In class on Tuesday we had discussed the structuring of law school, as well as law school admissions. At this time, I would now like to discuss a particular topic which I believe will appeal to many in the class: the LSAT and Law School admission.
Planning, hopefully, to attend law school myself, I began researching law schools a few months ago. And it was here I discovered the significance of the LSAT in the law school admissions--it makes up nearly 40-50% of of an admission decision--and it's not an easy test!
Now while I believe there has to be some way to gauge student success in law school besides GPA, I do not believe the LSAT should weigh as heavily in making a decision--that is, I think it should be closer to 30% of the total decision, not 40-50%. My rationale behind this is the following: there are multiple ways to measure intelligence (and to predict success) and, therefore, something like a LSAT--a test one can only take a few times at most--cannot encapsulate how well or not well someone will perform.
With that said, I personally believe GPA (with the difficulty of the major taken into consideration) ought to be the leading the factor (maybe 50-60%), followed by the LSAT (maybe 30%) and lastly followed by activities/work experience (maybe 10-15%). In other words, I think less weight should be given to the LSAT and more to other areas. This, of course, is a personal opinion; however, I am wondering what others in the class think of the LSAT? Do you think it will predict how well one will do in law school? Should it weigh as much in decision factors?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I do believe that law schools should weigh LSAT scores less than they presently do. I feel that one standardized test cannot efficiently express whether a student will succeed in law school. I think that experience and GPA should be weighed the most. The GPA lets a school know that the student takes his or her studies seriously. Experience expresses that the student is extremely interested in the field. I think that a successful law student needs to know more than just logic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your argument. Although the LSAT is an exam that measures the application of skils required for law school, such heavy emphasis on the exam is not efficient. Determining an individual's full abilities through one standardized test is not suffiecient enough to evaluate a student's potential. Therefore, I feel more emphasis should be placed on GPA, extra curricular activities, and alternate experiences in the field of law.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though they have tried to structure the LSATs specifically to guage how well we would do in law school. Do I think that it is the best method of determining someone's intelligence? No. But I also do not think that GPA is the best determining factor in that. Personally I think that it should be an even mix between LSAT score, GPA, Activities, and letters of reccommendation. I feel that letters should carry more weight, because they are the only real way to get any insight on a person.
ReplyDeleteThough I haven't started studying for the LSAT, I think it is a pretty good way to compare people. I certainly don't think it should be the only consideration, I like that it is quantifiable way to compare people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the letters of recommendation suggestion. A number--that is a GPA and LSAT score--can only tell so much. Personal anecdotes can be just as, or more, important than that number. Character is important to me.
ReplyDelete