The Future of Justice (Ep. 164)
The guys are fresh back from Chi-town. Their bellies are full of Chicago red hots and deep dish pie. Their spirits are high after hanging out with class full of awesome LSAT-takers. And they’re ready to take on your pressing LSAT questions. Today the guys review a recent email from LSAC, they give an update from two past-listeners-turned-law-students, they talk a bit about Ben’s Score Tracker, and they muse about the interactions that may happen if you have a pharma degree AND a JD.
As always, if you like the show and you want to get more from the Thinking LSAT community, check out these links. You can connect with other folks studying for the LSAT, and get more useful resources from Nathan and Ben.
The Thinking LSAT Facebook Group.
Find us on Twitter. Nathan’s Twitter handle. Ben’s Twitter handle.
The Thinking LSAT personal statement review.
5:56 – Email 1—The guys read through another amusing email from LSAC. This time, they’re letting folks in the San Francisco Bay area know that the LSAC forum location is changing. They’re moving away from Marriott and pledging their allegiance to Hilton! Tune in to hear the guys run through the email and find out why the forum is moving. Plus, the guys give some advice on whether it’s even worth it to attend one of these events. Thanks to listener Keith, who sent this email our way!
14:52 – Email 2—The students in the Chicago class were wondering about the fate of long-time listener, and friend of the show, Wicked. If you’ll remember, Wicked applied to law schools with an insane LSAT score and GPA, and the guys followed the saga of her admissions process. So what ended up happening to our high-scoring pal? Well, she was offered admission to Harvard, but TURNED THEM DOWN, so that she could go full-ride plus a $10k stipend to Michigan. Pretty badass, right? Nathan and Ben break down why this puts Wicked at an advantage every step of the way in her law career, starting with day one of her 1L year.
21:39 – Email 3—Chris tuned in to episode 161 and listened to the guys talk about “Why XYZ Law School?” essays. And he found it helpful. Sort of. Now, he’s sitting down to write a slew of his own “why” essays and he asks the guys what they think he should include. Should he say that it’s because the schools he’s applying to are ranked well and have good job-placement statistics? Ben and Nathan agree that while talking numbers might show a school you’re listening to their sales pitches, you probably want to talk more about soft factors. Like maybe write about how you love the city where the school is, or you dig the culture on campus. Things like that, y’know?
28:42 – Email 4—Basinel just wrapped up her degree. At pharmacy school. In Russia. Now she’s back stateside and working on getting a job as a pharmacist. At this point you might be like, “hey, B, this ain’t the Thinking Pharmacy podcast…what gives?!” But Basinel brings it right back home. It turns out she’s always been interested in going to law school, and now that she’s thinking about her future she wants to know if the guys think it might be a good idea to have a pharmacy-school degree and a JD. Plus, she didn’t graduate in Russia with a GPA, so she wants to know what that means for her LSAC GPA after she takes the LSAT. The guys don’t really know the answer to either question, but they make their best guesses. Chances are that having a JD and another technical degree can only help you—it’s probably better than just having a JD by itself.
36:30 – Email 5—Who’s going to law school on a full-ride scholarship?! Josh. That’s who. And “why is he goin’ to law school on their dime?” you may wonder, dear listeners. Because he asked for it. That’s why. After listening to the show, Josh was well armed for financial-aid negotiations. His law school admitted him and offered him a partial scholarship late in the cycle. But having read the school’s ABA 509 report, Josh knew that he should probably be going to that school for free. So what did he do? He walked away, saying he needed more money to attend the school in question. The next day, they called him back with a new, and much better offer. Josh writes in to tell the tale and thank the guys, but his entire note basically sounds like a back-handed compliment. It’s pretty fun. The guys kinda give Josh’s email the side eye and launch into a discussion about adverbs, writing skills, and reading comprehension.
55:38 – Email 6—PK noticed that on Ben’s Score Tracker, there’s an option to record your “untimed score.” She thinks that maybe, just maybe, this is why folks write in and share their untimed scores, much to the chagrin of our Thinking LSAT duo. After all, if there’s an option to record an untimed score on the Score Tracker, there must be some significance to the number, no? Ben sets the record straight on the Score Tracker and how untimed score data can be significant.