<p>I see someone likes playing the devil’s advocate…that’s an interesting perspective too I admit.</p>
<p>Well, if I saw things going the other way empirically, I’d argue the other side. Basically, I’m trying to find an explanation for what I’ve seen among some of the horror stories I’ve heard. And this is the best one I have.</p>
<p>It could certainly swing the other way in theory. But this fits with what I’ve seen.</p>
<p>I think whatever people are saying for the OP is premature. Based on the OP’s past posts, he has decent high school numbers but not fantastic ones (34 ACT and 2110 SAT). He would be putting his eggs in the wrong basket if he were practicing vigorously for the LSAT right now. It would be less silly sounding if this guy were someone who got a 177 on a real administration and was wondering if his chances would look much better with a 180. Not saying I doubt he’ll get a 180 or whatever, but anything said about a projected score is hot air until there is actually a real LSAT score. Meanwhile, concentrate on getting into college.</p>
<p>Ya I knew someone would look up my past posts after this thread. I’m no standout in high school I completely admit. I am not the valedictorian or some kind of supergenius that will find the cure for cancer like joked at in this thread. Hell, I have a C in calculus right now if you look up my past topics. </p>
<p>What I standout in is that I have a plan to do what I want to do and I do that better than any other kid (not trying to come off as overconfident). My goal is simply this:</p>
<p>I have been dual enrolled at high school and my local community college for two years. My high school weighted GPA is only 4.5 but I take all APs I can and at the same time enroll in as many community college courses that transfer to a UC campus as possible. So far, in four semesters and two summer sessions, I have about two actual years of UC work done with a 4.0 GPA average (I realize it’s community college so it’s obviously easier to get a 4.0). I also have 5 AP courses all with 5’s that will transfer for credit finishing all of my GE in conjunction with the classes I am taking. Without completely boring you of my entire life scheme, I’m simply going to summarize it as thus:</p>
<p>-Go to community college, save money, rack up high GPA, save time
-Be a good enough high school student to get into UC’s such as UCLA and Cal (that is why I don’t have 2300+ and all the things you are expecting schrizto because that is simply not what I study for. If you haven’t noticed I study for only one major test. Hint hint)
-Study the LSAT with a target score of 180 (this basically takes up my free time. Some people like playing Xbox, I play logic games)</p>
<p>This is the road I chose to take and in my opinion it has its many advantages from saving thousands upon thousands of dollars. Each 5 units costs me about $30 here hahaha and it’s easy to get a 4.0 to balance out some B’s I might get at upper division classes. In the meantime, I devote my spare time to the LSAT. It shouldn’t be that hard to believe I get high 160s range if you know what my plan of attack is in regards to my education.</p>
<p>I personally wouldn’t be so sure. I received a 2310 on my SAT but I received a 170 flat after 5 months of study. I was scoring 173s and 174s on my practice tests. This really killed my changes for the top 5.</p>
<p>Well, the practice tests I’m taking are old released 1990’s exams. Unless the curves have changed, the questions are much harder, and/or test day pressure makes me choke I feel decently confident. Of course, I honestly know that getting a 176 on a practice test in the safe, relaxing, comforting warm chair in your own home is different than sitting in a room where your performance will decide the rest of your future. That thought is mainly one of the reasons I never think I am prepared enough for the real LSAT so I keep on going, test after test.</p>
<p>Perhaps when you apply to law school, you could explain your decision to graduate from college in two years by pointing to financial considerations. I’ve read before that law school admissions officers don’t tend to frown on young applicants who rushed through college if these applicants did so because their financial situation compelled them to (I think I read this in Anna Ivey’s guide to law school admissions; Ivey was an admissions officer at the University of Chicago’s Law School). Also, do your best to get a GPA above 4.0. It really isn’t that difficult to rack up A+'s in many classes, and as you may know, law schools assess these A+'s to be worth a 4.33, even if your university only considers them to be worth a flat 4.0.</p>
<p>I really don’t want to get into this debate, but I do want to point out a few things. It is really easy to get As in CC and dual enrollment is no longer a big deal. I’d say nearly a third of the students in my kids’ high school were dual enrolled and getting all As, since our high school gets a tuition discount. It seemed like a good way to get credits.</p>
<p>What we learned, however, is that there are down-sides to dual enrollment. 1) Not all credits are guaranteed to transfer (most notably courses in your future major). 2) The academic requirements can give students a false sense of security that they are able to do college level work. Based on my kids’ classes in a presumably good CC, the academic requirements were significantly less than their college classes at decent schools. 3) If you have enough credits to claim that you could graduate in 2-years, then you are potentially eliminating your eligibility for 4-year freshman scholarships. You may be viewed as a transfer student, not a freshman. We were at an open house where a student asked a question about financial aid and was visibly shocked to learn that she had lost her opportunities for the big scholarships. 4) Certain schools may accept fewer transfer applicants than freshman applicants. If you’re looking at the big public universities it probably isn’t a big deal but if you were hoping for a very selective university this may not be the best track. 5) by focusing on dual enrollment and long-term goals, you’re missing out on normal personal growth. Well-rounded activities and interpersonal interactions are just as important as everything else in life, especially at this stage of your life. I can tell you from 30+ years of practicing law that it’s a very social field. Whether you’re interacting with other lawyers, clients, your community, networking, etc. – you better spend as much time developing your personal skills as practicing the LSAT or you’ll be unemployable and unhappy wherever you go to school. I suspect your parents have tried to tell you this already…</p>
