CLASS OF 2018 MEDIANS! (LSAT/GPA/Class Size) Forum

rnoodles · Post by **rnoodles** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:26 pm

Seamus887 wrote:
HLSorBust wrote:They might as well impose some sort of cutoff for entering law school too. A cut off of perhaps 3.80+ and 173+ should be the mandatory minimum for all law schools. It would go a long way in weeding out the less capable people pretending to be smart in order to enter a highly prestigious and intellectual field. After all, the law profession is a field for the most intelligent people in the world, and is therefore no place for stupid people.
Right... because GPA is definitely correlated with intelligence....

You sir reek of someone who failed their Underwater Basketweaving elective.

Generally · Post by **Generally** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:34 pm

Post removed.

rnoodles · Post by **rnoodles** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:39 pm

Seamus887 wrote:
rnoodles22 wrote:
Seamus887 wrote:
HLSorBust wrote:They might as well impose some sort of cutoff for entering law school too. A cut off of perhaps 3.80+ and 173+ should be the mandatory minimum for all law schools. It would go a long way in weeding out the less capable people pretending to be smart in order to enter a highly prestigious and intellectual field. After all, the law profession is a field for the most intelligent people in the world, and is therefore no place for stupid people.
Right... because GPA is definitely correlated with intelligence....
You sir reek of someone who failed their Underwater Basketweaving elective.
No I reek of someone who did not take college serious at first and sabotaged my own GPA, but after going back, I am amazed at how easy it really is to get As. The only thing an A says is you are maybe disciplined and can follow directions.

It's cool bro, just kidding around. I agreed with your first post above.

Generally · Post by **Generally** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:42 pm

Post removed.

benwyatt · Post by **benwyatt** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:43 pm

Post removed.

lhanvt13 · Post by **lhanvt13** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:19 pm

benwyatt wrote:
Seamus887 wrote:
I'm not mad, it's the truth. I am bitter about my GPA for sure haha It is so easy to get As, I want to go back and beat the crap out of young stupid me.
+1

My undergrad courses were mostly curved like law courses :/ 3As for a 60 person class and so forth until Ds

UpandDown97 · Post by **UpandDown97** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:26 pm

HLSorBust has got to be a troll. No one can honestly hold the belief that no one deserves to be a lawyer if they don't have a minimum 3.8/173.

rnoodles · Post by **rnoodles** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:29 pm

UpandDown97 wrote:HLSorBust has got to be a troll. No one can honestly hold the belief that no one deserves to be a lawyer if they don't have a minimum 3.8/173.

Personally, I think you're a failure if you score anything less than a 180. Just saying

krads153 · Post by **krads153** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:29 pm

Seamus887 wrote:
rnoodles22 wrote:
Seamus887 wrote:
HLSorBust wrote:They might as well impose some sort of cutoff for entering law school too. A cut off of perhaps 3.80+ and 173+ should be the mandatory minimum for all law schools. It would go a long way in weeding out the less capable people pretending to be smart in order to enter a highly prestigious and intellectual field. After all, the law profession is a field for the most intelligent people in the world, and is therefore no place for stupid people.
Right... because GPA is definitely correlated with intelligence....
You sir reek of someone who failed their Underwater Basketweaving elective.
No I reek of someone who did not take college serious at first and sabotaged my own GPA, but after going back, I am amazed at how easy it really is to get As. The only thing an A says is you are maybe disciplined and can follow directions.

Eh, depends on the major and school. I went to a top STEM school and average GPA for STEM was like 2.8, maybe slightly lower, since they curved to a B minus in most courses.

Generally · Post by **Generally** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:31 pm

Post removed.

Mack.Hambleton · Post by **Mack.Hambleton** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:31 pm

jk148706 wrote:where is white spider need more medians

basedvulpes · Post by **basedvulpes** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:34 pm

Post removed.

rnoodles · Post by **rnoodles** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:36 pm

basedvulpes wrote:
rnoodles22 wrote:
UpandDown97 wrote:HLSorBust has got to be a troll. No one can honestly hold the belief that no one deserves to be a lawyer if they don't have a minimum 3.8/173.
Personally, I think you're a failure if you score anything less than a 180. Just saying
If you didn't get a 180 you failed on at least a couple of questions.

How some people have the audacity to apply with a 179 or lower is beyond me.

nothingtosee · Post by **nothingtosee** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 4:57 pm

More medians less banter

benwyatt · Post by **benwyatt** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 5:02 pm

Post removed.

