grade school through High school rank vs. LS rank Forum

[ruleser]

Love to see how people ranked in grade school through HS vs. how they rank in LS. People on here say a lot they did good in college but the competition in LS is so much harder you don't know where you'd place. But to me, HS is more reflective of abilities - college you can do well based on working hard or not, grade school through HS you are going on how smart you are.

What I mean by "grade school through HS" is were you the student always at the top of the class since 1st grade through HS, or were you mid class grade school, maybe a little better HS... call this one of those silly surveys the psych dept. at your college forced you to do as lab when taking psych 101...

grade school: where in class
HS: where in class
LS: where in classs (and what school)

EDIT: posted in wrong forum, if someone can move to a better one would be appreciated

[Matthies]

Grade school: held back 2 years, bottom of class

High School: bottom of the class I think

College: first time failed out, I mean like F’s. When I went back like six years later 3.92 gpa w/ 100 credits, not sure where I ranked I don’t think they did that, but graduated with high honors.

Law School: graduated 13th in my class at Denver

*Note: I have sever dyslexia, like could not read or write my own name until I was 10. When I went to grade/high school there were not many computers. Anything I write w/o speech to text or at least a good word processor comes out in gibberish, backwards or just completely jumbled. Hence I credit my big jump to technology allowing me to actually be able to communicate my knowledge once it became readily available. That and I think my early education was kind of a self fulfilling prophecy, they did not know as much about learning disabilities then (early to late 80s) so after being told you were retarded, would never learn to read, etc for most of your early life you don’t put much effort into school I think.

[A'nold]

From the 5th grade through the 8th grade I failed pretty much every class then maintained like a C- average which at least got me through high school. I hated school more than anything pretty much and chose to skip and not do my work and owned tests without studying (when I showed up) and that gave me enough passing grades to graduate.

Oh yeah and I'm 1st in my section in ls.

[OperaSoprano]

Moved for you.

[nahgems]

Grade School: At the end of the year there was only one kid with no "gold star" stickers on the spelling test chart. That was me.
High School: Bottom of the Honor Roll
College: Top 20%
LS: Top 5% (TTTT)

[RVP11]

I'll only share that my law school rank at a school full of brilliant people is much better than my rank at a subpar urban high school where even the valedictorian just went to the local state school.

Late bloomers FTW.

[lsat_fear]

almost had to repeat 5th grade; graduated high school with a 2.8, got a 1570 SAT (on the old 1600 point version); went to a TTT undergrad, did okay (3.5), got a 177 LSAT and got slightly above median grades at T6 law school

[macattaq]

ITT: whip it out and see whose is the biggest!

[Renzo]

Grade school: terrible performance. So bad I my parents took my to a psychologist to see if I had a learning disability. She said, "nope, just doesn't like to do schoolwork."

HS: dropped out

LS: median at T6

I think I just effed up your theory.

[gatorlion]

ITT: People seek to undermine a plausible correlation using purely anecdotal evidence.

Small-N FAIL

[WellNow]

Love to see how people ranked in grade school through HS vs. how they rank in LS. People on here say a lot they did good in college but the competition in LS is so much harder you don't know where you'd place. But to me, HS is more reflective of abilities - college you can do well based on working hard or not, grade school through HS you are going on how smart you are.

What I mean by "grade school through HS" is were you the student always at the top of the class since 1st grade through HS, or were you mid class grade school, maybe a little better HS... call this one of those silly surveys the psych dept. at your college forced you to do as lab when taking psych 101...

grade school: where in class
HS: where in class
LS: where in classs (and what school)

EDIT: posted in wrong forum, if someone can move to a better one would be appreciated

Why do you think high school is a more accurate reflection of smarts than college? As I remember it, grade school through high school was just a bunch of busy work, i.e. if you put in the time you get the grade. The only real exceptions were my AP classes.

[prezidentv8]

Never been ranked.

But so far,

HS: 3.2 (ish?)
College: 3.7 (ish)
Law: 3.6 (ish)


Also, for each level, here's my interpretation:

High school is busy work with a few tests.
College is less busy work, more tests.
Law is one test.

[lsat_fear]

ITT: People seek to undermine a plausible correlation using purely anecdotal evidence.

Small-N FAIL

not trying to undermine anyone's theory--just giving my relevant numbers that might be used to test the theory. my numbers don't fit the theory very well--doesn't mean there's no correlation whatsoever. if enough people on TLS respond, however, there may be some basis for evaluating whether there's a correlation or not.

[Mattalones]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

[Cavalier]

I was maybe top half to top third in grade school through high school. I could always do well on tests without much studying, but since most of the grade was based on homework and other dumb projects, I was too lazy to be anywhere near the top quarter of the class. In college I was top 5%. In law school... can't say much here, but I am at least top half.

[RVP11]

OP: school performance and intelligence just don't correlate strongly enough for you to form a strong theory, I believe. None of grade school, high school, college, and law school are designed to see how smart you are.

