Seriously, how are law school grades even relevant? Forum

[MrKappus]

Exams, and especially exam weeks simulate the experience of being a lawyer under pressure during an extended trial, merger, etc. The grades from these exams show who has the mental stamina to make it through experiences that "normal" people could not handle.

Not sure if serious...

I this he was super cereal. To which I reply: no.

[071816]

Exams, and especially exam weeks simulate the experience of being a lawyer under pressure during an extended trial, merger, etc. The grades from these exams show who has the mental stamina to make it through experiences that "normal" people could not handle.

Not sure if serious...

I sure hope not.

[crEEp]

Exams, and especially exam weeks simulate the experience of being a lawyer under pressure during an extended trial, merger, etc. The grades from these exams show who has the mental stamina to make it through experiences that "normal" people could not handle.

Not sure if serious...

I initially dismissed it as trolling, but Christmas came early... check out shepdawg's post history--especially this one:

2L at TTT is shit. The school already dropped the bottom 1/3 of the class, so the competition is higher. Plus, no one has a job, so everyone is shooting for #1.

I generally don't give much weight to a school's rank or the achievements of someone it admits, and there's no reason to deviate from that policy. However, when a 1L tries to explain what the legal market is really like, the gloves come off...

[luthersloan]

Law school grades are relevant mostly for the reason that LSAT scores and undergraduate grades are relevant. All three measure, in some highly imperfect way, intelligence and work ethic. With, in the case of law school grades, a tiny bit of relevence to the actual skills and abilities useful to the practice of law.

[prezidentv8]

158

[crEEp]

Law school grades are relevant mostly for the reason that LSAT scores and undergraduate grades are relevant. All three measure, in some highly imperfect way, intelligence and work ethic. With, in the case of law school grades, a tiny bit of relevence to the actual skills and abilities useful to the practice of law.

That's the huge red flag undermining any assertion that grades/LSAT scores may act as reasonable predictors of someone's innate intelligence and work ethic. The LSAT doesn't measure intelligence; it measure speed of processing. Synaptic efficiency indeed lays the foundation for higher-level brain functions, but there isn't a 1:1 relationship between "processing speed" and "intelligence."

Work ethic is another beast altogether. Does the ultra genius who opens his textbook for the first time the day before the exam and books the class (after spending the entire semester smoking weed and playing Skyrim) have a good work ethic? Probably not...but his efficient use of time makes up for that in the context of the exam.

Intelligence is too complicated to warrant a standardized approach to its measurement. Don't mistake that as attacking their approach on "everyone's a unique snowflake" grounds, though...that bullshit is rampant on TLS. If you're among the small crowd affected by these type 2 errors, the barriers preventing you from achieving your goals may seem impossible to get around...so suck it up and either find a way or make one.

[prezidentv8]

Okay fine.

158.5

[Guchster]

U mad, OP?

Guys why did you make him angry? You wouldnt like him when he's angry! Insert joke about likability on internet platform here*

Rage on, creep.

[breadbucket]

SO MUCH RAGE!

--ImageRemoved--

A.. aha... ahahahhahAHAHAHA!

[crEEp]

U mad, OP?

Guys why did you make him angry? You wouldnt like him when he's angry! Insert joke about likability on internet platform here*

Rage on, creep.

You know how in some classes there's that one painfully awkward person who sits at the front of the classroom and excitedly volunteers to contribute what he genuinely believes to be nuanced and insightful views on topics about which he's embarrassingly ignorant? You know how the moment you realize this, you feel this sort of vicarious embarrassment? ....that's almost how how feel right now. I'm really tempted to sympathy trollbait, you know, as a public service or something

[MrKappus]

U mad, OP?

Guys why did you make him angry? You wouldnt like him when he's angry! Insert joke about likability on internet platform here*

Rage on, creep.

