Can anyone evaluate my softs? Forum

[Aside]

Thanks

[mornincounselor]

Softs are really of limited utility in the law school application process. It's the kind of thing where if your softs are good enough to make any difference, you won't have to ask about them. Your's will not make any difference to your application prospects -- it's really just all about the LSAT.

One obstacle you might face, however, is law schools generally require four-year degrees. I'm not sure if you're three-year degree might be an issue. Another issue is international students tend to be limited in the types of jobs they can get in the US. But with (presumably) no numerical GPA it all comes down to your performance on the LSAT. There are great resources here which can help you get a score.

Best of luck,

[Aside]

Softs are really of limited utility in the law school application process. It's the kind of thing where if your softs are good enough to make any difference, you won't have to ask about them. Your's will not make any difference to your application prospects -- it's really just all about the LSAT.

One obstacle you might face, however, is law schools generally require four-year degrees. I'm not sure if you're three-year degree might be an issue. Another issue is international students tend to be limited in the types of jobs they can get in the US. But with (presumably) no numerical GPA it all comes down to your performance on the LSAT. There are great resources here which can help you get a score.

Best of luck,

Thanks for the response. Actually, my univ is a well-respected 4 year Canadian univ. I just finished everything in 3 years, including the thesis defence. I think where I was going with my post was to ask if my subpar softs will hurt my application.

But I get your point. Thanks.

[SullivanLSAC]

Aside:

I disagree with mornincounselor’s assessment of your softs. I think the package of softs that you present will help you a great deal.

“Softs” are more than just your extracurricular college activities. Yes, being president of some club is a nice soft, but law schools think of “softs” as things that define you, that helped make you into the person you are, and that help them build a class of interesting people with diverse interests and perspectives that can be used to enhance the law school learning experience for your classmates. They certainly help your application prospects, and the absence of them can doom you. There are a lot of 170/3.8s walking around law schools with medians well below those numbers because all they had to show for 4 years of college was a good LSAT score, a good GPA, and a bad hangover. People like that get rejected all the time and their applications get passed down the rankings until some place picks them up because for that school the numbers are irresistible.

You have so many softs that fit my broad definition that I hardly know where to begin. You’re a foreigner, and not just from England or France, but from South Korea, which makes you doubly interesting, as it has few representatives in the U.S. legal profession. You’re older, you’re married, and you even have a child – all unusual in law schools, and so of interest to admissions committees. You studied in Canada, at a school that almost necessarily (i) has a perspective on many subjects that is different from that of the many U.S. schools that will be sending students to law school; and (ii) is underrepresented at U.S. law schools. And, of course, you put together a collection of interesting jobs. I know, you weren’t a cancer researcher, but you have established a work ethic beyond that which a GPA can show, and you have gained life experiences that few law students will have. In short, you bring a lot to the table, and any law school would love to have your collection of perspectives in its classrooms.

Unless you screw up the LSAT, that is. Mornincouselor’s right about that. No soft is so good that you can get into a law school with median LSAT (and GPA) numbers substantially above yours. But if you present your softs well in your personal statement (try to hit all the bases), I see you getting into every law school at which your LSAT score (and GPA) are at or above its 25th percentile.

Good luck.

Dan Sullivan

[Traynor Brah]

Aside:

I disagree with mornincounselor’s assessment of your softs. I think the package of softs that you present will help you a great deal.

“Softs” are more than just your extracurricular college activities. Yes, being president of some club is a nice soft, but law schools think of “softs” as things that define you, that helped make you into the person you are, and that help them build a class of interesting people with diverse interests and perspectives that can be used to enhance the law school learning experience for your classmates. They certainly help your application prospects, and the absence of them can doom you. There are a lot of 170/3.8s walking around law schools with medians well below those numbers because all they had to show for 4 years of college was a good LSAT score, a good GPA, and a bad hangover. People like that get rejected all the time and their applications get passed down the rankings until some place picks them up because for that school the numbers are irresistible.