TheodoreKGB · Post by **TheodoreKGB** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 5:02 pm

basedvulpes · Post by **basedvulpes** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 5:03 pm

Post removed.

chuckbass · Post by **chuckbass** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 5:04 pm

Omg 0Ls suck

kjm1992 · Post by **kjm1992** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 11:52 pm

Post removed.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 12:01 am

Ron Howard wrote:Basically, they need to close down about half of the law schools in the country, and then change the structure of those ranked roughly between 80 and 20. Instead of issuing JDs--because most of the students from these schools are not receiving jobs for which a three year professional education and commensurate expense is warranted--they can issue two year Juris Masters degrees. These degrees will be sufficient for the vast majority of legal work, including small law, local government, and compliance type jobs. Meanwhile, roughly the top 20 schools will continue to issue Juris Doctors with the goal of training "higher level" legal professionals to tackle "advanced legal concerns" (read: big law, big fed, and judiciary). If, at later point in one's career, a JM is interested in pursuing more advanced legal work, they can obtain an LLM in "Advanced Legal Studies". Likewise, students who perform exceptionally well in the first year of a JM program, can transfer to a JD program, since the first year curriculums will be kept the same. This approach will help to check people's expectations, reduce debt, diminish the glut of lawyers, and restore prestige--yes prestige--to the higher echelons of the legal industry.

what kinda elitist bullshit is this. small law firms probably require significantly more legal knowledge than biglaw. your practice is way broader and you actually do substantive things right off the bat rather than being apprenticed. dont even get me started on bigfed even being fucking attorneys. half these people are incompetent and its a good thing they require people to pass the bar before they hire because im sure they were getting burned at relatively crazier rates with all the dumbs they hire.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 12:05 am

MikeJD wrote:Berkeley also increased class size by 10%, maybe if they didn't do that they would still be at 167. They must have really needed the extra revenue.

maybe they accepted roughly the same number of people but there were more acceptances this year because more people are gonna be going to law school this year.

krads153 · Post by **krads153** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:21 am

rnoodles22 wrote:
krads153 wrote: The entire university system in the US needs to be reformed though, from undergrad through grad level. As far as I'm concerned all universities are generally "for profit" scams, especially the private ones that charge like 50k tuition a year for, on average, no discernible employment benefit.
This. +100. Germany has it right cost wise, the UK has it right choice wise (A-levels, AA-levels, etc.). Hell, I don't think you can even apply to some schools in the UK if you don't have the scores for it. They will literally turn you down and bar you from applying. Bit strict and harsh (and I don't necessarily want to advocate for anything like this), but it can help cull class numbers and boost employment (however marginally or significantly) I'm sure.

In the UK, I think you apply first, interview, and if they accept you, they give you a conditional offer (so for Oxford/Cambridge and other top unis, it'd be like 3 As in A-levels relevant to your major). At other places it might be 2 As and a B, etc. You get your A-levels after the conditional offer. If you don't get the 3As, you get rejected. University is much cheaper there, you apply with a major in mind so you don't waste as much time doing irrelevant stuff, and it's only 3 years. They also don't have the "everyone deserves to go to college mentality" that is impractical in an economy that can't support so many college grads - it's all grades based, so only people who score well can go to university.

Most nations actually have a system like this (testing to weed people out at each educational level; if you don't have the grades, you can't go) - Asia is the same as Europe. Plus, they have much stronger science/math programs and rigor than we do, at least before the university level; the weeding out process at each level (elementary, junior high, high school, etc.) makes a lot of sense to me. I don't get why the US can't do something like that. The US is inclined to "baby" everyone when it doesn't even make sense for everyone to have a college degree. Right now there's too many college grads and not enough jobs. Plus the cost of college is insane.

krads153 · Post by **krads153** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:30 am

kjm1992 wrote:
rnoodles22 wrote:
krads153 wrote: The entire university system in the US needs to be reformed though, from undergrad through grad level. As far as I'm concerned all universities are generally "for profit" scams, especially the private ones that charge like 50k tuition a year for, on average, no discernible employment benefit.
This. +100. Germany has it right cost wise, the UK has it right choice wise (A-levels, AA-levels, etc.). Hell, I don't think you can even apply to some schools in the UK if you don't have the scores for it. They will literally turn you down and bar you from applying. Bit strict and harsh (and I don't necessarily want to advocate for anything like this), but it can help cull class numbers and boost employment (however marginally or significantly) I'm sure.
Fun fact: In the Netherlands, you take a test when you're like 12 which determines what level of high school/their equivalent you can be in. Only those who make it into the top level can go to grad school (including law and med school). Also, once you're in the top level, you have to pursue some kind of grad school, or you have to pay the government back, since their government basically covers tuition for all schooling. At least this is what a law student from the Netherlands told me.

Yeah, this makes a lot more sense to me. Would solve all of the problems with law in the US.

basedvulpes · Post by **basedvulpes** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:32 am

Post removed.

chuckbass · Post by **chuckbass** » Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:33 am

nothingtosee wrote:More medians less banter