Top Law Schools

Knowing this forum, I predict a flood of choosing threads that contain the words "I'm not taking the LSAT. It's not even an option, so please don't even say 'take.' I want to go to this year. I really just need to start my life, and studying for the LSAT just doesn't work for me."

Probably not going to get a merit scholarship though if you go this route. It might make sense for who have extremely pristine resumes and UG credentials who could get to HYS and not need a merit scholarship (because of need-based aid).

But yeah, I agree Ricky, this will spawn a big group of pseudo reverse-splitters who won't do a "take."

Is this the beginning of them phasing out the test?

Of course they shouldn't. They're way too smart to take the test. duhhhh

Will T-14 seriously utilize this? Are they that shameless?

notalobbyist wrote:Will T-14 seriously utilize this? Are they that shameless?

Why wouldn't they?

I'm confused/clueless - what would even make a school want to fill up to 10% of its incoming class with students who didn't take the LSAT? And what could make an applicant so attractive even without an LSAT that a school would take them (other than my cynical first instinct of "Donor Dollars from Daddy"?)

ScottRiqui wrote:I'm confused/clueless - what would even make a school want to fill up to 10% of its incoming class with students who didn't take the LSAT? And what could make an applicant so attractive even without an LSAT that a school would take them (other than my cynical first instinct of "Donor Dollars from Daddy"?)

URMS

A school would want to use 10% of its class on people with no LSATs if those individuals can provide them with exceptionally high GPAs. Even the T14 schools need to have GPA medians as high as possible for USNWR.

This is going to be used almost exclusively for urns, watch.

This could be really good news for splitters though. If, by default, 10% of every class starts with 4.0s who have effectively 120 LSATs, you'd think that creates some extra wiggle room in that bottom 25% GPA percentile.

ETA: On a more cynical note, this could be a maneuver to increase class sizes.

Will_McAvoy wrote:This could be really good news for splitters though. If, by default, 10% of every class starts with 4.0s who have effectively 120 LSATs, you'd think that creates some extra wiggle room in that bottom 25% GPA percentile.

ETA: On a more cynical note, this could be a maneuver to increase class sizes.

This is def to increase class sizes. What other reason could it be? Time to sucker more people into law who never considered the career long term enough to plan for LSAT and just want to apply on a whim.

Will_McAvoy wrote:This could be really good news for splitters though. If, by default, 10% of every class starts with 4.0s who have effectively 120 LSATs, you'd think that creates some extra wiggle room in that bottom 25% GPA percentile.

ETA: On a more cynical note, this could be a maneuver to increase class sizes.

For averaging purposes though, will those without an LSAT count towards the incoming class LSAT medians? How would this work?

rahulg91 wrote:
For averaging purposes though, will those without an LSAT count towards the incoming class LSAT medians? How would this work?

Averaging, by definition, is completely separate from medians. Furthermore, most law schools release only their medians and not their averages.

I would guess that students without LSATs would 1) affect GPA medians only, or 2) not be counted toward any medians at all.

Is this good for splitters?

That's a funny article. It's pretty bold for a Hamline Law professor to turn his nose up at the prospect of students getting legal jobs.

Bildungsroman wrote:That's a funny article. It's pretty bold for a Hamline Law professor to turn his nose up at the prospect of students getting legal jobs.

It's more akin to the NCAA preventing players from getting paid.