Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
saraeliz

Law School Chances - What should I do?? Help

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, beyondsection17 said:

I sometimes wish I could go back to when I joined this site and change my username to AsSheThenWas. But then again, that looks too much like "ass, he then was".

It's a pretty pompous parenthetical inclusion.

On another note, PuisneStudent would have been a funny username.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, beyondsection17 said:

I sometimes wish I could go back to when I joined this site and change my username to AsSheThenWas. But then again, that looks too much like "ass, he then was".

At least your name isn’t hopefulcanadianlawyr... why did I think I’d just post my chances thread? 

Edited by ToLawAndLetLaw
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, hopefulcanadianlawyr said:

At least your name isn’t hopefulcanadianlawyr... why did I think I’d just post my chances thread? 

Well, at least you're not "JudgeOrBust."

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, providence said:

Hey, the Devil's Advocate played an important role in the church - arguing against canonizing people so that there was an opportunity to discover if they had any weaknesses. 

Though the position was significantly changed in the 1980s, and the devil's advocate had long been a slang term, never the official title - and in any event, everyone has weaknesses (everybody's a sinner - except that Guy, to roughly quote Homer Simpson...). Dorothy Day is on the road to likely future recognition by the Catholic church as a saint, and likely would be recognized as such already if not for having had an abortion etc. (not debating that here, I mean how viewed from the Catholic perspective!).

Note the capitalization of "Guy" in that context, but not "devil"... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re good names (for those who don't know, in US jurisprudence Judge Learned Hand is considered probably the greatest and/or most-cited US federal judge never appointed to the Supreme Court):

Of course, Kozinski is now gone...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, maximumbob said:

On the point about Harvard's adopting the GRE, since the GRE is a very similar test to the LSAT (and, apparently, an equally useful predictor of sucess), I'm not sure how adopting the GRE remotely addresses the op's complaint. The main driver for it appears to be that it's a more accessible test outside of North America. 

It was OP who brought it up, intended to highlight what they considered a refreshing change of course from the LSAT. Or maybe they weren't aware that the alternative to writing the LSAT was to write a different standardized test.  

Edited by Iheartcats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2018 at 7:26 AM, providence said:

Do you mean devils' advocate? Because you look arrogant/stupid/naive/foolish/ridiculous/annoying. It's like showing up to the first day of high school football and telling everyone your ultimate goal is to play in the NFL. Well, great.... but why don't you focus on getting in shape and learning the game first? You should be letting other people say to you, "Hey, ever thought of being a judge?" Not telling "everyone" that you want to. 

Hey, this is my opinion alone (ok, and that of some people I've talked with, including judges.) If people disagree or think they know better, go ahead and tell everyone you want to be a judge, and maybe I'm wrong as to what they'll be thinking of that. 

I think the using the word "goal" is what most makes it sound absurd and arrogant.  A goal is a defined benchmark that you plan to hit.  If a person said "I'm going to try out for the high school football team this year. I love football, it would be my dream to play in the NFL" I would be far less likely to cringe at the statement than if they said it was their goal.  Just changing 'goal' to the word 'dream' sounds less obnoxious (and serious).  That said, I still probably wouldn't go around before I am even in law school saying its my dream to be a judge.... 

Edited by Iheartcats
edited NHL to NFL, whoops!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Iheartcats said:

I think the using the word "goal" is what most makes it sound absurd and arrogant.  A goal is a defined benchmark that you plan to hit.  If a person said "I'm going to try out for the high school football team this year. I love football, it would be my dream to play in the NHL" I would be far less likely to cringe at the statement than if they said it was their goal.  Just changing 'goal' to the word 'dream' sounds less obnoxious (and serious).  That said, I still probably wouldn't go around before I am even in law school saying its my dream to be a judge.... 

[emphasis added]

I would cringe, if someone said that playing high school football was the first step to ultimately playing hockey in the NHL... :twisted:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, epeeist said:

[emphasis added]

I would cringe, if someone said that playing high school football was the first step to ultimately playing hockey in the NHL... :twisted:

I actually am pretty clueless about sports, but that was a genuine typo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, providence said:

Never underestimate the power of ignorance, either. Sometimes law students and potential law students are their own worst enemies. On this site, I’ve seen people doing what I consider to be ridiculous amounts of over-preparing for the LSAT,

For me, going all-out with my LSAT prep was necessary. It was not intuitive to me so I really had to work at it. In my experience, more people underestimate the difficulty of the LSAT than overestimate it. Ignorance still played a part, but in a different (maybe more detrimental) way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Psychometronic said:

For me, going all-out with my LSAT prep was necessary. It was not intuitive to me so I really had to work at it. In my experience, more people underestimate the difficulty of the LSAT than overestimate it. Ignorance still played a part, but in a different (maybe more detrimental) way.

