Top Law Schools

The ABA is considering dropping the LSAT. Check out this article:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011 ... s_use_lsat

Do you think the ABA will do it?

It would be truly pathetic if law schools threw away the only objective measure of law school aptitude.

Who cares if the ABA does it. They quite clearly don't control anything. It's all about the rankings, and USNWR won't drop it because it is their livelihood.

albusdumbledore wrote:Who cares if the ABA does it. They quite clearly don't control anything. It's all about the rankings, and USNWR won't drop it because it is their livelihood.

Exactly. The ABA can make all the changes they want (although dropping the LSAT will only create more shitty law schools/students), but USNWR has the real final say.

vtoodler wrote:Will Law Schools Drop the LSAT Requirement?

Cooley and Regent probably will.

Northwestern?

I will be so pissed if they do.

my god. this is terrifying.

as someone who has taken the lsat 4 times...and has spilled blood, sweat, and tears (all literally)

this is fucking outrage

dextermorgan wrote:

albusdumbledore wrote:Who cares if the ABA does it. They quite clearly don't control anything. It's all about the rankings, and USNWR won't drop it because it is their livelihood.

Exactly. The ABA can make all the changes they want (although dropping the LSAT will only create more shitty law schools/students), but USNWR has the real final say.

This. Schools aren't going to drop their LSAT requirement. Even if you make the LSAT optional, there's going to be a bloodbath in admissions - they'll take 4.0s and otherwise auto-ding you for not having taken it, I would bet.

The LSAT is worthless.

They should drop the LSAT. If there's one thing that law schools need more of, it's 4.0 UGPA political science majors.

After all, GPA is what truly measures intellect!

I say, drop GPA as a consideration and go all LSAT.

gregthomas77 wrote:I say, drop GPA as a consideration and go all LSAT.

I really feel like this is what the schools would like to do.

Maybe TLS is full of HYPSM undergrads, but I really don't think you ppl realize how worthless an astronomical GPA in Women's Inter-ethnic Studies from State U. really is.

Yeah right

flcath wrote:Maybe TLS is full of HYPSM undergrads

What the fuck is the M doing? Is he like the creepy guy in the sorority girl pic?

what is the M?

d34dluk3 wrote:

flcath wrote:Maybe TLS is full of HYPSM undergrads

What the fuck is the M doing? Is he like the creepy guy in the sorority girl pic?

If the M is MIT, he won't be in many pictures with girls. (I kid.)

funkytown wrote:

d34dluk3 wrote:

flcath wrote:Maybe TLS is full of HYPSM undergrads

What the fuck is the M doing? Is he like the creepy guy in the sorority girl pic?

If the M is MIT, he won't be in many pictures with girls. (I kid.)

The M is in fact MIT.

(Since you have already preempted any joke I might now make, that's everything I had to say.)

Wow WTF.. well, doesn't NU already allow joint and single program (law) students to get in w/o LSAT? So there must have already been a loophole for this 'requirement' anyway. I can't imagine that schools will stop relying on LSAT though (at least unless a different test is developed) because it is prob a much more accurate predictor of law school success and ability than UGPA IMO.
I think also Michigan and a few other schools allow admits without LSAT for some of there students who went there for UG no?

Just like in public schools, high school, and undergraduate studies, standardized testing is overly emphasized. By emphasizing the LSAT, GRE, SAT, and any other test, we teach to the test, not to intelligence. Intelligence and work ethic could be best measured by taking a few minutes to look at each student's accomplishments. Instead, many choose standardized testing because looking at a score generated by one test is much easier than configuring a way to quantify each student's achievements displayed on their resume or transcript.

DCLaw11 wrote:configuring a way to quantify each student's achievements displayed on their resume or transcript.

So you'd rather teach to how best to configure a resume and transcript?

d34dluk3 wrote:

DCLaw11 wrote:configuring a way to quantify each student's achievements displayed on their resume or transcript.

So you'd rather teach to how best to configure a resume and transcript?

Why not? At least then the person would have experience in working, volunteering, or other meaningful activities where experiences are gained. My opinion is that we do not put enough emphasis on what people do and what they gain from it. Instead, we look at a numerical score because it is easily quantifiable.

I don't believe they will.

All other Grad, professional programs have standardized tests. To drop LSAT would just simply be outrageous, and would diminish law school community.

T6Hopeful wrote:

dextermorgan wrote:

albusdumbledore wrote:Who cares if the ABA does it. They quite clearly don't control anything. It's all about the rankings, and USNWR won't drop it because it is their livelihood.

Exactly. The ABA can make all the changes they want (although dropping the LSAT will only create more shitty law schools/students), but USNWR has the real final say.

This. Schools aren't going to drop their LSAT requirement. Even if you make the LSAT optional, there's going to be a bloodbath in admissions - they'll take 4.0s and otherwise auto-ding you for not having taken it, I would bet.

Each school would be more than happy to accept high GPAs without LSATS. It'd actually be a boon for people with high GPAs and would slowly erode the importance of LSATs over time. USNWR would be required to change their criteria due to the flood of applicants without LSATs.

Edit: Seriously though, wouldn't this be great? Law schools would be more free to admit people according to what they thought made a good student and future alumni rather than what USNWR tells them.