Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=275183
Whew. Who would've thought that law school admissions was such a wild ridebaseballfan660 wrote:according to Dave from Powerscore it will only be Harvard this year from the T-14 most likely. The schools have to do a study first to prove their is a correlation between GRE success and Law School success.
"Doing this" meaning conduct a study or accept the GRE?grades?? wrote:Remember, its the t13. I heard speculation at my t10 today that the admin was going to meet about doing this asap.
No idea, speculation. I imagine they are gonna meet to talk about the H move and see how viable it is to implement sooner rather than later aka next year.Veil of Ignorance wrote:"Doing this" meaning conduct a study or accept the GRE?grades?? wrote:Remember, its the t13. I heard speculation at my t10 today that the admin was going to meet about doing this asap.
It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.SlackOff wrote:It's a win/win for law schools, so they'll probably all follow in suit eventually...
As a splitter, I'm probably going to actually fucking cry if they do.
Pure anecdotal but I never gave law school real consideration because I didn't want to invest time & energy to LSAT. But now I'm giving it more thought because a JD could be beneficial for my career. Same with a couple of my friends I talked with at HBS & HKS who are now thinking of pursuing dual degrees.Npret wrote:It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.SlackOff wrote:It's a win/win for law schools, so they'll probably all follow in suit eventually...
As a splitter, I'm probably going to actually fucking cry if they do.
I'm surprised people don't seem happier about this decision.
Because the legal market definitely isn't over-saturated as it stands...Npret wrote:It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.SlackOff wrote:It's a win/win for law schools, so they'll probably all follow in suit eventually...
As a splitter, I'm probably going to actually fucking cry if they do.
I'm surprised people don't seem happier about this decision.
I don't understand how this makes more lawyers? I thought people were upset that their personal chances at becoming lawyers could be harmed?lymenheimer wrote:Because the legal market definitely isn't over-saturated as it stands...Npret wrote:It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.SlackOff wrote:It's a win/win for law schools, so they'll probably all follow in suit eventually...
As a splitter, I'm probably going to actually fucking cry if they do.
I'm surprised people don't seem happier about this decision.
Yea. I'm slightly conflating. And making broad assumptions. But if other schools follow, kids will get bumped down: H-GRE kids will bump out some [previous] H-LSAT kids. Who will bump kids lower down. There are some schools that won't think twice about taking on more tuition payers = more law students -> grads -> lawyers.Npret wrote:I don't understand how this makes more lawyers? I thought people were upset that their personal chances at becoming lawyers could be harmed?lymenheimer wrote: Because the legal market definitely isn't over-saturated as it stands...
You mean lower schools being able to admit on GRE? Don't quite follow.
Well...Npret wrote: It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.
I'm surprised people don't seem happier about this decision.
This.lymenheimer wrote: Because the legal market definitely isn't over-saturated as it stands...
Why would it be really bad for LSAT? Business schools accept GRE but applicants predominantly still take GMAT.Po$eidon wrote:As someone who teaches LSAT it's pretty much a disaster for the (very large I might add) LSAT market that's developed around the LSAT. Like, reeeeeaaalllly bad. It will destroy the purpose of LSAT study for virtually everyone that doesn't already have a high GPA. I don't see how LSAC is not currently running around with their hair on fire screaming.
Po$eidon wrote:As someone who teaches LSAT it's pretty much a disaster for the (very large I might add) LSAT market that's developed around the LSAT. Like, reeeeeaaalllly bad. It will destroy the purpose ofLSAT studyeven applying to law school for virtually everyone that doesn't already have a high GPA. I don't see how LSAC is not currently running around with their hair on fire screaming.
That is totally true. Which will, further, destroy the LSAT market which largely is based around the idea that LSAT score can move mountains (won't move crap after this)SlackOff wrote:Po$eidon wrote:As someone who teaches LSAT it's pretty much a disaster for the (very large I might add) LSAT market that's developed around the LSAT. Like, reeeeeaaalllly bad. It will destroy the purpose ofLSAT studyeven applying to law school for virtually everyone that doesn't already have a high GPA. I don't see how LSAC is not currently running around with their hair on fire screaming.
