| Topic Name: |
how much does your school count? |
| Message Name: |
Unfair to base it all on LSAT |
| Date Posted: |
10/18/2002 |
| In Reply To: |
Law schools have been doing this stuff for years; do you think that they are that dense?
They know that there are relative differences among schools. But it is one thing to know of them and a totally different thing to try and compensate for them. Unlike the study of law, a single topic heavily regulated by the ABA, undergraduates are spread across a spectrum of majors with tons of different requirements. A school that is good at one thing isn't neccesarily good at another. Also unlike law schools, prestige often plays a lesser role in picking undergraduate schools. Price, location, and convienance play a much greater factor in deciding where to go to undergraduate then law school.
Law schools recieve tens of thousands of applications a year and need quick and dirty ways to screen. They can't sit around and weigh the relative merits of degrees from a thousand undergraduate institutions.
Is the LSAT a "easy" way out? Definitely, it's also one of the only plausible ones. The LSAC isn't qualified to try and adjust your GPA by school. They provide class ranking relative to other applicants from your school and that's all they can do.
Complaining is fine IF you can come up with a better suggestion. Otherwise, there's no benefit in bashing other people's schools for no other effect then massaging your own ego.
On the point of weighing a 4 hour test more then 4 years of undergraduate. That's an old and tired argument that the law schools settled long ago. They DO count the 4 hour test more at most schools. Why? Because it's a better predictor for them of future performance then the ambiguous and distorted GPA (admittedly for many of the reasons you're complaining about; but what can they do other then to discount GPA?). The system is in some ways set; question is, what are you going to do about it? Bash other people's schools? Please. |
| Message: |
I am of the opinion that the LSAT does indeed measure raw intelligence. However, the LSAT would be more fair if it also included a math/finance section. Being a lawyer, especially one in corporate finance and tax, involves far more math ability than logical games ability. I know many people who did great on the GMAT but not so great on LSAT. These people would have surely done better in law school than some of these people getting high LSAT scores.
Again, I'd like to say that a regular state school in no way can compare to a top ten undergrad school. The students at the top schools are not only more intelligent, but they also work like maniacs as well, thus making the curve far more difficult. In fact, the University of Chicago had to close its library on Friday nights just to encourage kids to have a social life and not to study. This level of cutthroat-ness and competitiveness does not exist at normal schools.
|
|