You have so many softs that fit my broad definition that I hardly know where to begin. You’re a foreigner, and not just from England or France, but from South Korea, which makes you doubly interesting, as it has few representatives in the U.S. legal profession. You’re older, you’re married, and you even have a child – all unusual in law schools, and so of interest to admissions committees. You studied in Canada, at a school that almost necessarily (i) has a perspective on many subjects that is different from that of the many U.S. schools that will be sending students to law school; and (ii) is underrepresented at U.S. law schools. And, of course, you put together a collection of interesting jobs. I know, you weren’t a cancer researcher, but you have established a work ethic beyond that which a GPA can show, and you have gained life experiences that few law students will have. In short, you bring a lot to the table, and any law school would love to have your collection of perspectives in its classrooms.

Unless you screw up the LSAT, that is. Mornincouselor’s right about that. No soft is so good that you can get into a law school with median LSAT (and GPA) numbers substantially above yours. But if you present your softs well in your personal statement (try to hit all the bases), I see you getting into every law school at which your LSAT score (and GPA) are at or above its 25th percentile.

Good luck.

Dan Sullivan

Note that this guy wants you to pay him for admissions counseling, so he's likely to be inclined to claim that GPA/LSAT aren't the vast majority of the admissions puzzle (when we have a decade of solid data to indicate that they in fact are).

Either way, don't worry about "softs" at all right now. Worry about killing the LSAT.

[Goldchain]

Hi, I'm an international student intending to apply for law school in the upcoming fall.
I'm a bit of an unconventional student in the sense that I quit school at the age of 20 and returned to school at 27 and graduated with an honours degree in 3 years (including an honours thesis on a legal topic).

My work experiences consist of:

- 4 years of teaching English in South Korea (I did this just for a living, nothing special).
- 2 years of working at a borough office (this is where it gets tricky; as some of you may already know, all Korean men are required to serve in the army for 2 years, but due to my health issues, I was exempted from military service and instead was stationed to work at a nearby borough office as a public service worker. I was required to work there full-time for full 2 years. I'm not sure if this will also be considered a soft).
- 3 years of working as an academic advisor at my univ.
- 1/2 year of working as a research assistant for one of the profs in our faculty.

Also, some of my volunteer experiences include:

- 1 full month of full-time volunteer work in a mayoral election campaign (this was back in Korea).
- Volunteer work at a nursing home once every month for 6 years while I was in Korea.


I think all of these experiences that I have seem pretty subpar compared to a lot of stellar softs I've seen around here and I'd like a blunt evaluation of my softs. I'm 30 now, married, and have a 2 year old son as well, if that's relevant.

Thanks

Your softs are better than some KJD candidates but on a scale of 1-10 your softs are probably just slightly above average. Rare and highly unusual softs, urm status, unique socioeconomic factors, and splitters typically make up most of the candidates who are above both 25th benchmark but below median who end up accepted at top tier law schools (a statement in respectful disagreement with Sullivan). I'll make a tier of softs for you:

Elite Softs: Olympic Medal, Wrote best selling book, Grammy, Rhodes Scholar, Nobel Peace Prize Winner

Great Softs: Teach for America, Peace Corps, PH.D.

Average Softs: President of Fraternity, post college work experience, president of a college club or 2

Your softs are much closer to Average than great but if you have an above median gpa and LSAT you'll probably get in most of the places where you apply. LSAT is King. Softs are mere icing on the cake unless you have elite game changing softs.

[mornincounselor]

Aside:

I disagree with mornincounselor’s assessment of your softs. I think the package of softs that you present will help you a great deal.

“Softs” are more than just your extracurricular college activities. Yes, being president of some club is a nice soft, but law schools think of “softs” as things that define you, that helped make you into the person you are, and that help them build a class of interesting people with diverse interests and perspectives that can be used to enhance the law school learning experience for your classmates. They certainly help your application prospects, and the absence of them can doom you. There are a lot of 170/3.8s walking around law schools with medians well below those numbers because all they had to show for 4 years of college was a good LSAT score, a good GPA, and a bad hangover. People like that get rejected all the time and their applications get passed down the rankings until some place picks them up because for that school the numbers are irresistible.