Could you provide the quote for that, though?baseballfan660 wrote:according to Dave from Powerscore it will only be Harvard this year from the T-14 most likely. The schools have to do a study first to prove their is a correlation between GRE success and Law School success.
it's on his twitter. Spivey also talked about it in his advice thread I believe. They seem to think it will be a few years before it is widely accepted at other schools.Veil of Ignorance wrote:Could you provide the quote for that, though?baseballfan660 wrote:according to Dave from Powerscore it will only be Harvard this year from the T-14 most likely. The schools have to do a study first to prove their is a correlation between GRE success and Law School success.
What career is that? I mean the test isn't worth your time but 3 additional years of school is?ImGonnaTakeGRE wrote:Pure anecdotal but I never gave law school real consideration because I didn't want to invest time & energy to LSAT. But now I'm giving it more thought because a JD could be beneficial for my career. Same with a couple of my friends I talked with at HBS & HKS who are now thinking of pursuing dual degrees.Npret wrote:It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.SlackOff wrote:It's a win/win for law schools, so they'll probably all follow in suit eventually...
As a splitter, I'm probably going to actually fucking cry if they do.
I'm surprised people don't seem happier about this decision.
Yup, this about sums it up.lymenheimer wrote: Opening up admission to GRE kids could lead to more whimsical "oh I want to be a lawyer now", and we have plenty of those as it is even with the LSAT as a "barrier to entry".
I wonder what effect this will have on Harvard's yield. Potentially admittedly students with only a mild inclination toward law school and a legal career will affect yield, as I would assume a larger percentage of these students (as opposed to students who are dead-set on law school) will possibly attend PHd programs, etc. instead of HLS. It seems like HLS would be forced to admitted many more students to fill an equivalent class size. Handing out acceptances to people with only mild interest in attending seems like brand deflation to me.Po$eidon wrote:^Also I'd argue that Harvard is probably the single worst institution to try pulling this for the LSAT market: lay prestige matters in marketing and Harvard is the king of that. Further, it is simultaneously very prestigious and has a very large class size. If a lower tier school attempted this other institutions would shrug but also if either Stanford or Yale pulled this most institutions would be like "but only they can get away with it". Harvard is like a dam breaking.
Corporate M&A. Again, I know and have read the countless books & websites saying that there's no job that requires a dual JD/MBA. So I never gave law school much serious thought. But considering I'm heading to b-school in the fall and already have GRE scores, why not?Npret wrote:What career is that? I mean the test isn't worth your time but 3 additional years of school is?ImGonnaTakeGRE wrote:Pure anecdotal but I never gave law school real consideration because I didn't want to invest time & energy to LSAT. But now I'm giving it more thought because a JD could be beneficial for my career. Same with a couple of my friends I talked with at HBS & HKS who are now thinking of pursuing dual degrees.Npret wrote:It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.SlackOff wrote:It's a win/win for law schools, so they'll probably all follow in suit eventually...
As a splitter, I'm probably going to actually fucking cry if they do.
I'm surprised people don't seem happier about this decision.
Because it's a waste of time and money? In fact it's a much bigger waste of time and money then studying and taking exam. I think possibly you need to understand a little bit more about law school.ImGonnaTakeGRE wrote:Corporate M&A. Again, I know and have read the countless books & websites saying that there's no job that requires a dual JD/MBA. So I never gave law school much serious thought. But considering I'm heading to b-school in the fall and already have GRE scores, why not?Npret wrote:What career is that? I mean the test isn't worth your time but 3 additional years of school is?ImGonnaTakeGRE wrote:Pure anecdotal but I never gave law school real consideration because I didn't want to invest time & energy to LSAT. But now I'm giving it more thought because a JD could be beneficial for my career. Same with a couple of my friends I talked with at HBS & HKS who are now thinking of pursuing dual degrees.Npret wrote:It's a win/win for some applicants too. Just not the ones that post here apparently. But don't give up hope yet. I doubt US News will drop the LSAT from the rankings. This is all speculation that splitters are hurt. The idea is to broaden the applicant pool not to cut out a large segment of it.SlackOff wrote:It's a win/win for law schools, so they'll probably all follow in suit eventually...
As a splitter, I'm probably going to actually fucking cry if they do.
I'm surprised people don't seem happier about this decision.