166 cc dropout looking to turn it around in 4 year college Forum

[Chrstgtr]

I respectfully disagree.

Why are you asking for advice and then disagreeing with what everyone says. TLS has a lot of great collective information and advice on how things actually work instead of the nice flowery stuff you read from official websites. If it was as easy as reading schools websites a site like TLS wouldn't exist.

[csprizzle38]

90% of applicants are white. I'm a URM with a 166 and (in the future) a summa degree in history Phi Beta Kappa from an Honors Collehe---with a *technical* GPA of 3.3-3.4 since I "unofficially withdrew" from community college. Thus, I won't be getting in pursuant to the standard criteria---the "numbers game"--*anyway*; indeed, if I get in, it will be because I'm able to prevail on them that my real transcript should offset blowing off bio 101 when I was nineteen and uninspired. (It's a miscarriage of justice that SOP makes it impossible for a college valedictorian to divest herself from JC grades, but I digress.)

So your points about the data, though valid in the main, are moot as applied to me. Whereas for most taking truly rigorous courses isn't necessary to go to Penn, for me it is. (Well, it greatly increases the probability, anyway.) That's all I claimed.

Oh, and by the way: I'm not micromanaging my courses solely for the sake of law school. Rather, I've organized my history sequence by interest/chronology/requirements, chosen my electives based on Phi Beta Kappa requirements, Honors College requirements, and my pet interest in corporate finance. (And over 95% of them will indeed be offered when I plan to take them; virtually every one is a core class.)

(I'm typing on my mom's IPad. My fingers are frighten' exhausted. Goodnight haha)

Dude, stop writing like this. Ugh.

More importantly: wtf, man? People who have successfully gone through the admissions process are telling you what matters, and you're willfully ignoring it. If you graduate coiff at Stanford like the first gal you linked to, or top 10 at Penn (or whatever), nobody is going to give two shits how many 400 level classes you took at Random State U. You already lost the UG prestige game by going to a run of the mill school (as I did), so just get the highest GPA possible. The rest is bullshit.

Also, as a former social sciences instructor, your schedule is awful. Why on earth would any historian take History of Rome prior to History of Greece? Or EuroCiv 1 and 2 simultaneously? I almost think you're trolling us here.

I've spent the last three years of my life reading---alone, in my room---the opinions and dissents of Scalia and Posner, the books of Bryan Garner, and the appellate briefs of Clement, Olson, Shanmugam, and many others. I write in a forceful, elegant tone because it's fun and because I've become quite adept at it.

On that note, I'll smoothly segue into my response to the mouse: I can hardly wait to begin my Senior thesis for the Honors College, the Dean of which will no doubt be writing me a sterling letter of recommendation, one that lauds my "professional writing skills" and "swift mastery of the material" I'll no doubt exhibit in "the most RIGOROUS undergrad (400-level) courses our university has to offer." Indeed, you might even say, I'll MAKE my application "SCREAM RIGOR." (I'm not attending Brown or Harvard, after all lolololol.)

Moreover, I think it noteworthy that "classics" majors average the highest LSAT score out of all majors, besting physics and mathematics and economics and even ENGINEERING. Perhaps this speaks to the "rigor" many of us still attach to a traditional, Phi Beta Kappa liberal arts education. (Think, for example, Chief Justice Roberts and Evan Chesler, both of whom graduated summa cum laude in History.)

Finally, I'll close by addressing cron's two-part VITUPERATION (big word! haha) against my schedule's organization: (1) Rome is only offered in the Spring, and I wish to take it and Greece consecutively. (2) European Civilizations I and II are consecutive *summer* courses.

But why quibble over trifling analytic details when we can all get to know each other a bit! I'm an openly gay former varsity football star who dropped out of community college to read books, and who's now passionate about becoming an Equity Partner at a white-shoe firm in New York. Despite my Patrick Batemanesque obsession with prestige and image, I'm very romantic and looking for another careerist gay jock to sweep me off my feet. xD

Add me on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/tailback04210

[A. Nony Mouse]

Oh, dude.

[chuckbass]

Oh, dude.

[FuriousDuck]

...

[fratstar1]

......

[180kickflip]

Smh. Been awhile since I fell into the troll pit. Guess I was due lol.

[rad lulz]

.

[lieph82]

Take a look at his facebook. This guy's real, or has spent years creating this backstory.

[johnnyquest]

Take a look at his facebook. This guy's real, or has spent years creating this backstory.

Or...ran across someone's FB profile and adopted it as his new troll persona.

[cron1834]

Not sure if serious ...

