Splitters in law school Forum

[whymeohgodno]

Splitters are just people who got LUCKY on the LSAT, essentially idiots. I'm sure they do horrible in law school.

Then why the so claimed smart people just can't do well in lsat? You are so ridiculous.
The only reason the splitters are lucky is because they are smart but just not dedicated enough during their undergraduate studies. To be fair,I believe lsat is a better way than gpa to test your intelligence.

I was a splitter (2180/3.2) when applying to UG. Now I'm a semi-reverse splitter (166/3.94). Sometimes people turn their work ethics around--something my HS GPA would not have predicted.

I was a reverse splitter 4.2/4.0 with a 31 ACT. Now I'm a 176/2.8.

Did you take the SATs?

[005618502]

i dont see how the LSAT is such a predictor of LS. I could see how ones cold diagnostic would mean something, but its soooo learnable that i just dont see it. and which sections are most important? I went almost perfect on 2 sections, perfect on 1, and missed a shitton on RC lol. I guess i hope RC isnt the most important, though i could see how it may be lol

[09042014]

Then why the so claimed smart people just can't do well in lsat? You are so ridiculous.
The only reason the splitters are lucky is because they are smart but just not dedicated enough during their undergraduate studies. To be fair,I believe lsat is a better way than gpa to test your intelligence.

I was a splitter (2180/3.2) when applying to UG. Now I'm a semi-reverse splitter (166/3.94). Sometimes people turn their work ethics around--something my HS GPA would not have predicted.

I was a reverse splitter 4.2/4.0 with a 31 ACT. Now I'm a 176/2.8.

Did you take the SATs?

In 8th grade I got a 13XX to get into some gifted program. I never took it in high school. I'm not sure how good my verbal would have been. I'd do pretty good on math though.

[James Bond]

In 8th grade I got a 13XX to get into some gifted program.

[09042014]

i dont see how the LSAT is such a predictor of LS. I could see how ones cold diagnostic would mean something, but its soooo learnable that i just dont see it. and which sections are most important? I went almost perfect on 2 sections, perfect on 1, and missed a shitton on RC lol. I guess i hope RC isnt the most important, though i could see how it may be lol

People all seem to increase in a similar amount. So I'm guessing there wouldn't be a huge difference between cold and real. Law school is learnable too. Maybe being somewhat learnable actually increases the predictive ability.

RC and LR have the most predictive ability. LG has less, but still above GPA IIRC.

[09042014]

In 8th grade I got a 13XX to get into some gifted program.

I had already taken algebra in 8th grade, so being in 8th grade wouldn't be huge factor in my score. Not knowing some advanced trig and adv algerbra prob hurt.

I'm not sure if I could get my verbal over 700. My vocab isn't great. Is SAT still vocab and analogy?

It was also low 1300's IIRC.

[almostfamous]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

[Mike12188]

Splitters are just people who got LUCKY on the LSAT, essentially idiots. I'm sure they do horrible in law school.

Then why the so claimed smart people just can't do well in lsat? You are so ridiculous.
The only reason the splitters are lucky is because they are smart but just not dedicated enough during their undergraduate studies. To be fair,I believe lsat is a better way than gpa to test your intelligence.

Bro you def got lucky, you prob guessed on half of em

[09042014]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

Lets be honest here. It was your intelligence that was lack. You were lazy as shit.

If you are lazy as shit in law school, you'll probably do just as bad. If not, you should do well.

[James Bond]

In 8th grade I got a 13XX to get into some gifted program.

I had already taken algebra in 8th grade, so being in 8th grade wouldn't be huge factor in my score. Not knowing some advanced trig and adv algerbra prob hurt.

I'm not sure if I could get my verbal over 700. My vocab isn't great. Is SAT still vocab and analogy?

It was also low 1300's IIRC.