Standardized tests, OTOH, are designed to do just that. I have had tremendous ups and downs in academic performance (i.e. whiz kid in grade and middle school, horrible grades in high school, horrible grades at one college then great grades at another college, I will admit to top half in law school), but my performance on standardized tests has been pretty level throughout that same time period.

[seespotrun]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

He definitely couldn't get his word count where it needs to be. Also, if he got extended time I would definitely complain.

[A'nold]

Never been ranked.

But so far,

HS: 3.2 (ish?)
College: 3.7 (ish)
Law: 3.6 (ish)


Also, for each level, here's my interpretation:

High school is busy work with a few tests.
College is less busy work, more tests.
Law is one test.

Lol, thus why I get better and better as I go on. I hate busy work. Also the reason that my LRW grade will likely be my lowest grade.

[Xnegd]

Not in LS yet, but can speak of up till then.

Pre School: I was kicked out for kissing to many of the girls (was a Catholic School), ans trying to kiss a nun.

K-5th: The School didn't believe in holding kids back, but I was told they almost made an exception for me.

6-8th: Same deal. I only passed because I cried, and cried, and cried at the Principals office.

9-11th: Failed out of English, Failed out of Math (but got a "D" since my teacher had sex with a student, so everyone got a passing grade. Failed quite a few classes, and dropped out of the rest. I had to take a bunch of night school to get my diploma. All you do there is sleep and you get a degree.

12th: Came to California, where eye screening is mandatory. Found out I was legally bind in my right eye, and couldn't see much better in my left. Turn out all the squiggly shapes were letters and stuff. State paid for me to get glasses, got straight B's and A's.

When to Community College - graduated with a 4.0 and four degrees.

Went to College (Berkeley): I graduated with honors, and a 3.5.

LS: to be decided. I hope I do well!

edit: Spell Check

[clevinger33]

[Aeroplane]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

0L?

[XxSpyKEx]

I saw this thread the other day and thought it was kinda dumb and that no one would reply... The issue with trying to find any correlation with prior academic performace & law school performance is that you have to presume that people had the same level of motivation from when they were in grade school (or high school) through law school, which is not true (OK, maybe it is for Harvard type people, but probably not for most people). I mean who didn't have other shit on their minds in HS and even UG besides grades and your actual career many years later? Personally, I know in HS I could have cared less about class or grades and put 110% in getting laid as much as I could. UG for my first 3.5-4 years I cared way more about partying, lifting 3.5+ hours a day, hanging out with friends, and working on my car/racing it and pretty little about actually passing my classes (I was on the 6 year year plan).

[270910]

My performance has been very consistent; it's interesting to see people who 'bounce around' so much. Whoever mentioned that motivation has a big part to play was spot on... though I'd also agree that in law school motivation isn't always 'enough'.

[Mattalones]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

0L?

Yes'r ... 0L Here.
I don't think that changes much though. From what I've seen and heard from several friends at T14 LSs (and their classmates when visiting/going to their classes sometimes) is that no single piece of LS is super hard (in the same way curing AIDS or cancer is hard). It's just the high workload of somewhat challenging stuff. I know that is super-subjective, but it seems like there are enough people who can track what I am talking about here ...

Super-Smart = Single Handedly wrote Google's search algorithms, invented+implemented the Euro Dollar, Discovered relativity.
Very smart+Very hard working = do good in LS, business, or some professional career.

I'm making a pretty simple point: There are only a few super-geniuses in the world, and that you don't have to be one to be a T14, V100 kind of person. There are more of these kind of people than super-geniuses in the world. Don't get offended. I mean, think about it: Einstein v Scalia on an IQ test. I'm sure Scalia is very smart, but his intelligence probably isn't on par with what Einstein's was. If you were able to get a candid answer out of him, he would probably recognize that too.

I only bring it up because people on here seem to think that smarts is by and large the main determining factor in LS success. If it were, then Einstein would could have gotten a 4.0 in LS without ever going to class, reading, or studying; even he would have had to work to succeed.

When it comes down to it, Mr. 165 could probably outperform Mr. 171 in T14 LS X if Mr. 165 puts in 12-15hrs/day of solid work, and Mr. 171 only puts in 8hrs/day of work.

[prezidentv8]

I am going against the grain here, but from what I have gathered, intelligence caps out on benefits for LS grades much earlier than a strong work ethic. Hard work makes up for the rest of where intelligence leaves off. Imagine Steven Hawking in LS barely doing shit ... probably wouldn't do that well. But, the well-above-average-intelligence-but-not-brilliant-student who busts his ass all of the time would make some pretty good grades. Its about being able to read huge amounts of material and retain it. That isn't a result of super-smarts. Super-smarts is the kind of thing that wins a Field Metal in Mathematics, or gets you the Nobel Prize in Physics. You don't need that in law school AT ALL.

0L?

<what you said>

Here's the thing, from my perspective.

Nearly everyone's smarts are at a really really similar level. Nearly everyone works really really hard. Grades are curved. There will be smart people and hard workers and those that are both at all levels of the curve, in each class. Nature of the beast I think.