You have so many softs that fit my broad definition that I hardly know where to begin. You’re a foreigner, and not just from England or France, but from South Korea, which makes you doubly interesting, as it has few representatives in the U.S. legal profession. You’re older, you’re married, and you even have a child – all unusual in law schools, and so of interest to admissions committees. You studied in Canada, at a school that almost necessarily (i) has a perspective on many subjects that is different from that of the many U.S. schools that will be sending students to law school; and (ii) is underrepresented at U.S. law schools. And, of course, you put together a collection of interesting jobs. I know, you weren’t a cancer researcher, but you have established a work ethic beyond that which a GPA can show, and you have gained life experiences that few law students will have. In short, you bring a lot to the table, and any law school would love to have your collection of perspectives in its classrooms.

Unless you screw up the LSAT, that is. Mornincouselor’s right about that. No soft is so good that you can get into a law school with median LSAT (and GPA) numbers substantially above yours. But if you present your softs well in your personal statement (try to hit all the bases), I see you getting into every law school at which your LSAT score (and GPA) are at or above its 25th percentile.

Good luck.

Dan Sullivan

Note that this guy wants you to pay him for admissions counseling, so he's likely to be inclined to claim that GPA/LSAT aren't the vast majority of the admissions puzzle (when we have a decade of solid data to indicate that they in fact are).

Either way, don't worry about "softs" at all right now. Worry about killing the LSAT.

@SullivanLSAC are you somehow affiliated with the Law School Admission Council? If so, are you speaking in your official capacity as a part of that organization? If the answer to either of those questions are "no" you really ought to change your username. I'm always confused when I see you posting, and I'd hate to think other posters are misled by this apparent affiliation.

[eagle2a]

just do well on the lsat and you'll be good

[SullivanLSAC]

Aside:

I disagree with mornincounselor’s assessment of your softs. I think the package of softs that you present will help you a great deal.

“Softs” are more than just your extracurricular college activities. Yes, being president of some club is a nice soft, but law schools think of “softs” as things that define you, that helped make you into the person you are, and that help them build a class of interesting people with diverse interests and perspectives that can be used to enhance the law school learning experience for your classmates. They certainly help your application prospects, and the absence of them can doom you. There are a lot of 170/3.8s walking around law schools with medians well below those numbers because all they had to show for 4 years of college was a good LSAT score, a good GPA, and a bad hangover. People like that get rejected all the time and their applications get passed down the rankings until some place picks them up because for that school the numbers are irresistible.

You have so many softs that fit my broad definition that I hardly know where to begin. You’re a foreigner, and not just from England or France, but from South Korea, which makes you doubly interesting, as it has few representatives in the U.S. legal profession. You’re older, you’re married, and you even have a child – all unusual in law schools, and so of interest to admissions committees. You studied in Canada, at a school that almost necessarily (i) has a perspective on many subjects that is different from that of the many U.S. schools that will be sending students to law school; and (ii) is underrepresented at U.S. law schools. And, of course, you put together a collection of interesting jobs. I know, you weren’t a cancer researcher, but you have established a work ethic beyond that which a GPA can show, and you have gained life experiences that few law students will have. In short, you bring a lot to the table, and any law school would love to have your collection of perspectives in its classrooms.

Unless you screw up the LSAT, that is. Mornincouselor’s right about that. No soft is so good that you can get into a law school with median LSAT (and GPA) numbers substantially above yours. But if you present your softs well in your personal statement (try to hit all the bases), I see you getting into every law school at which your LSAT score (and GPA) are at or above its 25th percentile.

Good luck.

Dan Sullivan

Note that this guy wants you to pay him for admissions counseling, so he's likely to be inclined to claim that GPA/LSAT aren't the vast majority of the admissions puzzle (when we have a decade of solid data to indicate that they in fact are).