Still, your 8th grade SAT is most likely higher than my 11th grade SAT, and I thought mine was pretty awesome at the time

[005618502]

i dont see how the LSAT is such a predictor of LS. I could see how ones cold diagnostic would mean something, but its soooo learnable that i just dont see it. and which sections are most important? I went almost perfect on 2 sections, perfect on 1, and missed a shitton on RC lol. I guess i hope RC isnt the most important, though i could see how it may be lol

People all seem to increase in a similar amount. So I'm guessing there wouldn't be a huge difference between cold and real. Law school is learnable too. Maybe being somewhat learnable actually increases the predictive ability.

RC and LR have the most predictive ability. LG has less, but still above GPA IIRC.

I only increased 5 points because RC never increased, and everything else started off with very little missed questions.

Fme for not ever reading in my free time before studying for the LSAT

[Mike12188]

i dont see how the LSAT is such a predictor of LS. I could see how ones cold diagnostic would mean something, but its soooo learnable that i just dont see it. and which sections are most important? I went almost perfect on 2 sections, perfect on 1, and missed a shitton on RC lol. I guess i hope RC isnt the most important, though i could see how it may be lol

1. RC prob is the most important, because of all the dense reading
2. Isn't the law itself learnable?

[005618502]

i dont see how the LSAT is such a predictor of LS. I could see how ones cold diagnostic would mean something, but its soooo learnable that i just dont see it. and which sections are most important? I went almost perfect on 2 sections, perfect on 1, and missed a shitton on RC lol. I guess i hope RC isnt the most important, though i could see how it may be lol

1. RC prob is the most important, because of all the dense reading
2. Isn't the law itself learnable?

If i had an extra 10 minutes on the RC section i could have aced it. So i dont feel as though i will be held back.... then again im not in law school. I wouldnt mind having to read an hour longer then others each night.... I just dont see how it is a predictor of LS performance i guess

[Mike12188]

i dont see how the LSAT is such a predictor of LS. I could see how ones cold diagnostic would mean something, but its soooo learnable that i just dont see it. and which sections are most important? I went almost perfect on 2 sections, perfect on 1, and missed a shitton on RC lol. I guess i hope RC isnt the most important, though i could see how it may be lol

1. RC prob is the most important, because of all the dense reading
2. Isn't the law itself learnable?

If i had an extra 10 minutes on the RC section i could have aced it. So i dont feel as though i will be held back.... then again im not in law school. I wouldnt mind having to read an hour longer then others each night.... I just dont see how it is a predictor of LS performance i guess

Agreed 10 minutes on RC would have gave me perfect sections. I don't think it is a predictor of LS either, not because it is learnable though

[almostfamous]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

Lets be honest here. It was your intelligence that was lack. You were lazy as shit.

If you are lazy as shit in law school, you'll probably do just as bad. If not, you should do well.

I'm hoping you meant it WASN'T my intelligence that was lacking

No argument on the lazy as shit part, though. That combined with stupid major choice really did me in. I've actually done really well in the non-science courses I've taken, but seeing as I'm a science major, that didn't do me too much good.

[005618502]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

Lets be honest here. It was your intelligence that was lack. You were lazy as shit.

If you are lazy as shit in law school, you'll probably do just as bad. If not, you should do well.

I'm hoping you meant it WASN'T my intelligence that was lacking

No argument on the lazy as shit part, though. That combined with stupid major choice really did me in. I've actually done really well in the non-science courses I've taken, but seeing as I'm a science major, that didn't do me too much good.

Yes, science majors are much more difficult. I dont understand why so many people choose science planning on LS. Is it just because the degree is worth more? is it for IP?

