Showing posts with label interviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interviews. Show all posts

Former LSAT Question-Writer Interview

LSAT Blog Former LSAT Question Writer InterviewI recently interviewed Stephen Harris, former LSAT question-writer and author of Mastering Logic Games. (Yes, he's written hundreds of the questions that appear in your books of LSAT PrepTests.)

Our discussion follows.

You can also:

1. Read ALL of my interviews with him (more than 5!)

2. Get them all in a free book I put together.

***

1. What inspired you to become a writer of LSAT questions (an "item-writer"), and what's the process by which one gets that job?

Good question. It’s not exactly the kind of thing you lie in bed at night, hoping someday to grow up to be. When one with a philosophy doctorate looks for a job, there is a publication called “Jobs for Philosophers” that contains job listings, mostly for academic posts, but with a few listings for non-teaching positions. Testing companies list job openings there, and I applied for one. I ended up with a teaching position, but when I was later contacted about writing LSAT items as a freelancer, I agreed.

What makes writing LSAT items so rewarding, compared to writing items for other exams, is that the skills tested, especially in logical reasoning, are so relevant - what makes this argument stronger; what flaw does this argument commit, etc. These skills are among the set of important tools necessary for success not only in law school, but also as a responsible citizen.


2. Which specific LSAT questions, passages, and games did you write? Any tough Logic Games or Logical Reasoning questions?

I wrote several hundred logical reasoning items over the years, but the way the LSAC item review process is set up makes it very difficult to identify your items later on. Basically, there are two levels of review between the item writer and the test form, and adjustments can be made all along the way, so it’s hard to look back at tests and say “yeah, I wrote that one.” Not to mention that it may be several years before your item even makes it to a test form. One thing I definitely learned from working with the LSAC folks is that they go out of their way to ensure that the items that appear on the test are fair and consistent.


3. What sort of guidance / parameters were you given by ACT / LSAC when it came to constructing each item-type?

LSAC did a great job of training item writers. I was sent to a three-day workshop that covered the nut-and-bolts of item writing for logical reasoning, including critiques of practice items I had written. Additionally, item writers received a detailed guide that covers all of the item types, as well as a “don’t do this” list. And editors offered lots of feedback if you got something wrong to help you hit the mark the next time. ACT and LSAC only bought the items that they liked, so there was plenty of incentive all around to get it right.


4. How did you and other item-writers come up with the topics for each section of the exam? Is there some kind of pre-approved list? What's up with all the questions about dinosaur extinction?

This is a challenge for any item writer. I don’t remember a list of approved topics, but it was made clear from the beginning that certain topics were undesirable; in particular, any that are likely to elicit a strong emotional response from test takers. Hence the dinosaur items. When I’m writing items, I simply try to pay attention, often to what I’m reading, but sometimes just to the bugs in the garden. Actually, Google and Wikipedia make item writing in general much easier, although I had stopped writing LSAT items by the time they came around.


5. How long did it take you, on average, to write each type of LSAT question? Everyone seems to hate Parallel Reasoning questions, but which Logical Reasoning question-type is the most difficult to create?

That reminds me of a lawyer joke – “it’s tough to tell what counts as billable time.” Seriously, if you have an idea for an item then writing it takes an hour or two, with editing. Otherwise, you can spend a lot of time staring at a blank screen before fingers hit keyboard. I found that it was hard to average one LSAT item a day when I was writing items as fast as I could. And some items are definitely harder to write than others. Parallel reasoning/flaw items are the toughest, because you need six topics per item – one for the stimulus, and one for each answer choice as well. You develop an appreciation for folks who have to be creative on a daily basis – cartoonists, comics, etc.


6. What do you think is the most difficult Logic Game, and the most difficult Logical Reasoning question, out of all the released LSAT PrepTests?

One of my favorite LR items is the rattlesnake item, number 22 in section 2 of PrepTest 30. It really tests one’s ability to distinguish necessary assumptions from sufficient assumptions. The game that I think is hardest is the bus game - PrepTest 36, Game 3. This is a complicated game that can easily overwhelm a test taker who is unprepared.


7. I've noticed that certain Logic Games are virtual copies of each other. (Especially #3 and #7 in this list.) Does this stem from the item-writers being lazy and reusing old content, LSAC rewarding those who studied a lot, a combination, some other explanation...?