I second this. I spotted about 4 people as soon as I sat down in the testing room that I could already see did not read the test day rules and I know that a lot of people think they do not need to study very hard for it. The LSAT is a learn-able exam! Get some Powerscore books and prep tests, spend a few months studying.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • You just completed your articles in insurance defense and yet claim to have vast knowledge in the field of medical and health law. You've also got an  LLM that focused on 11 different topics unrelated to insurance or civil lit.  But the type of law you are really interested in is IP law.   And you intend to tell employers about your poly marriage?  During interviews I assume?  Only way it could be a red flag is if you told someone unless your last name is Blackmore.  
    • The reason many 1Ls get crushed after grades come out is because they mistakenly carried the "hard work means good grades" mentality into law school. The bolded part of your post is me pointing out that you're making the same mistake. What I think you really need to do is change how you prepare for exams. My advice to you FOLLOW AT YOUR OWN RISK I'm a fellow slow worker. When I prepared for midterms like everyone else, I got the same marks as everyone else. When I prepared for final exams like a slow worker, I beat the curve in 6/7 courses. The only course where I didn't beat the curve was also the only class I made the mistake of not doing the aforementioned. Understand that you can't do all of the assigned work. It may take other people 1 hour to do a 30 page reading while it takes you 4 hours (I personally need to read every word on the page). Doing all of the assigned work is just not feasible for you because its not an efficient use of time. There is absolutely no shame in admitting this or accepting this. Doing all of the assigned work is just one of many different ways to prepare for the exam. You should let my exam grade determine whether your unique method of preparation is right or wrong. Understand that doing all of the assigned work doesn't mean you shouldn't be doing any work or even less work, it just means you should be doing the work that helps you best prepare for the exam. Doing the readings - Your main focus should be to make the most efficient use of your time (i.e. doing the type of work that helps you, as an individual, best prepare for the exam) First, check the syllabus to understand the place of this reading in the class (you'd be surprised how many people overlook the value of the course syllabus). The question here is: what am I reading? What topic is this reading on? How many days will you be dealing with this topic? How many pages is it? Is the topic a standalone topic or one piece of a bigger topic? This will give you a rough idea of how much time and concern you should give to this topic and also generally primes you for the work you need to do. Second, very briefly skim the reading while paying attention to the structure of the reading. Read the headings, intros, conclusions, etc. This will help you understand the skeleton of the reading.  Third, once you understand what you're reading (i.e. after completing the first two steps) your next question is: why am I reading this? Why has the professor assigned this reading? In other words, what does your professor want you, as a student, to get out of this reading for the purposes of their class? To answer these questions, look to course summaries/CANs from upper years who have taken the same course with the same professor.  Fourth, now you know what you're reading and why you're reading it. The question now here is: what does this reading say about that? If you're a person who's comfortable relying on a summary/CAN, then rely on your summaries/CANs to provide answer the answer to this question. If you're a person who's more comfortable doing the reading, then let the summaries/CANs create the signposts of what's important in the reading so you can focus on that and allocate your time effectively.  For example, if you're dealing with the topic of sexual assault in 1L criminal law, then you're probably going to want to read all of Ewanchuk and only focus on the bare essentials in every other case (e.g. R v Chase - only matters because it tells us how to interpret the sexual nature element of the AR; R v Cuerrier - only matters because it tells us when fraud vitiates consent and what L'Heureux Dube and McLachlin say in their respective dissents, respectfully, doesn't matter for the strict purpose of your exam unless your professor cares about policy; R v Mabior - only matters because it tells us when non-disclosure of HIV status vitiates consent/constitutes fraud; R v JA - only matters because it tells us to how interpret consent and, respectfully, Fish's dissent doesn't matter unless your professor cares about policy; etc)  Lectures - The purpose of lectures isn't for the professor to spoon-feed you the material, for you to practice your skills as a typist and copy the lecture verbatim or for you to get your online Christmas shopping done. The purpose of the lecture is for the professor to: Confirm to you that you're on the right track (i.e. you've done the aforementioned Reading stage correctly and understand what the topic is, why you're doing the reading, and that you know what you need to know) Clarify anything in the readings and/or correct any mistakes/things missing from your understanding/notes or the summaries/CANs you've relied on Provide you with their unique perspective/opinion/approach to the topic at hand. You're going to keep this in mind when writing your exam in order to cater to their beliefs, prejudices. For example, if you have a feminist professor, don't argue that sex work should be criminalized on an exam. Present both sides to the argument, and in one sentence say that you support it even if you don't. As a future lawyer, you're going to be arguing a lot of things you don't agree with or believe in for your own personal gain. Might as well start early   Give you any hints about the exam. Professors notice if/when the herd thins out during the school year and some times will be inclined to reward students for attending. There have been multiple times that I've gotten useful hints about exams from a professor simply for being present during a boring lecture in the middle of October Exams - Exam-writing is a skill. Learn it. Read books on how to develop the skill. My recommendation is "Law School Exams: A Guide to Better Grades" by Alex Schimel. Create your own outline. In your 5 to 15 page outline, you should have every piece of the "what you need to know" part of each of your readings. There should be absolutely no superfluous bullshit, fluff or fat on your outline. You've literally condensed the entire course into those 5 to 15 pages. Your casebook, other peoples outlines/CANs, etc were all just tools for you to arrive at your own outline.  Learn your outline cold. I mean cold. This doesn't only mean just memorizing it. You should be able to open up ExamSoft and type out the blackletter law part of your future exam answer on demand and at near-lightning speed. The only class that I actually did this properly for was the one I finished at the top (and despite missing a major issue on the exam) and the other class that I did this, but sort of half-assed, I got an A- despite writing one paragraph for a question worth 33% question because I blanked out. Once you've learned the outline cold, take a few old exam questions and do timed exams on ExamSoft. Your focus is to type out the blackletter law as you've been doing and then actually apply it to the facts. Review your answer by yourself, then with a professor (if you can reach them/they'll allow this) and finally compare against old exam answers. Many people will disagree with this but once you do a few of these timed exams, you'll start to notice repeating patterns in terms of the issues tested, answer structures, etc (there can only be so many and also many professors are creatures of habit). 
    • Had a similar thing happen: What can you tell me about person X? Should I know person X? They mentioned you in their interview... I have no idea who this person is...
×
×
  • Create New...