[csprizzle38]

@ rad lulz:

Barry Sanders is reputed as saying, "It turned out I never needed those extra few inches." In parallel fashion, "It turned out David Boies didn't need those extra few points." hahah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SYWiLDRDPc

All joking aside though, that's an amazing achievement, and much rarer than what I'm looking to accomplish in undergrad. Congratulations!

But just so nobody's under the impression that I'm "all-GRE-vocab-no-elite-thinking-skills," I'll post my best timed practice exams, which lay dormant in my Sterlite drawer. (In hindsight, it would've been more logical for me not to have begun seriously prepping with 62-71.)

PT 17 (172) - 1995
SuperPrep B (171) - 1999
PT 46 (169)
PT 29 (168)
PT 51 (168) - 2006

2,170 Jan '10 SAT (honestly my favorite - 650 math haha)

[toothbrush]

i was wondering how this thread was still going. then i read this page. what. the. fuck.

[John Everyman]

What are you going to do if law school doesn't work out, interest you, admit you where you want?

If you get a useless liberal arts degree I feel like you're setting yourself up for failure (or at least eliminating some potentially very valuable exit strategies). Major in something that is likely to have at least ok employment prospects, but that you can get As in if you work your ass off. Like no CS or engineering, but maybe econ, marketing, or whatever the easiest business degree they offer is. Not saying jobs will necessarily be easy to get anywhere, but at least get a degree where you've got a fighting chance at a decent non-law outcome.

lots of people seem to end up miserable at (or after) law school cuz they went just because they didn't think they had any other options. Right now is when you work to avoid becoming that guy.

Lol at major in Econ. Business/business administration is tcr

[csprizzle38]

Not sure if serious ...

https://www.facebook.com/tailback04210/ ... 158227%3A8
https://www.facebook.com/tailback04210/ ... 3213666727

Just because I voiced my disagreement with two clearly wrong-headed arguments* in a Scalian tone, it doesn't follow that I'm a "troll." I love the craft of argumentation, and I couldn't pass up the opportunity to just... argue. It's FUN! Jesus H. Christ... Somebody point me in the direction of the future gunners!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnsQLbdCWfk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufwnRVmgEWU #wolfpit


*1.) That the rigor and breadth of my schedule can't tip the scale in my favor when I apply to top law schools as a URM with a *technical* 3.4 GPA...
2.) That history majors---by which you probably meant "all non-engineering majors"---take course sets that are categorically perceived by admissions officers as "not very rigorous." (In contrast to Brown and Harvard, grade inflation isn't a problem at UMaine.)

[toothbrush]

why are you here if you dont want to take anyones advice

no one 'cept like maybe mal or DF like to argue on TLS. you're 100% wrong but you won't accept it. play nice or gtfo.

[csprizzle38]

why are you here if you dont want to take anyones advice

no one 'cept like maybe mal or DF like to argue on TLS. you're 100% wrong but you won't accept it. play nice or gtfo.

I'm totally in denial haha!... What's most remarkable to me is the *narrowness* of the claim I've defended... I cannot believe anybody wise to the "holistic" nature of 160+ URM law admissions would affirm the two assumptions footnoted in my last post. hahaha

How is this even a discussion? It's absolutely ridiculous! To be sure, on many complex issues---e.g., same-sex marriage and abortion---reasonable people can disagree. But trying to sell me on those arguments is like trying to persuade me that 2+2=5...

[toothbrush]

why are you here if you dont want to take anyones advice

no one 'cept like maybe mal or DF like to argue on TLS. you're 100% wrong but you won't accept it. play nice or gtfo.

I'm totally in denial haha!... What's most remarkable to me is the *narrowness* of the claim I've defended... I cannot believe anybody wise to the "holistic" nature of 160+ URM law admissions would affirm the two assumptions footnoted in my last post. hahaha

How is this even a discussion? It's absolutely ridiculous! To be sure, on many complex issues---e.g., same-sex marriage and abortion---reasonable people can disagree. But trying to sell me on those arguments is like trying to persuade me that 2+2=5...

holy molly

[cron1834]

Dude:

1) Nobody cares about VERY MARGINAL differences in "rigor" at a mediocre school. The consensus from people that have been through this is that HYS are the only schools that might, but you're excluded from consideration there.

2) There's no such thing as a "technical GPA." Your GPA is whatever gets reported to USNWR (ie, LSAC-calculated). It's a dumb system, but that's how it is.

3) Nobody is saying you shouldn't use big words AS SUCH. Just that you're off-putting and a bad communicator. I've taught history to undergraduates and I have graduate degrees - I've read more than you and authored more than you. I'm not anti-intellectual. You're just being annoying and have been called out as such.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I knew I liked you for a reason, cron.