Yes - I especially like to compare PrepTest 13, Game 3 to PrepTest 32, Game 1. Not only the setups, but also the formulations of the first rules are strikingly parallel in these two games. (Even the numbers are near anagrams – coincidence?) I can only speculate as to why this happens, other than to pick up on your point that on a standardized test things are, well, standardized. There really is no question as to whether or not the same things are tested over and over – they are. The only question is whether you’ll be able to see how the items on your test are similar to previous items. As your list indicates, sometimes the similarity can be pretty close.


8. Have you ever heard of folks at LSAC reading online message boards and laughing at the stressed-out test-takers who post there?

I have never heard of LSAC folks basking in the misery of prospective law students. My experience with these people is that they are pretty sympathetic with the test taker and her plight. A guy I worked under at LSAC, for instance, had a hard time getting into grad school because he refused to take the GRE since “it didn’t measure anything important.” This is the kind of guy you want building your standardized test. One thing I have learned from studying thousands of LSAT items is that, first appearances notwithstanding, there is a benevolent intelligence at work behind the LSAT. The test taker just needs to tap into it.

Photo by the.sprouts

Law School: Getting In | Interview

Law School Getting In InterviewI recently interviewed Thane Messinger, author of Law School: Getting In, Getting Good, Getting the Gold.

Our discussion follows.

1. What are your thoughts on the importance of law school rankings?

Law school rankings have become almost a hypnotic focus among both students and administrators. Curiously, it is of only indirect (but serious) interest within the profession. It might thus pay to also look at just how legal employers view rank.

The law is an intensely status-oriented profession. Much has been written, and much is said (and not said) in everyday conversations among lawyers and law students, each of whom is aware of—if not consciously promoting—a pecking order of legal status. Less is said on why this is so. First, let’s get a few points out the way.

Are rankings meaningful? Yes, they are.

So they describe real differences among law schools? Yes, they do.

Should they be used to decide which law school to attend? Well, in true lawyerly fashion: yes and no.

To treat law school rankings as unimportant—whether out of ignorance or indignation—is foolish. Rankings do reflect qualitative differences between and among law schools. On the other hand, looking only to rankings is equally foolish, and treating law schools with rankings within a half-dozen places of each other as hugely different is simply nonsense. Both extremes set up a bit of a straw man, as few take either approach.

Still, it’s important to keep the value of rankings firmly in mind, as a decision about attending one law school or another can make a big difference. Moreover, as to the last point, it is quite common to use rankings to highlight close difference—But this school is three points higher!—rather than treat them as they should be treated.

Rankings reflect gross, not fine, distinctions, based on both objective and (hugely) subjective criteria with wide margins of error. So, comparing #12 with #37 or #37 with #92 are fair comparisons worthy of consideration. Comparing #12 with #16 is seductively easy—and qualitatively incorrect. Within a half-dozen, other attributes are more important.


2. I’m glad you’re bringing the practitioners’ view into the discussion. So what are some of these qualitative differences?

Law school is not just some combination of buildings, faculty, students, and graduates. Instead, a twofold reality heightens the sensitivity of lawyers to status. The first is the highly competitive nature of law school. The second is the highly risk-averse nature of law practice. These two factors combine to create a system that is nearly a caste system in its orientation and effect.

Is this right? Wrong question. I happen to believe it is foolish. Many others decry it. But the reality is that it is. To hope that we can wish it away—without substantive changes in how our profession operates—is simply that, wishful thinking. For our purposes, wishful thinking is worse than silly. It will set you up for failure, as it’s easy to mistake the “wishful” part for something approaching reality.

There’s a paradox in this debate, and that is that law practice has elements of egalitarianism that are almost the opposite of all of the above. In litigation especially, it is the nature of persuasion and of winning, and of a consistent superiority at both, that marks the superior attorney. The paradox comes in that one’s pedigree is of little importance in the real world of the courtroom (and even, for a corporate lawyer, boardroom)—but of great importance in getting there.

Even more, the airs of a fancy law degree, or of a superiority complex, can work very much against us. Few jurors like being condescended to, and as a result, many top litigators look as if they just arrived to the courthouse via Trailways. Quite a few affect a less-than-holier-than-thou appearance, so as to connect to the individuals who will ultimately, if indirectly, decide their case (and earnings). Even in corporate offices, while senior executives expect a pedigreed counsel (and get it), they generally prefer down-to-earth, let’s-get-the-job-done consigliere, not snippy bluebloods.


3. I can certainly agree with that. Law students are very, very smart, and it’s good to hear this advice. How does this tie in with the “name brand” aspect of rankings?