You know how in some classes there's that one painfully awkward person who sits at the front of the classroom and excitedly volunteers to contribute what he genuinely believes to be nuanced and insightful views on topics about which he's embarrassingly ignorant? You know how the moment you realize this, you feel this sort of vicarious embarrassment? ....that's almost how how feel right now. I'm really tempted to sympathy trollbait, you know, as a public service or something

Guchster's never actually spoken to a woman without giving his credit card number first. Don't be too hard on him.

[PopTorts13]

U mad, OP?

Guys why did you make him angry? You wouldnt like him when he's angry! Insert joke about likability on internet platform here*

Rage on, creep.

You know how in some classes there's that one painfully awkward person who sits at the front of the classroom and excitedly volunteers to contribute what he genuinely believes to be nuanced and insightful views on topics about which he's embarrassingly ignorant? You know how the moment you realize this, you feel this sort of vicarious embarrassment? ....that's almost how how feel right now. I'm really tempted to sympathy trollbait, you know, as a public service or something

Guchster's never actually spoken to a woman without giving his credit card number first. Don't be too hard on him.

ah ha ha ha

[johndhi]

blame the law firms, who, by the way, don't hire exclusively based on grades.

[MrPapagiorgio]

Trying WAY too hard to sound smart and sophisticated with all them big and fancy words and such

+ a bajillion

Also

Vicarious embarrassment

Just stop. You're not impressing anyone.

[Gamecubesupreme]

blame the law firms, who, by the way, don't hire exclusively based on grades.

Whoever told you that is lying.

It is only true if your GPA is above a certain point (AKA 3.7).

Then a 3.8 won't be that different from a 3.9.

But if you only have a 3.1, good luck convincing big firms to hire you over either one of those two previous candidates.

[Mr. T6]

This is one of those cute questions that can be endlessly rehashed with virtually any culling of the law school crowd:

How is the LSAT even relevant?

How are grades even relevant?

How is performance as a first-year attorney even relevant? You barely know what you're doing.

Et cetera.

The cuteness is mostly derived from the fact that, in the end, it actually doesn't matter. What matters to most firms is that you're capable of generating business -- either from being such a good lawyer that clients are attracted to you, or from other soft skills.

[Guchster]

U mad, OP?

Guys why did you make him angry? You wouldnt like him when he's angry! Insert joke about likability on internet platform here*

Rage on, creep.

Girl, U DEF. MAD





Alright, it's time to calm down now creep, nothing to see here.

--ImageRemoved--

[Guchster]

U mad, OP?

Guys why did you make him angry? You wouldnt like him when he's angry! Insert joke about likability on internet platform here*

Rage on, creep.

You know how in some classes there's that one painfully awkward person who sits at the front of the classroom and excitedly volunteers to contribute what he genuinely believes to be nuanced and insightful views on topics about which he's embarrassingly ignorant? You know how the moment you realize this, you feel this sort of vicarious embarrassment? ....that's almost how how feel right now. I'm really tempted to sympathy trollbait, you know, as a public service or something

Guchster's never actually spoken to a woman without giving his credit card number first. Don't be too hard on him.

ah ha ha ha

Get that purple font OUT OF MY FACE!

[johndhi]

blame the law firms, who, by the way, don't hire exclusively based on grades.

Whoever told you that is lying.

It is only true if your GPA is above a certain point (AKA 3.7).

Then a 3.8 won't be that different from a 3.9.

But if you only have a 3.1, good luck convincing big firms to hire you over either one of those two previous candidates.

The reason I believe law firms don't hire exclusively based on grades is from my experience and my friends' experience during OCI. I have top grades and did poorly (no call back or no offer after callback) in interviews in which I did not connect well with the interviewers. I got the benefit of the doubt on a couple of bad ones because of my grades, but they didn't do all the legwork. Even more convincing, though, is the results of my friends: I know at least four guys/gals that were just around median, but are incredibly charming people, who landed jobs at top firms. When you're speaking of V10, Weil is probably the only firm that engages in this, but other firms in V50 undoubtedly do so. There's also the case of another friend who's a total weirdo, despite having top grades + LR, who struck out.