Either way, don't worry about "softs" at all right now. Worry about killing the LSAT.

@SullivanLSAC are you somehow affiliated with the Law School Admission Council? If so, are you speaking in your official capacity as a part of that organization? If the answer to either of those questions are "no" you really ought to change your username. I'm always confused when I see you posting, and I'd hate to think other posters are misled by this apparent affiliation.

No, I am in no way affiliated with the Law School Admission Council. That is the acronym for my business. It has, to my knowledge, never confused anyone else. In any event, I have identified myself fully in the user profile on this site, so no one would be confused for long.

[SullivanLSAC]

Aside:

I disagree with mornincounselor’s assessment of your softs. I think the package of softs that you present will help you a great deal.

“Softs” are more than just your extracurricular college activities. Yes, being president of some club is a nice soft, but law schools think of “softs” as things that define you, that helped make you into the person you are, and that help them build a class of interesting people with diverse interests and perspectives that can be used to enhance the law school learning experience for your classmates. They certainly help your application prospects, and the absence of them can doom you. There are a lot of 170/3.8s walking around law schools with medians well below those numbers because all they had to show for 4 years of college was a good LSAT score, a good GPA, and a bad hangover. People like that get rejected all the time and their applications get passed down the rankings until some place picks them up because for that school the numbers are irresistible.

You have so many softs that fit my broad definition that I hardly know where to begin. You’re a foreigner, and not just from England or France, but from South Korea, which makes you doubly interesting, as it has few representatives in the U.S. legal profession. You’re older, you’re married, and you even have a child – all unusual in law schools, and so of interest to admissions committees. You studied in Canada, at a school that almost necessarily (i) has a perspective on many subjects that is different from that of the many U.S. schools that will be sending students to law school; and (ii) is underrepresented at U.S. law schools. And, of course, you put together a collection of interesting jobs. I know, you weren’t a cancer researcher, but you have established a work ethic beyond that which a GPA can show, and you have gained life experiences that few law students will have. In short, you bring a lot to the table, and any law school would love to have your collection of perspectives in its classrooms.

Unless you screw up the LSAT, that is. Mornincouselor’s right about that. No soft is so good that you can get into a law school with median LSAT (and GPA) numbers substantially above yours. But if you present your softs well in your personal statement (try to hit all the bases), I see you getting into every law school at which your LSAT score (and GPA) are at or above its 25th percentile.

Good luck.

Dan Sullivan

Note that this guy wants you to pay him for admissions counseling, so he's likely to be inclined to claim that GPA/LSAT aren't the vast majority of the admissions puzzle (when we have a decade of solid data to indicate that they in fact are).

Either way, don't worry about "softs" at all right now. Worry about killing the LSAT.

I don't appreciate the suggestion that my advice is slanted by self-interest. In any event, if you read the final paragraph of my post, you will see that I actually infer (at least) that the GPA/LSAT ARE, in fact, the "vast majority" of the admissions "puzzle," and nowhere do I "claim," or even suggest, otherwise. Softs are important. Anyone who claims otherwise just doesn't have any.

"This guy"

[TLSDookie]

Great Softs: Teach for America, Peace Corps, PH.D.

Average Softs: President of Fraternity, post college work experience, president of a college club or 2

Your softs are much closer to Average than great but if you have an above median gpa and LSAT you'll probably get in most of the places where you apply. LSAT is King. Softs are mere icing on the cake unless you have elite game changing softs.

Not the first time I've seen this refrain around TLS that Teach for America is somehow an above average soft. What's the reasoning here? In my experience, all anecdata from friends, people who TFA tend to be people who have no idea how else to spend the years immediately following undergrad and don't want to begin a career. Why would that be preferable to a candidate who has shown a consistent interest in studying a law in their work experience (I.e. Being an R.A. For a law professor, being a paralegal)?

[Goldchain]

Great Softs: Teach for America, Peace Corps, PH.D.