There are two ways to approach this: the “egghead” answer and the just-the-facts-ma’am answer. Law schools are status-conscious because of professors, and because of lawyers. Together—along with a society that knows only brand-name schools—these support a self-reinforcing structure built on status.

So who sets these standards? Law professors are an obvious starting point. But, because their worlds are generally focused in, well, law school, there’s another group that heightens this already-strong orientation towards status. That is the world of lawyers and law practice. Firms are populated with individuals who have attended law school, of course. The better the firm, the more likely its inhabitants have attended the top schools. But, in most cases, the experience with law school begins (and ends) there. As a result, the practitioner takes a nearly-monochromatic view of the law school world: there’s “my” school…and then there’s everyone else’s.

The “law schools for everyone else” are clearly worse than my school…unless everyone else “knows” that such-and-so school is better. Drats. So, if one attends, say, a well-regarded regional law school, its graduates will relish the ego-boost of admiration from others, especially if practicing in that region. What happens when someone walks in from, say, Stanford? Well, sure, that’s an okay school too. And so it goes.

How many law schools can most non-lawyers (or even lawyers) mention? Hmm. There’s Harvard, of course. And, oh yes, Yale, Stanford. Columbia and NYU, for those on the East Coast. And the Universities of [insert nearest states here]. See where this goes? Chances are most of us can name the top dozen or so schools. We could probably come up with another dozen, and if someone named a few others, we’d get those too. But two hundred? No way. Only one group knows even a substantial fraction of that total: those about to apply to law school. Even law school deans focus only on schools near and above them.

So, what that means is that the entire population relies on “name brand” and on “me-and-better” to decide status (above the general status of being a law graduate). This is one reason law schools have begun to spend serious money in branding—to improve name recognition among those who might apply (and, ahem, among those who might be asked by U.S. News and World Report.)

In short, there’s a very real emotional pressure to believe one’s own school is better than it is—and to help others to believe so too—and so there’s constant pressure to connect with those schools higher above. This, in turn, heightens the value of schools—geometrically if not exponentially—the higher they are. Winner take all.

It’s an academic version of what happens in locker rooms from junior high on. Perhaps it shouldn’t be, but it’s hardly likely that we’ll change this little aspect of our psychology. More to the point, what this means is that the law practice world—which accounts for the vast majority of lawyers—feeds the weight given to objective measures, which in turn are driven by standards such as how many books are in the library (and you thought measurements would stop), how much money is spent on faculty (of obvious interest to law professors), and professors’ own views of their world.

Professors deal with the same human emotion: the school they went to is best, while the others range from dreck to okay. And it doesn’t matter who you’re talking with. If they attended the University of Virginia, their many glories are front and center, and only schools clearly better than UVA are in The Club (i.e., the Ivy League.) In this sense, it’s like looking through the wrong end of a pair of binoculars: everything around what you’re looking at is squished to nothingness.

An important point: the less secure one is, the more important status is. I’ve seen lawyers almost visibly sizing each other up by their law schools. This happens more often among younger lawyers; this is a no-no among older and better lawyers. Indeed, after working with excellent lawyers from “lesser” schools—and poor lawyers from top ones—few senior attorneys get hung up on pedigree. Among law students, it’s often a one-upmanship about their LSAT or undergraduate school or, amazingly, prep school. I remember one attorney in particular who it seemed was thinking for a split second how to respond when hearing that a more-junior associate attended a better school. It was actually far better, and both were playing games with the other in terms of one-upmanship. It was a game both lost, by the way. Why a focus on this? Why can’t we just say “law school is law school” and be done with it?

Well, for one thing, it’s not true. For another, there’s that human element again. Once one has graduated, there’s a natural inclination to live in the reflected glory of that school. This can be for practical reasons (getting a job), or for ego-driven ones. (You went there!?) But still…why? Because our sense of self-worth, particularly for lawyers, is tied up with how we perceive ourselves as smart, and how much we depend upon others seeing us as smart. If we can reflect in academic glory, we feel the warm glow of that self-worth.


4. Another question I get asked a lot is related to whether there is a difference between the quality of material actually taught in different law schools.

Yes, indeed. The “Don’t Top Law Schools Teach Law Better?” question.

The answer? Nope. This used to be a common refrain among (you guessed it) graduates of the top schools. The accusation and assumption was that good law schools taught theory—the ability to “think like a lawyer”—while lesser schools taught mere mechanics of black letter law, like a trade school. This was often said (and written) with a proverbial sneer: a “real” law school taught manly law (i.e., theory), while piddling law schools taught sissy law (i.e., how to go to court).