<p>The real subject matter of the law is the relationships between human beings - the duties they owe each other, and the resolution of disputes between them. It’s not just a tournament to determine who has best mastered formal logic, or who has the most impressive vocabulary, or who has the best memory. All of those skills are useful to lawyers insofar as they help in the applicable of formal rules to the relationships between real flesh and blood human beings. But the point of it all is those relationships.</p>
<p>Law schools are cautious about admitting students who are exceptionally young because of a fear that their life experience is not sufficient to give them adequate insight into human relationships to understand adequately how the rules governing those relationships should best operate.</p>
<p>Adding another fraction of a standard deviation to an LSAT score that’s already two or three standard deviations to the right of the median far less important to your future success as a lawyer than the ability to relate to human beings. </p>
<p>Throw away your LSAT prep books, and get out there and make some friends. Try to get a date for the prom. Fall in love. Have your heart broken, and learn to get over it. </p>
<p>The worst lawyers I have ever encountered in a quarter century of practice have been those who were most inept at dealing with people.</p>
<p>Thank you for trying to teach me life lessons, yet I can’t force myself to care about things that I naturally don’t even pay attention to like prom and/or other social mishaps. </p>
<p>In any case, Neonzues, I am positive every unit I take will transfer over and also I can still qualify for scholarships; I checked this with my counselor.</p>
<p>I actually disagree about getting friends. I had many acquaintances during my undergraduate years at UC Berkeley, but no substantial/close friends. I wasn’t too interested in having a social life, getting girlfriends, ect. That doesn’t mean I didn’t develop necessary professional communication skills. I always spoke up in class discussions and I always received full marks in participation. I am very assertive and talkative when it comes to business/professional discussions.</p>
<p>Being “talkative” or developing “people skills” in a social setting and developing “people skills” in a more strict or professional setting are completely different in my opinion. I am not afraid at all to talk to others in a social setting; I chose not to. I’m not really an introvert because I talk to others when I want to, but I have so much more fun with myself by watching movies, playing video games, in addition to my family. They are my closest friends. Yet I’m fine talking in a professional setting however. </p>
<p>Getting close friends/going to prom isn’t that important.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Check. Mild check. And not sure about you, but quite common in general.</p>
<p>I agree with jimmihendrix, if you don’t have friends it doesn’t necessarily destroy your life. I’m not interested in such trivial matters.</p>
<p>and bluedevilmike, I will tell you guys what I get on my official LSAT when I do take it, but I’ve got some time.</p>
<p>There have been two posters, one here, one on another board, who followed the same plan. Neither did well in admissions. </p>
<p>Student A went to high school and dual enrolled in UWisconsin-Stephen’s Point. (Apologies if it’s Steven’s Point.) Had a 4.0. Went to UWisconsin Madison with enough credits to finish in 1.5 years. Got almost all As there–maybe one A minus or something. High LSAt–not 180, but high. Rejected at each and every one of the top 14. </p>
<p>Student B went to CC in NYState with dual enrollment. Transferred into Cornell ILR (which is VERY respected). Got slightly lower grades, but still had above a 3.9 cum. Got into some good law schools, but not in the top 14. Her LSAT was lower, but still high. </p>
<p>I think that the top law schools are looking for students who are intellectually curious. If there’s some valid reason to race through school–your dad died and you have to work to help support your mom support your younger siblings–then I think admissions takes that into account. But when they see someone who seems to be just collecting credits like savings stamps to collect the degree, I think it’s a turn off–especially for Yale and Stanford. </p>
<p>Additionally, while my experience is anecdotal, while I have seen a fair number of students do CC and then go on to law school, in every case where the student got into a top law school, (s)he submitted two years of grades from a 4 year university, not just one year. There was a very lengthy thread about this a few years back and that was the consensus. </p>
<p>So, if the OP wants to proceed with his/her game plan, I would recommend taking at least one year between college and law school so that two years worth of grades from the 4 year degree-awarding institution are available. </p>