Average Softs: President of Fraternity, post college work experience, president of a college club or 2

Your softs are much closer to Average than great but if you have an above median gpa and LSAT you'll probably get in most of the places where you apply. LSAT is King. Softs are mere icing on the cake unless you have elite game changing softs.

Not the first time I've seen this refrain around TLS that Teach for America is somehow an above average soft. What's the reasoning here? In my experience, all anecdata from friends, people who TFA tend to be people who have no idea how else to spend the years immediately following undergrad and don't want to begin a career. Why would that be preferable to a candidate who has shown a consistent interest in studying a law in their work experience (I.e. Being an R.A. For a law professor, being a paralegal)?

working for a law firm/ law professor is fairly common amongst students who eventually decide to attend law school to become lawyers. It is a soft but it doesn't stand out from the crowd. It's equivalent to someone who wants to be a teacher deciding to shadow a teacher or substitute teach first for experience. That's fine and dandy but doesn't make you more special than others who do the same. TFA is a competitive, highly regarded national organization that hires young proven leaders/talent. It's almost like selection bias (all of those people must be awesome to go through a program like that so we should get a couple of em)... Goldman Sachs, Google, Apple and the like get similar regard if your numbers already make you pretty competitive.

[Aside]

Thanks everyone for your responses. I really appreciate it.
I'm actually quite grateful that my softs are at least not below average. I honestly thought that given my age and all, my softs would be more on the subpar side.

[Aside]

Hi, I'm an international student intending to apply for law school in the upcoming fall.
I'm a bit of an unconventional student in the sense that I quit school at the age of 20 and returned to school at 27 and graduated with an honours degree in 3 years (including an honours thesis on a legal topic).

My work experiences consist of:

- 4 years of teaching English in South Korea (I did this just for a living, nothing special).
- 2 years of working at a borough office (this is where it gets tricky; as some of you may already know, all Korean men are required to serve in the army for 2 years, but due to my health issues, I was exempted from military service and instead was stationed to work at a nearby borough office as a public service worker. I was required to work there full-time for full 2 years. I'm not sure if this will also be considered a soft).
- 3 years of working as an academic advisor at my univ.
- 1/2 year of working as a research assistant for one of the profs in our faculty.

Also, some of my volunteer experiences include:

- 1 full month of full-time volunteer work in a mayoral election campaign (this was back in Korea).
- Volunteer work at a nursing home once every month for 6 years while I was in Korea.


I think all of these experiences that I have seem pretty subpar compared to a lot of stellar softs I've seen around here and I'd like a blunt evaluation of my softs. I'm 30 now, married, and have a 2 year old son as well, if that's relevant.

Thanks

Your softs are better than some KJD candidates but on a scale of 1-10 your softs are probably just slightly above average. Rare and highly unusual softs, urm status, unique socioeconomic factors, and splitters typically make up most of the candidates who are above both 25th benchmark but below median who end up accepted at top tier law schools (a statement in respectful disagreement with Sullivan). I'll make a tier of softs for you:

Elite Softs: Olympic Medal, Wrote best selling book, Grammy, Rhodes Scholar, Nobel Peace Prize Winner

Great Softs: Teach for America, Peace Corps, PH.D.

Average Softs: President of Fraternity, post college work experience, president of a college club or 2

Your softs are much closer to Average than great but if you have an above median gpa and LSAT you'll probably get in most of the places where you apply. LSAT is King. Softs are mere icing on the cake unless you have elite game changing softs.

If you don't mind, could you elaborate on that part please?

[Aside]

Aside:

I disagree with mornincounselor’s assessment of your softs. I think the package of softs that you present will help you a great deal.

“Softs” are more than just your extracurricular college activities. Yes, being president of some club is a nice soft, but law schools think of “softs” as things that define you, that helped make you into the person you are, and that help them build a class of interesting people with diverse interests and perspectives that can be used to enhance the law school learning experience for your classmates. They certainly help your application prospects, and the absence of them can doom you. There are a lot of 170/3.8s walking around law schools with medians well below those numbers because all they had to show for 4 years of college was a good LSAT score, a good GPA, and a bad hangover. People like that get rejected all the time and their applications get passed down the rankings until some place picks them up because for that school the numbers are irresistible.