Certainly there are grade and school cutoffs, but I was surprised by how deeply into the curve firms were looking. It is not stated enough how important good interviewing is; once OCI starts, we are a lot closer to each other than you'd think.

[gp86]

OP is mad as fukkkk. On the balance of things, law school grades work fine. The best generally come out at the top of the class. Do some brilliant, talented individuals get shafted by one fluke grade or by barely not making LR? Yes. Is this unfair? Absolutely. Do firms and judges care? No. Is this reason to revolt and change the system? Not really. I know we're all special little snowflakes, but we all look the same to employers. HTFH.

[Guchster]

OP is mad as fukkkk. On the balance of things, law school grades work fine. The best generally come out at the top of the class. Do some brilliant, talented individuals get shafted by one fluke grade or by barely not making LR? Yes. Is this unfair? Absolutely. Do firms and judges care? No. Is this reason to revolt and change the system? Not really. I know we're all special little snowflakes, but we all look the same to employers. HTFH.

Friend, you need to know your roll. creep and poptorts are coming for you next!

[ben4847]

OP is mad as f--kkk. On the balance of things, law school grades work fine. The best generally come out at the top of the class. Do some brilliant, talented individuals get shafted by one fluke grade or by barely not making LR? Yes. Is this unfair? Absolutely. Do firms and judges care? No. Is this reason to revolt and change the system? Not really. I know we're all special little snowflakes, but we all look the same to employers. HTFH.

Yup. And note, that the other factors they rely on (charm, looks, etc.) are much less relevant to their purposes. Especially for the first few years before you need to get your own clients.

[mrloblaw]

blame the law firms, who, by the way, don't hire exclusively based on grades.

Whoever told you that is lying.

It is only true if your GPA is above a certain point (AKA 3.7).

Then a 3.8 won't be that different from a 3.9.

But if you only have a 3.1, good luck convincing big firms to hire you over either one of those two previous candidates.

Point: unless your GPA paints you as potentially braindead, grades are meaningless. A chimpanzee with special needs and an Emanuel's could meet the GPA cutoff for most v50 firms. It isn't c/o 2011 anymore.

[truevines]

Law school grades are relevant mostly for the reason that LSAT scores and undergraduate grades are relevant. All three measure, in some highly imperfect way, intelligence and work ethic. With, in the case of law school grades, a tiny bit of relevence to the actual skills and abilities useful to the practice of law.

That's the huge red flag undermining any assertion that grades/LSAT scores may act as reasonable predictors of someone's innate intelligence and work ethic. The LSAT doesn't measure intelligence; it measure speed of processing. Synaptic efficiency indeed lays the foundation for higher-level brain functions, but there isn't a 1:1 relationship between "processing speed" and "intelligence."

Work ethic is another beast altogether. Does the ultra genius who opens his textbook for the first time the day before the exam and books the class (after spending the entire semester smoking weed and playing Skyrim) have a good work ethic? Probably not...but his efficient use of time makes up for that in the context of the exam.

Intelligence is too complicated to warrant a standardized approach to its measurement. Don't mistake that as attacking their approach on "everyone's a unique snowflake" grounds, though...that bullshit is rampant on TLS. If you're among the small crowd affected by these type 2 errors, the barriers preventing you from achieving your goals may seem impossible to get around...so suck it up and either find a way or make one.

Weird that people here care about the "innate intelligence" so much.Nothing is fair.

Why don't we complain about the chick who is hot and is the goddaughter of the firm's global co-chair?

Why don't we bash the son of the evil chair of an i-Bank on Wall Street, who never has to study LSAT or go to law school but earns more than the shitty 160k?


Law school is s a game, just like any other test/school/job evaluation. If you decide to play the game, follow the rule and try to get the top scores.

Go screw your folks if you wanna complain nothing is fair.