood of being URM (compare non-native speaker demographics in the USA...guess who's at the top of the list? not blacks, Asians, or whites...)-->inquiry about URM status (hugely relevant factor given OP's low GPA). Sorry for assuming most TLS users could make the jump in logic. Inception meme was 180, though.

It's not a logical jump, it's just you being an idiot and using incorrect terms.

I certainly could/should have initially phrased things more delicately, but your response is, well, idiotic. Touche, hypocrisy!

[bk1]

I certainly could/should have initially phrased things more delicately, but your response is, well, idiotic. Touche, hypocrisy!

Happy to be of service.

[09042014]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

It's 163, which is higher than the vast majority of colleges in America. I'm inclined to agree with DF on this one: admission to Columbia (barring some incredible pre-college experiences) demonstrates high intelligence and test-taking ability. If nothing else, I'd expect a Columbia student to have the capacity to score upper 160's/lower 170's. Of course, OP is going to have to put in the time studying if he wants to reach that potential.

/stupid argument started by DF because he was probably bored

Property will do that.

[whymeohgodno]

The average LSAT score for Columbia UG is in the low to mid 160s.

It's 163, which is higher than the vast majority of colleges in America. I'm inclined to agree with DF on this one: admission to Columbia (barring some incredible pre-college experiences) demonstrates high intelligence and test-taking ability. If nothing else, I'd expect a Columbia student to have the capacity to score upper 160's/lower 170's. Of course, OP is going to have to put in the time studying if he wants to reach that potential.

/stupid argument started by DF because he was probably bored

Property will do that.

Getting good grades in high school (lololol) and getting a good score on the SAT (lolololol) = getting good grades on the LSAT?

lololol.

[Patriot1208]

The funny part is not so much that he believes he can get a 170, because honestly, a lot of people can if they put in the effort. The funny part is someone is douchey (stupid?) enough to write "I'm really brilliant" as evidence to show that he can do better than his past performance indicates.

[Patriot1208]

It's 163, which is higher than the vast majority of colleges in America. I'm inclined to agree with DF on this one: admission to Columbia (barring some incredible pre-college experiences) demonstrates high intelligence and test-taking ability. If nothing else, I'd expect a Columbia student to have the capacity to score upper 160's/lower 170's. Of course, OP is going to have to put in the time studying if he wants to reach that potential.

/stupid argument started by DF because he was probably bored

Property will do that.

Getting good grades in high school (lololol) and getting a good score on the SAT (lolololol) = getting good grades on the LSAT?

lololol.

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

[whymeohgodno]

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

On the whole. It doesn't translate into the individual level.

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college. And since this guy has a shit gpa from Columbia the only way he is "brilliant" would be if he lacks discipline (even though it's pretty hard to lack discipline and get a low 3.0 gpa in liberal arts....I would know), or he majored in something in math/science department and lacked effort (which could easily explain a low 3.0 gpa).

[09042014]

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college.

You should.

[whymeohgodno]

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college.

You should.

URM modern dance major at Columbia vs premed student at some TTT state school.

Both with low to mid 3.0 gpa's.

[Patriot1208]

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college.

You should.

As a general rule, yes, of course it's not guaranteed, but generally Columbia students will do better than SUNY Buffalo.

[whymeohgodno]

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college.

You should.

As a general rule, yes, of course it's not guaranteed, but generally Columbia students will do better than SUNY Buffalo.

Do you guys know how hard it is to get a sub 3.0 gpa as a liberal arts major? It's seriously mind blowing how lazy you have to be. You probably have to never show up to any class + not even prep for any tests to get a sub 3.0.

[Patriot1208]

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college.

You should.

As a general rule, yes, of course it's not guaranteed, but generally Columbia students will do better than SUNY Buffalo.

Do you guys know how hard it is to get a sub 3.0 gpa as a liberal arts major? It's seriously mind blowing how lazy you have to be. You probably have to never show up to any class + not even prep for any tests to get a sub 3.0.[/quote]

Probably true, although my grades are actually worse in my Poli Sci major than my Finance major.

[beachbum]

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college.

You should.

URM modern dance major at Columbia vs premed student at some TTT state school.

Both with low to mid 3.0 gpa's.

Yeah, it's like this one time I heard about this guy from Columbia who got a 156 on the LSAT, and there was this other guy who went to ITT Tech (lol!) who got a 173!!!11

...My point is that Columbia matriculates a smarter, more talented student body than almost any other college in the country. Again, this is reflected in their average LSAT score that is predictably higher than almost any other college in the country. Is the OP guaranteed a high score because of his undergrad? Of course not. But it's far more likely that he's a smart, gifted individual- and thus more likely to have a higher ceiling on the LSAT. Couple the probability of intelligence with a good work ethic and I don't see why a 170 is unreasonable.

[whymeohgodno]

Yeah, it's like this one time I heard about this guy from Columbia who got a 156 on the LSAT, and there was this other guy who went to ITT Tech (lol!) who got a 173!!!11

...My point is that Columbia matriculates a smarter, more talented student body than almost any other college in the country. Again, this is reflected in their average LSAT score that is predictably higher than almost any other college in the country. Is the OP guaranteed a high score because of his undergrad? Of course not. But it's far more likely that he's a smart, gifted individual- and thus more likely to have a higher ceiling on the LSAT. Couple the probability of intelligence with a good work ethic and I don't see why a 170 is unreasonable.