You have so many softs that fit my broad definition that I hardly know where to begin. You’re a foreigner, and not just from England or France, but from South Korea, which makes you doubly interesting, as it has few representatives in the U.S. legal profession. You’re older, you’re married, and you even have a child – all unusual in law schools, and so of interest to admissions committees. You studied in Canada, at a school that almost necessarily (i) has a perspective on many subjects that is different from that of the many U.S. schools that will be sending students to law school; and (ii) is underrepresented at U.S. law schools. And, of course, you put together a collection of interesting jobs. I know, you weren’t a cancer researcher, but you have established a work ethic beyond that which a GPA can show, and you have gained life experiences that few law students will have. In short, you bring a lot to the table, and any law school would love to have your collection of perspectives in its classrooms.

Unless you screw up the LSAT, that is. Mornincouselor’s right about that. No soft is so good that you can get into a law school with median LSAT (and GPA) numbers substantially above yours. But if you present your softs well in your personal statement (try to hit all the bases), I see you getting into every law school at which your LSAT score (and GPA) are at or above its 25th percentile.

Good luck.

Dan Sullivan

Note that this guy wants you to pay him for admissions counseling, so he's likely to be inclined to claim that GPA/LSAT aren't the vast majority of the admissions puzzle (when we have a decade of solid data to indicate that they in fact are).

Either way, don't worry about "softs" at all right now. Worry about killing the LSAT.

I don't appreciate the suggestion that my advice is slanted by self-interest. In any event, if you read the final paragraph of my post, you will see that I actually infer (at least) that the GPA/LSAT ARE, in fact, the "vast majority" of the admissions "puzzle," and nowhere do I "claim," or even suggest, otherwise. Softs are important. Anyone who claims otherwise just doesn't have any.

"This guy"

I really appreciate your earnest response, Sullivan. As per your advice, I'll try to present my softs well in my personal statement. Again, thank you.

[Traynor Brah]

No, I am in no way affiliated with the Law School Admission Council. That is the acronym for my business. It has, to my knowledge, never confused anyone else. In any event, I have identified myself fully in the user profile on this site, so no one would be confused for long.

lol

No, we are in no way affiliated with Major League Baseball. This is an acronym for my business. Never confused anyone else.

[Traynor Brah]

I don't appreciate the suggestion that my advice is slanted by self-interest. In any event, if you read the final paragraph of my post, you will see that I actually infer (at least) that the GPA/LSAT ARE, in fact, the "vast majority" of the admissions "puzzle," and nowhere do I "claim," or even suggest, otherwise. Softs are important. Anyone who claims otherwise just doesn't have any.

"This guy"

I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate such a suggestion. Just making observations!

[Goldchain]

Hi, I'm an international student intending to apply for law school in the upcoming fall.
I'm a bit of an unconventional student in the sense that I quit school at the age of 20 and returned to school at 27 and graduated with an honours degree in 3 years (including an honours thesis on a legal topic).

My work experiences consist of:

- 4 years of teaching English in South Korea (I did this just for a living, nothing special).
- 2 years of working at a borough office (this is where it gets tricky; as some of you may already know, all Korean men are required to serve in the army for 2 years, but due to my health issues, I was exempted from military service and instead was stationed to work at a nearby borough office as a public service worker. I was required to work there full-time for full 2 years. I'm not sure if this will also be considered a soft).
- 3 years of working as an academic advisor at my univ.
- 1/2 year of working as a research assistant for one of the profs in our faculty.

Also, some of my volunteer experiences include:

- 1 full month of full-time volunteer work in a mayoral election campaign (this was back in Korea).
- Volunteer work at a nursing home once every month for 6 years while I was in Korea.


I think all of these experiences that I have seem pretty subpar compared to a lot of stellar softs I've seen around here and I'd like a blunt evaluation of my softs. I'm 30 now, married, and have a 2 year old son as well, if that's relevant.