Although this might have been true at one time, it is no longer. All law schools now teach the same law, the same way. The bulk of law professors come from the same background: Top 5 law school, top clerkship, a year or two at a top firm, and then on to an assistant professorship. Even the lowest-ranked law schools can get, with today’s job market, the same caliber of astonishingly pedigreed new professor. They have all sipped from the same well, and even “local schools” that have an interest to focus on the laws of that state now focus as well on exactly the same doctrines that the “big boys” do. And even if all their professors didn’t come from a Top 5 school, they all want to have come from one…so they’ll be even more sensitive to teaching “theory,” just like the big boys.

This prejudice carries forward in odd ways. One book states that “top J.D. programs require a lot of work.” Um, all J.D. programs require a lot of work. It’s just that they don’t require as much work as everyone seems to believe—and they certainly don’t require makework. Top or otherwise. So, if you’re going to go to one school over another, don’t let it be for this reason.


Law School Bound Book Interview

LSAT Blog Law School BoundI recently interviewed John Richardson, author of Law School Bound: Everything you need to get into law school in Canada and the U.S. Our discussion follows. At the end, I've included a listing of the topics covered in book, as well as a link to a review of the book.


1. You published Law School Bound back in 2006. What new advice do you have for law school applicants today?

Law School Bound was designed to guide people from the decision to attend law school, through the application process, through the bar admission process and into a legal career. The book was designed to “stand the test of time”. Therefore, I wouldn’t give any different advice in 2010.

I wrote the first edition of Law School Bound in 1992 when North America was in a severe recession. The 1992 recession resulted in fewer applications for law school (including a decline in the number of people taking the LSAT). The book published in 2006 was during an economic boom. As you know, 2010 has been a tough year all around. The 2010 recession seems to have resulted in an increase in the numbers of LSAT test takers.

But, so what? If one wants to attend law school and become a lawyer, one shouldn’t care about the state of the economy. A weak economy always means fewer jobs for lawyers (and everybody else). That said, there is always an abundance of opportunity for talented, enthusiastic, focused people. Remember, the economy will turn around. You might as well be waiting (with that law degree in hand) when it does!


2. In Chapter 12, "Different Marketing for Different Schools," you talked about tailoring the application theme depending upon a school's mission statement. This sounds like a good idea, but aside from a top LSAT score and GPA, what else are they really looking for? Don't they all want unique personal backgrounds, work experience, impressive extracurriculars, etc.?

Your question is focuses both on the law school applicant and on the law school itself.

First, the law school applicant:

There is a saying that even a dog knows whether he has been “kicked” or accidentally “tripped over”. A law school admissions committee knows perfectly well whether an applicant is applying to that particular school or is just hoping to attend any school. Remember, it’s the job of the law school admissions committee to “fill the class”. All other things being equal (which they may or may not be the case), any school would rather offer a space to an applicant who they think is a “good fit” for the school.

When I consider the criteria that you mention:

Grades and LSAT scores: they will (in that order) be a huge factor. Remember that upward trends in grades are helpful.

Unique personal backgrounds: The truth is that only a small percentage of law school applicants have “unique personal backgrounds”. Furthermore, there is no objective agreement on what a “unique personal background is”. And finally, the real issue (assuming a “unique personal background”) is: how does that background bear on the applicant’s desire to attend law school and his/her application?

Work Experience: Work experience is relevant from the perspective of: how does it bear on the decision to attend law school? How does it bear on the maturity level of the applicant? How does it bear on the applicant’s motivation? Most law school applicants are coming out of some kind of undergraduate program and therefore do not have a great deal of work experience. Unless you are a “second career” applicant, the most that “work experience” will do is, distinguish you in a small way from other applicants.

Impressive Extracurricular Activities: Again, there is no agreement on what is impressive and what is not. The issue is the same: how does participation in the activity contribute to the kind of person you are. For example, three years of “swimming practice” every day is strong evidence of motivation and consistency. Membership in certain clubs (depending on the role you played) may be evidence of nothing. So, when dealing with extracurricular activities, I recommend that you describe why it was important, what you learned from it, and how it bears on your decision to attend law school.

Second, focus on the law school itself – how does the school see itself?