OP, I taught history to undergrads, too. Your schedule is perfectly fine. It's not going to make the slightest difference in your application. I will go so far as to say that it won't hurt you, but that's it. When I said history majors, I meant history majors. And the thing with history (again, saying this as a history teacher) is that it's hard to do badly in a history class, but it's hard to get the top grades as well. Honestly, someone who puts in all the work to fulfill the requirements will probably get some version of B (unless there are serious writing/comprehension issues), which isn't usually the case in STEM courses. But it's not easy to get the straight As in history.

And leaving aside the causation/correlation issue, the classics majors you referred to are people who study Latin and Greek. Not history majors who take classical history courses. Those would just be history majors. Which is a fine major, but again, isn't going to make you stand out.

But again - if you are right about all this why did you even post the schedule to begin with?

And the surest sign of not being a good writer is describing your own writing as things like "forceful" and "elegant" and "Scalian." In what universe is that a good idea?

[Ti Malice]

Please don't lock this thread.

[cron1834]

I knew I liked you for a reason, cron.

And the surest sign of not being a good writer is describing your own writing as things like "forceful" and "elegant" and "Scalian." In what universe is that a good idea?

Like, there's nothing classier than telling people how classy you are, amirite?

[csprizzle38]

Dude:

1) Nobody cares about VERY MARGINAL differences in "rigor" at a mediocre school. The consensus from people that have been through this is that HYS are the only schools that might, but you're excluded from consideration there.

2) There's no such thing as a "technical GPA." Your GPA is whatever gets reported to USNWR (ie, LSAC-calculated). It's a dumb system, but that's how it is.

3) Nobody is saying you shouldn't use big words AS SUCH. Just that you're off-putting and a bad communicator. I've taught history to undergraduates and I have graduate degrees - I've read more than you and authored more than you. I'm not anti-intellectual. You're just being annoying and have been called out as such.

I begin from the premise that even at HYS---where she'd have a shot with a 162 and 3.9+---a URM with a 166 and 3.9+ throughout four years of undergrad would have a shot, and that she definitely would have a shot at Chicago/Penn/UVA. (This is so *notwithstanding* her failure to satisfy what USNews suggests are the admissions benchmarks.) Such is the holistic nature of affirmative action.

1.) Earning A's in 400-level and 500-level (graduate) courses for four years in an Honors Program at a state university, and graduating summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa with a 3.96---rather than taking *easy* courses and graduating with a 3.97---could very well incline top law schools to ignore my junior college zeroes when they assess the strength of my application. Such is the holistic nature of affirmative action.

2.) Not so---not when an applicant's viability is independent of helping the target school move up in the rankings IN THE FIRST PLACE!

3.) If I'm a poor analytical writer, so too are the finest appellate litigators and jurists in the nation, whose styles (and rich vocabularies) I've successfully "ARROGATED." So bite me. You send me your latest essay; I'll send you mine; and we'll compare. (You're attacking my "communication skills" because you find my forceful style "off-putting," not because you think I write shoddy prose. Gimme' a friggen' break haha.)

[d cooper]

Retake the LSAT.

[csprizzle38]

I knew I liked you for a reason, cron.

OP, I taught history to undergrads, too. Your schedule is perfectly fine. It's not going to make the slightest difference in your application. I will go so far as to say that it won't hurt you, but that's it. When I said history majors, I meant history majors. And the thing with history (again, saying this as a history teacher) is that it's hard to do badly in a history class, but it's hard to get the top grades as well. Honestly, someone who puts in all the work to fulfill the requirements will probably get some version of B (unless there are serious writing/comprehension issues), which isn't usually the case in STEM courses. But it's not easy to get the straight As in history.

And leaving aside the causation/correlation issue, the classics majors you referred to are people who study Latin and Greek. Not history majors who take classical history courses. Those would just be history majors. Which is a fine major, but again, isn't going to make you stand out.

But again - if you are right about all this why did you even post the schedule to begin with?

And the surest sign of not being a good writer is describing your own writing as things like "forceful" and "elegant" and "Scalian." In what universe is that a good idea?

No, it's not easy at all... Because they're 400-level courses at a perfectly respectable state university. And that's the precisely my point: If I get A's in them, and if I get into Phi Beta Kappa---which will require me to get A's in Formal Logic and Accelerated French---I'll be in a better position than I would getting similar grades in courses where it's easy to get them. THAT'S ALL I'VE DEFENDED LOL. THAT'S ALL I'VE DEFENDED. THAT'S IT.

Oh, and it's not like I'll be one of the smarter students in the class... I crammed for the AP U.S. History exam for two sick days and got a 4 (with a 71 course grade... as a junior in high school). I'm pretty sure I'll be able to compete with the best and the brightest. (Especially if cron will teach me how to communicate effectively.)