Thanks

Your softs are better than some KJD candidates but on a scale of 1-10 your softs are probably just slightly above average. Rare and highly unusual softs, urm status, unique socioeconomic factors, and splitters typically make up most of the candidates who are above both 25th benchmark but below median who end up accepted at top tier law schools (a statement in respectful disagreement with Sullivan). I'll make a tier of softs for you:

Elite Softs: Olympic Medal, Wrote best selling book, Grammy, Rhodes Scholar, Nobel Peace Prize Winner

Great Softs: Teach for America, Peace Corps, PH.D.

Average Softs: President of Fraternity, post college work experience, president of a college club or 2

Your softs are much closer to Average than great but if you have an above median gpa and LSAT you'll probably get in most of the places where you apply. LSAT is King. Softs are mere icing on the cake unless you have elite game changing softs.

If you don't mind, could you elaborate on that part please?

An example is you grew up in a single mother home, then became homeless, then went to foster care because of your parent's drug issues, you dropped out of high school, somehow straightened out your life, and eventually graduated summa cum laude from MIT (or insert good reputable school). Basically you succeeded against all odds. One of my friends was like this and his cycle was absurd.

[foxes]

Working for a law firm/ law professor is fairly common amongst students who eventually decide to attend law school to become lawyers. It is a soft but it doesn't stand out from the crowd. It's equivalent to someone who wants to be a teacher deciding to shadow a teacher or substitute teach first for experience. That's fine and dandy but doesn't make you more special than others who do the same. TFA is a competitive, highly regarded national organization that hires young proven leaders/talent. It's almost like selection bias (all of those people must be awesome to go through a program like that so we should get a couple of em)... Goldman Sachs, Google, Apple and the like get similar regard if your numbers already make you pretty competitive.

I was in tfa before law school and really think you're wrong about this. TFA is not extremely competitive and "hiring proven leaders and young talent" is a pr line that doesn't match reality. The fact of the matter is that tfa is extremely common at top schools (i know at least a dozen ex tfaers personally at h) and nowhere near a great soft that will let you outperform your cycle. Is it great to have two years of well recognized work experience on your resume? Sure. But this is overblown

[Goldchain]

Working for a law firm/ law professor is fairly common amongst students who eventually decide to attend law school to become lawyers. It is a soft but it doesn't stand out from the crowd. It's equivalent to someone who wants to be a teacher deciding to shadow a teacher or substitute teach first for experience. That's fine and dandy but doesn't make you more special than others who do the same. TFA is a competitive, highly regarded national organization that hires young proven leaders/talent. It's almost like selection bias (all of those people must be awesome to go through a program like that so we should get a couple of em)... Goldman Sachs, Google, Apple and the like get similar regard if your numbers already make you pretty competitive.

I was in tfa before law school and really think you're wrong about this. TFA is not extremely competitive and "hiring proven leaders and young talent" is a pr line that doesn't match reality. The fact of the matter is that tfa is extremely common at top schools (i know at least a dozen ex tfaers personally at h) and nowhere near a great soft that will let you outperform your cycle. Is it great to have two years of well recognized work experience on your resume? Sure. But this is overblown

You made my point. TFA is really common at top schools because those people have good gpas/ stats and proved themselves. And who cares if perception isn't reality. The honest truth is the kids at Duke are probably as smart as the ones at Columbia but some top firms won't take any Duke students who are not top in their class but will go deep at Columbia. Law and law school admissions are perception fueled industries.

[Mack.Hambleton]

definitely average

[Mack.Hambleton]

Aside:



You’re a foreigner, and not just from England or France, but from South Korea, which makes you doubly interesting

ljl

[Aside]

.

[reasonable_man]

I assumed by the title of the thread that we were evaluating your non-erect penis size (which is at least as important to your law school application as any of that stuff you posted). This is a disappointing thread to say the least.

In short (no pun intended) - I don't think any of those things will have any impact on your application at all.