[005618502]

i dont see how the LSAT is such a predictor of LS. I could see how ones cold diagnostic would mean something, but its soooo learnable that i just dont see it. and which sections are most important? I went almost perfect on 2 sections, perfect on 1, and missed a shitton on RC lol. I guess i hope RC isnt the most important, though i could see how it may be lol

1. RC prob is the most important, because of all the dense reading
2. Isn't the law itself learnable?

If i had an extra 10 minutes on the RC section i could have aced it. So i dont feel as though i will be held back.... then again im not in law school. I wouldnt mind having to read an hour longer then others each night.... I just dont see how it is a predictor of LS performance i guess

Agreed 10 minutes on RC would have gave me perfect sections. I don't think it is a predictor of LS either, not because it is learnable though

I guess, i just wish RC didnt kill my score so badly. No point re-taking because its too hard to improve that damn section from what i have found

[s0ph1e2007]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

puppies across the globe just died



had to say it, b/c that was a major, blatant, SC

[almostfamous]

I came in with a TON of science credits from high school and so kind of naturally stayed in the sciences. By the time I realized how bad of a decision this was, I was already a good bit of the way done with my major so just stuck it out. I do think having to read lots of science journals and textbooks, etc. helped me on the LSAT though.

[005618502]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

puppies across the globe just died



had to say it, b/c that was a major, blatant, SC

??

[almostfamous]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

puppies across the globe just died



had to say it, b/c that was a major, blatant, SC

??

[005618502]

I came in with a TON of science credits from high school and so kind of naturally stayed in the sciences. By the time I realized how bad of a decision this was, I was already a good bit of the way done with my major so just stuck it out. I do think having to read lots of science journals and textbooks, etc. helped me on the LSAT though.

From what ive seen those who read ALOT whether it be for fun/free time or school seem to do much better on the LSAT as their RC starts high. The other 2 parts of the test are VERY easy to improve on. Really your cold diagnostic doesnt mean anything about your score. Its how much you missed on certain sections. Like me, RC killed my diag so i was auto screwed, but if you miss none on RC and games owns you then your score can increase dramatically with the right teaching

[s0ph1e2007]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

puppies across the globe just died

had to say it, b/c that was a major, blatant, SC

??

SC=self call
response to the "oh and by the way I rocked the SAT including even a revision to 1600 scale to make him/her sound even more brilliant lol


additionally: splitters cant all do badly in law schools or all of NU would stink. Also, quite a few students have some seriously good excuse for one term or year of grades that ruined their GPA, including serious illness, serious family tragedy, or being a DI athlete (there are actually a few of these on TLS)

[09042014]

Haha well from personal experience, I know that my SAT score was NOT an indicator of success in undergrad...got a 1570 (2360 if you count writing) on my SATs and am now applying to schools with a 3.1 GPA.

Hopefully LSAT is a better predictor!

Lets be honest here. It was your intelligence that was lack. You were lazy as shit.

If you are lazy as shit in law school, you'll probably do just as bad. If not, you should do well.

I'm hoping you meant it WASN'T my intelligence that was lacking

No argument on the lazy as shit part, though. That combined with stupid major choice really did me in. I've actually done really well in the non-science courses I've taken, but seeing as I'm a science major, that didn't do me too much good.

Yes, science majors are much more difficult. I dont understand why so many people choose science planning on LS. Is it just because the degree is worth more? is it for IP?

I didn't know anyone planning on doing law school in science. We all appear to be people who flammed out of our previous careeers.

There isn't a big market for people with a BS in Bio, Chem and Physics with poor GPAs. And it's hard as fuck to get into a good PhD program with shit grades.

I probably couldn't get into even the worse PhD EE degrees, yet I got into a T13 law school.

Some people just want a change. I have a PhD in EE from a great EE school in my section. He just wanted a change.

[almostfamous]

you must have missed the rest of my post where I admitted that I did really shitty in undergrad and thus fully realize that my SAT score means nothing--I'm not a freshman anymore...I believe other people were posting their scores as well, and since this is a conversation about how standardized test scores affect real-life performance, I thought it was relevant.

Sorry if it came across as bragging, but I really didn't think anybody (including myself) would still get touchy about who scored higher on a test 4 years ago.