<p>I’d also forget Yale and Stanford. Soft factors are important. Unless you have one of the “hooks” that you don’t create yourself-e.g.,URM status–it’s almost impossible for someone who goes straight from high school with dual enrollment to junior year in college with no time off to work, serve in the military, etc. to accomplish anything that will help admissions. It’s HIGHLY unlikely that you’re going to become the student body president or a star athlete or the editor in chief of the campus paper if you show up as a junior. While Harvard doesn’t weigh soft factors as heavily as Y or S does, you still need SOMETHING more than gpa + LSAT to get in. It’s going to be hard to do that. It also may be harder for you to get good letters of recommendations from profs.</p>
<p>My recommendation is to slow down and smell the roses. You don’t have to go to prom if you don’t want to, but you do need to find some interest in life other than doing logic puzzles. This is primarily so you’ll have a better life. However, if you don’t have anything else going for you, it’s going to be hard to land a good job straight out of college for at least one year and it’s going to be harder to do something well enough to make yourself competitive for a top law school.</p>
<p>PS: This simply isn’t true:
</p>
<p>If your grades go down substantially when you transfer, you’re not getting into a top school. LSDAS DOES give you a cum gpa, but when you go to 2 different institutions, it also calculates a gpa for each institution. If your gpa from the degree granting institution is lower than your cum, it’s going to hurt.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>PrepTests pre-2000s or so are much easier than recent PrepTests. Try taking PrepTest 59 or 60.</p>
<p>And it’s too bad this was not posted on TLS.</p>
<p>I agree, stop and smell the roses. This doesn’t mean getting friends if you chose not to. But find doing something that you enjoy. For example, I really love reading about politics/watching the news. I love watching Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show,” and the “Colbert Report.” I also love watching “South Park,” “Seinfeld,” and “Family Guy.” I also enjoy playing the guitar and listening to rock music. </p>
<p>Call me a nerd, but I can do many things worthwhile with myself. Friends aren’t for everyone, but that doesn’t mean you have to throw your life away to endless studying.</p>
<p>The general tenor of the OP’s posts is troubling and depressing. Single-mindedness is not a virtue. Dismissing “trivial matters” such as a social life is a terrible mistake. Do you honestly believe you’ll be successful, in ANY endeavor, if you lack the necessary networking and social skills? </p>
<p>I’m currently a 2L at one of HYS, and let me tell you, we have our fair share of the socially awkward and misanthropes. But the majority of people here are down to earth and actually give a hoot about their fellow man. And those people are inevitably going to be the ones who have successful careers. Sure, your grades can get you into an elite firm or government job, but what happens after that? Being a skilled legal mechanic is but one factor out of many that will determine how far you go. I can’t stress enough the importance of building good relationships and making good first impressions. No one makes partner at a firm, to the federal bench, or to an elite law school teaching position without knowing how to play the game. </p>
<p>But career success aside, do you honestly want to go through life ignoring the fullness of human experience? Are you a robot?</p>
<p>I enjoy solitude. But a life without friends is as unimaginable to me as a life without food or oxygen.</p>
<p>Yes I would actually. You can develop business skills of communication without developing an intricate social life. Plus how many law firm associates actually do become close friends with their co-workers anyways? I would assume it’s mostly going to dinners, speaking up about current events/sports events, all that jazz. Other than formal or informal company gatherings, I doubt it would be absolutely necessary to develop more long-lasting or “actual” friendships with your co-workers or law partners. Business socialization is different from “friendship” socialization. </p>
<p>Like I said, friends are not cut out for anyone. Don’t think I haven’t tried. It’s just with the vast majority of people I have tried to become friends with, yet when I take the initiative we only talk about trivial or non substantial matters, which usually puts me off. I don’t need close friends because I already have a close family which fills that void. Not that I don’t care about my “fellow man.” Like I said, I have a myriad of acquaintances; if you as me for a favor or want to talk to me, I will usually listen. But more often than not, this relationship has been related to school work or school issues. We don’t develop the relationship any further and no one has ever invited me to “hang out anywhere.” </p>
<p>I don’t consider myself socially awkward or a misanthrope. I am very adept in speaking up in class I have an ability to impress my professors
through my discussions. Most of my previous professors/graduate student instructors have believed me to be a very social person outside of class. I have no problem whatsoever letting myself heard. And believe me, I know people who are social extroverts but fail to express themselves in a class or professional setting. This affects their participation grades. I would rather be a social introvert and be a good professional conversationalist than vice versa. </p>
<p>I am very conversational when talking to hair stylists, doctors, family friends, friends of my parents ect. when they take the initiative to talk to me (no matter how superficial their conversations with me are). </p>
<p>People are different. I haven’t had a good experience with friends, and I probably won’t bother unless someone approaches me and shows an interest with being friends with me. I have taken the initiative too many times in the past to fail. It’s not worth bothering about with when I can enjoy solitude just as well.</p>