Anyone who isn't braindead or just completely skipped every single class and didn't open a book for finals can get above 3.0 gpa in any liberal arts major at any college without breaking a sweat.

[sporkdevil]

I'm a really brilliant student. All my professors have applauded and liked my work, my ideas and my ability of analysis. I realistically believe I can pull off a 170 for LSATs.

1. I love how humble you are. It's a great aspect.

2. If you can realistically pull a 170 (probably a long shot) then yes, applying is worth it.

3. If you have to ask, you probably aren't into it, and are probably one of the people who drop out early first year, because they just aren't that into it.

Rethink what you want to do. I was prepared to go to law school regardless of what happened in the application process. I've seen too many people drop out because they went to school based on their score or what they had some impulse to do. The question "Should I even apply to law school?" is: "No, not unless you want to waste a lot of time and money."

[beachbum]

Yeah, it's like this one time I heard about this guy from Columbia who got a 156 on the LSAT, and there was this other guy who went to ITT Tech (lol!) who got a 173!!!11

...My point is that Columbia matriculates a smarter, more talented student body than almost any other college in the country. Again, this is reflected in their average LSAT score that is predictably higher than almost any other college in the country. Is the OP guaranteed a high score because of his undergrad? Of course not. But it's far more likely that he's a smart, gifted individual- and thus more likely to have a higher ceiling on the LSAT. Couple the probability of intelligence with a good work ethic and I don't see why a 170 is unreasonable.

Anyone who isn't braindead or just completely skipped every single class and didn't open a book for finals can get above 3.0 gpa in any liberal arts major at any college without breaking a sweat.

Weren't you the one who was laughing at any correlation between high school grades/test scores (and thus quality of undergrad) and LSAT score? But college grades are totally different, right?

And didn't the OP say he had major personal issues that brought down his GPA? And before these issues he was doing well?

[jdhopeful11]

I'm a really brilliant student. All my professors have applauded and liked my work, my ideas and my ability of analysis.

[blink]

There is a reason that better schools are higher represented in better law schools.

On the whole. It doesn't translate into the individual level.

Just because some guy goes to Columbia doesn't mean I would expect him to do better on the LSAT than someone going to a community college. And since this guy has a shit gpa from Columbia the only way he is "brilliant" would be if he lacks discipline (even though it's pretty hard to lack discipline and get a low 3.0 gpa in liberal arts....I would know), or he majored in something in math/science department and lacked effort (which could easily explain a low 3.0 gpa).

You need to pull your head out of your ass.

Yeah, it's like this one time I heard about this guy from Columbia who got a 156 on the LSAT, and there was this other guy who went to ITT Tech (lol!) who got a 173!!!11

...My point is that Columbia matriculates a smarter, more talented student body than almost any other college in the country. Again, this is reflected in their average LSAT score that is predictably higher than almost any other college in the country. Is the OP guaranteed a high score because of his undergrad? Of course not. But it's far more likely that he's a smart, gifted individual- and thus more likely to have a higher ceiling on the LSAT. Couple the probability of intelligence with a good work ethic and I don't see why a 170 is unreasonable.

Anyone who isn't braindead or just completely skipped every single class and didn't open a book for finals can get above 3.0 gpa in any liberal arts major at any college without breaking a sweat.

Weren't you the one who was laughing at any correlation between high school grades/test scores (and thus quality of undergrad) and LSAT score? But college grades are totally different, right?

And didn't the OP say he had major personal issues that brought down his GPA? And before these issues he was doing well?

This.

[cjp2157]

Sorry for replying so late!!!
Thanks a ton to everyone who gave a serious response

And to everyone else, wow.. I didn't know my post would be dissected so thoroughly. It's an internet message board.. I didn't think what I said would be taken so seriously.

I'm not an arrogant person. My original post was only to stress that I really think I can do well on the LSAT despite my grades. If you must know, my sub 3.0 GPA is b/c I was at a point where I was suicidal. I was at a point where it was very difficult to carry on my daily life.. so attending class and handing in assignments became incredibly difficult. What I did turn in received strong marks, but absences and missed assignments took a huge toll on my grades. I had a string of C's and D's that killed my GPA. The issues I suffered and still suffer from to an extent make it really difficult to do my best work.

I only stated that I'm "brilliant" really in an attempt to plead my case I guess.. I'm sorry if it came off as if I was arrogant and thought I was better than anyone else.
I know where I got into undergrad tells nothing of my level of intelligence. How grammatically correct my posts on this board are also mean very little. On that note, my preference for law school is not dictated by a rankings list.
If such things meant so much to me, I would have went to Harvard or Princeton instead of Columbia. I just want to get into a good law school. If I really am "brilliant" the rest will take care of itself, right? ( jk)

But once again, thanks SOOOOO much to those who helped me out. I'll be taking a practice test soon to gauge my ability and if it looks good, I'll study my ass off. If not, I'll rethink my plans.