well i've got time to actually study if i feel like so there's a chance that'll go up but I'm not sure what I'm shooting for or how hard it'll be to raise that up... what am I looking for to get a Columbia type score? 168? ahh whatever... no matter... if it happens it happens.
If you're serious or even half serious about law school, I would highly recommend studying for the LSAT. You can definitely improve your score significantly by doing lots of practice tests, learning the tricks, etc. If anyone tells you that it doesn't do any good to study for the LSAT....they are wrong.
ok... well... someone at the school who's teaching a prep course said that its unrealistic to improve your score by more than 6 or 7 points but maybe he's wrong...
Sucks about Shockley; he's definite out for the Cocktail Party, right? Teremewhoswhatsit wasn't that impressive. Although Chris Leak is horrible in Meyer's offense. As for your score - bear in mind that the difference between 157 and 167 isn't 10 correct answers. Its probably 17. A 157 puts you probably around 70th percentile. A 167 puts you around 97th. So that's a bigger line than might seem. That being said, Yoss is right - you can study. Not so much for the material but just to get familiar with the test. And there's no fool proof method of getting higher scores. I took Kaplan (and found it generally a waste of time) and know people who did worse after taking it.
Yep, there's only a fraction of a chance he'll play. Tereshinski should do okay with a week to prepare and if Richt does a better job of play calling than he did against Arkansas. What's more important is that we should have about five defensive starters back in the lineup after sitting out with some minor knocks. Yes, a 7 point upswing in your score can make a huge difference. And by studying...that's exactly what I meant in that you can become very familiar with how the test works. I liked Kaplan....not necessarily because the instruction itself was particularly helpful but because it allowed me to take a lot of practice tests under close to real conditions....sort of forced that familiarity on me.
ahhh... thanx for the tips... and Leak is just plain horrible... he's overrated and rely's WAY WAY WAY too much on his first read. He's got a good arm and he's athletic, somewhat - but he's just not as good as he seems/seemed to be. Even though they/we (I'm a Gator wannabe) haven't had amazing QB's we've always had smart QB's who can find more than just one or two receivers per game.
That'll help. You have a decent shot at it this year. Although now that GadZooks is gone, Florida have a chance. Exactly. I used them for their tests. Most of their strategies were designed to help students achieve scores I wasn't aiming for to begin with.
Leak is a pure pocket passer playing in a spread option. Given that the spread option requires him to make such fast decisions, he has no choice but to go to his first read. He was a much better passer the season before. Think of what Meyer is doing with Leak as what SAF does with Rooney by playing him on the wing in a 4-3-3. Using you own system regardless of whether you have the right players for it, which Meyer does not.
At the risk of being unhelpful, law school is what you make of it. I worked as a paralegal before law school, decided I wanted to be a lawyer, and went in with fairly pragmatic goals -- I wanted to do well enough to get a decent job. But I'm not particularly academic. I went to a "top" college and did completely average. Academics don't interest me as much as real world situations, and in many ways I viewed law school as a hoop to jump through. I did a clinic my third year of law school and thought it was the best part. In contrast, I had friends who had gone to less reputable colleges, who LOVED law school. Loved the classes, loved the professors, did extremely well. At least one of them probably had the best years of his life in law school. So a lot of it is your personality and your expectations. Just because you're not a bookworm doesn't mean that law school isn't for you...although it might make it less enjoyable. I certainly enjoyed parts of it less than some classmates. As an unrelated nugget, I'd take the advice everyone gives you with a grain of salt, especially when people go on about the importance of going to top schools. Does it make a difference? Yes. If you do well at a lesser school, will you be fine? I would say yes. It's not the end of the world if you don't go to Harvard. But I would study hard for the LSAT. That matters a lot, to every school. Best of luck, and feel free to PM me if you have any more questions.
That depends on what you want to do with your law degree, where you want to work, etc. Its also true that certain career paths are simply closed to those who didn't attend the top ten or so.
Lawyers are the scum of the earth and deserve to die. Fu<king c0cksucking money grabbing bastards. Thou shall all burn in the eternal flames of hell. Have fun.
some lawyers are scum. it is hard to argue that a district attorney is a bad person. for example, johnny cochcoran was a low life who deserves to burn in hell. bt that does not apply to marcia clark. she may have been a mediocre prosector, but she had the right intentions. most criminal defense attorneys are scum of the earth.