No two people see themselves in the same way and no two law schools see themselves in the same way. On the most basic level, one school may see itself as a national law school and another as a local school. Some schools may have a teaching philosophy of not teaching “black letter law” (perhaps some Ivy League schools) and others may see themselves as for the express purpose of teaching “black letter law”. Some schools may see themselves as strong in the “public or international law area”. Others may not.

When marketing yourself to a law school you must do your best to determine how the school sees itself. What kinds of people do they think are most compatible with their program? One must be conscious of these factors when crafting a “personal statement” for that school. You should determine the answers to these questions for any law school (including the top tier schools).

“Talk the talk” of the particular law school. Let’s consider two schools. The first school asks about your “community service”. The second school asks about your primary interests. Imagine that you have been an active participant in “Big Brothers”. When you apply to the first school you describe “Big Brothers” as “community service”. When you apply to the second school “Big Brothers” is one of your “primary interests.”


3. What advice do you have for applicants on getting accepted from a law school waitlist?

It is hard to generalize about this. Each school has its own admissions committee. Each school will have a different way of organizing its waiting list. For example, some may have a list with an order. Others may just have a list.

That said, it never hurts and can only help to let the school know that:

1. You are very interested in attending that particular school; and
2. Would accept an offer of admission from that school.

I would also advise you to remember the following:

In any office (including law offices – remember this for your future careers), the support staff have a great deal of influence. Always, Always, Always (did I say Always?) make sure that you treat the support staff with respect!

It all comes back to the idea, that it is the job of the admissions committee to fill the class. If you are enthusiastic about the school, they will be more enthusiastic about you.


4. What advice do you have for applicants on negotiating financial aid?

There are many opportunities for financial aid. Remember that “Financial Aid” can mean a loan, scholarship or combination. Some is public, some is private, etc. If you are applying for financial aid you must find out as much as you can about the organization that is funding the financial aid? What was their motivation? What criteria does it use? Every application for financial aid should (to the extent possible) be treated as a serious, independent application. You may want to emphasize different things about yourself for different forms of financial aid.


5. Any last words of advice to share with applicants?

Actually, these should be the “first words” of advice.

There are three categories of law school applicants.

1. Will get into most schools – These applicants have both very high grades and very high LSAT scores. In fact, the grades and LSAT scores are so high, that their application carries a “strong presumption” that they will be admitted. They don’t include anything in their application that will rebut that presumption. This is a small percentage of law school applicants.

2. Will get into no or very few schools – These applicants have low grades and LSAT scores and include nothing to redeem themselves in the rest of the application. They usually do a very poor job on the overall application. This is a small percentage of law school applicants.

3. Applicants who have demonstrated the academic ability to do law school work. But, the question is why that particular applicant instead of another applicant? This is by far the largest percentage of law school applicants.

Most applicants are in the third group. They must work on every component of your application file. In general the components of the application file include both “Direct Applicant Input” and “Third Party Evaluations”:

Direct Applicant Input:

* personal statements
* the law school application to the extent that they ask about biographical information

Third Party Evaluations:

* grades
* references
* LSAT scores

Furthermore each individual component must work with the other components in a way that creates a “whole that is greater than the sum of the parts”. It takes a lot of time to create a strong law school application.

Remember the following:
* Applying to law school is “academic marketing”. Your job is, through your law school application, to create positive (in a relevant way), images about yourself.

* “Talk the talk” of the particular law school. (See above)
Start your application early. This will give you the time to write it, rewrite it, get outside advice, etc.

Pretend you are applying in the year before you apply. Do a “shadow application” in the previous year. You will do a large amount of the work in the prior year, but it means that in the real application year, you will be improving your applications instead of creating them for the first time.

Get most of the work done in the summer. Applying to law school is a lot of work. It is so much work that it can encroach on time that you need to study (thus putting downward pressure on your grades).

Work with an “application buddy”. Most people do not perceive themselves the way others perceive them. You will be grateful for an “objective assessment” of the images that you are projecting. You will find it difficult to describe yourself because you have the “whole picture”. An “application buddy” will help you with these realities.

Take the LSAT in June or October at the latest. Remember that most law schools use a “rolling admissions process”. You can’t be admitted until your application is complete. June has the advantage of not conflicting with school and leaving October for a possible retake. The December takes place either the first or second weekend in December. This is a terrible time in your school year.

Make sure you apply to enough schools. Apply to schools in the following three categories: Wishful thinking (very tough to get into it). Probable match (match your grades and LSAT scores with the profile of the school). Insurance policy (you want to attend law school regardless of where you get in).

