|
|
Gilraen (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} ladyvorkosigan) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} otf_wank,@ 2006-09-22 21:14:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
You don't know the history of law school admissions! I know law school admissions!
This is small, but it so perfectly typifies the obnoxious that is many law students and potential law students that I had to post it.
burntnibbles asks law_students whether his debate experience will help him get into a top law school. The community, en masse, tells him that they will not. Cue threadlong freakout, and an eminently assholish and condescending post edit:
EDIT: Since it apparently wasn't clear in my opening statement, I want to emphasize that I am only seeking the comments of those who have collegiate debate experience, or at least those who know someone who does that has been through the application process. Thus far, 3 people have responded with what is essentially the same misguided assertion: "GPA/LSAT are all that matter; all other considerations are trivial".
Although I appreciate their willingness to take the time to respond, they apparently know little about law school admissions. If any of them had ever seen the admissions tables reported by schools on LSAC's website or the admissions scatterplot on lawschoolnumbers.com, for example, they'd know that there are a considerable amount of people who get into schools that are seemingly "out of their league" and occasionally schools that are even "way out of their league". While it is typically always best to err on the side of caution and keep the elevation of one's expectations relative to their GLR (GPA/LSAT ratio), for those of us with extracurricular accomplishments that both stand out and have relevance to lawyering (in my case, a track record of excellence in collegiate debate plus a brief but very decorated military career, as well as multi-paged letters of recommendation from notable professors and individuals) , it may not be naive to hope that we will receive special consideration.
The purpose of my post was to find law students debated because I am attempting to investigate just how much special consideration I should expect. While I have my suspicions that, because I've heard it said by some that moot court is becoming even more prestigious than law review at some schools and that litigation talent in general is the most highly sought after "skill" by big law, that debate experience will at least make my application stand out somewhat, I haven't the slightest clue if it will make it stand out to the point that I could potentially be one of those "mysterious anomalous acceptees" that you see in those tables and scatterplots.
I hope this not only clears up what type of responses I was looking for, but also plants a seed of doubt in the minds of those of you who think GLR is all that matters. If you'd like any further reading on this paradoxical general concept, I suggest you pick up a copy of Susan Estrich's book "How to Get Into Law School"; she offers a little discussion about those lucky few kids with bad numbers who go far because of other achievements (not legacies, mind you).</a>
This is small, but it so perfectly typifies the obnoxious that is many law students and potential law students that I had to post it.
burntnibbles asks law_students whether his debate experience will help him get into a top law school. The community, en masse, tells him that they will not. Cue threadlong freakout, and an eminently assholish and condescending post edit: EDIT: Since it apparently wasn't clear in my opening statement, I want to emphasize that I am only seeking the comments of those who have collegiate debate experience, or at least those who know someone who does that has been through the application process. Thus far, 3 people have responded with what is essentially the same misguided assertion: "GPA/LSAT are all that matter; all other considerations are trivial".
Although I appreciate their willingness to take the time to respond, they apparently know little about law school admissions. If any of them had ever seen the admissions tables reported by schools on LSAC's website or the admissions scatterplot on lawschoolnumbers.com, for example, they'd know that there are a considerable amount of people who get into schools that are seemingly "out of their league" and occasionally schools that are even "way out of their league". While it is typically always best to err on the side of caution and keep the elevation of one's expectations relative to their GLR (GPA/LSAT ratio), for those of us with extracurricular accomplishments that both stand out and have relevance to lawyering (in my case, a track record of excellence in collegiate debate plus a brief but very decorated military career, as well as multi-paged letters of recommendation from notable professors and individuals) , it may not be naive to hope that we will receive special consideration.
The purpose of my post was to find law students debated because I am attempting to investigate just how much special consideration I should expect. While I have my suspicions that, because I've heard it said by some that moot court is becoming even more prestigious than law review at some schools and that litigation talent in general is the most highly sought after "skill" by big law, that debate experience will at least make my application stand out somewhat, I haven't the slightest clue if it will make it stand out to the point that I could potentially be one of those "mysterious anomalous acceptees" that you see in those tables and scatterplots.
I hope this not only clears up what type of responses I was looking for, but also plants a seed of doubt in the minds of those of you who think GLR is all that matters. If you'd like any further reading on this paradoxical general concept, I suggest you pick up a copy of Susan Estrich's book "How to Get Into Law School"; she offers a little discussion about those lucky few kids with bad numbers who go far because of other achievements (not legacies, mind you).</a>