Letter of Reference: The fact that somebody agrees to write you a reference does not mean that it will be a good one. You need to “qualify” possible referees by asking the following question: “Do you feel that you could and would you be willing to write me a positive reference letter for law school” You are looking for an answer that is an enthusiastic – YES!

To borrow from a famous basketball coach, “Winning requires the will to prepare to win!”

***

Brief notes on Law School Bound from Steve:

This book is enormous - 560 pages.

As I read its table of contents, I felt as if I were looking at the contents of a pre-law advisor's brain.

John divided this book into 8 separate "books" (mega-chapters).

They are:

1. Deciding On Law School - The Pre-Law Career Counselor

2. Understanding And Identifying Opportunities To Study Law

3. The Law School Application Manual - Executing A Plan

4. Law School: Understanding, Surviving, Flourishing!

5. From Law School To Bar Admission - Your License To Practise

6. The World Is Your Oyster - Lawyers' Mobility In A Global World

7. Learning About Lawyers And The Legal Profession

8. Recognizing Historical Barriers To Access


It also includes an appendix with general LSAT tips and advice.

Appendix: LSAT PREP - Get Off On The Right Foot

Part A - Introducing The LSAT - A PREP Primer

Part B - Studying The LSAT - Past, Present And Future

***

For more info:

Read a review of Law School Bound by a pre-law college student.


LSAT Anxiety and Procrastination Tips | Interview

LSAT Blog Anxiety Procrastination TipsI recently interviewed Kelly Roell, from the Test Prep About.com site, via email. Our discussion follows.

1. Many people have difficulty sitting down and focusing when it's time to study for the LSAT. Suddenly, checking Facebook, cleaning out the spam folder in your email, and baking bread from scratch all seem like immediate concerns. What are some ways that test-takers can force themselves to sit down and look at their LSAT books?

A test-taker has to learn how to focus. First, set yourself up for success by getting rid of obvious distractions like the cell phone and t.v., getting yourself a beverage and snack beforehand, and choosing an appropriate time to study. Once you're settled, do something physical while you're studying if you're antsy and train your mind to get rid of distractions.


2. Given that the LSAT is such a high-stakes exam, what are some ways to make the stress manageable?

Best stress busters:

* Go for a run – Science has proven that a good sweat session positively uses the adrenaline that leads to physical stress symptoms. Take a run early on the day of the exam to calm the nerves

* Practice yoga – The deep, stretching movements and the meditation that goes along with yoga can calm the mind, thus reducing stress. Only do this on the day of the exam, though, if you're practiced. If you try it without knowing what you're doing, you'll only add to the stress.

* Be confident – If you've prepared well, there's no reason you shouldn't do your very best on test day. Go in with a confident attitude. Tell yourself that you're the smartest you've ever been and can do anything you set your mind to – whatever it takes to boost your self-esteem. Those with the highest self-esteem will succeed when no one else does.


3. What are some ways test-takers can cope if they freeze up on Test Day?

Set realistic expectations, envision something positive, use positive language, repeat an uplifting phrase, and shoot down negative thoughts.


4. How can test-takers make the 3-week-wait for their test scores more bearable?

First, you should get support. Let people know that you're anxiously awaiting your scores. Post it all over Facebook. Call your mom. Get your friends and family to rally around you so you have a support system if the scores aren't what you want.

Secondly, go out and celebrate with those friends and family. You did it! You took the LSAT. Regardless of your test scores, you have to be proud of yourself for having the guts to do it. Not many people do!

Last, distract yourself with something fun. Chances are good you've spent the last few months holed up in a room studying yourself sick. Relax. Go do something fun you've never done before. The adrenaline rush you get from experiencing something new and exciting will lessen the anxiety of the wait.

Photo by uaeincredible

Law School Admission Game | Interview

LSAT Blog Law School Admission Game BookLaw school admission consultant Ann Levine just came out with The Law School Admission Game. I recently interviewed Ann about her new book. Our discussion follows.

1. You have special tips for students applying to law schools that are far away from where they currently live. You suggest that they give specific reasons why they would want to move across the country for law school, such as family members or a fiancé.

I agree that it's important to convince each school of one's seriousness about attending if accepted. How can students work these details into their essays while maintaining the essay's flow?

Sometimes it’s easy to express sincere interest in a school within a personal statement. For example, it can be persuasive when showing an applicant is drawn to a certain area of law (hard to study maritime law in Iowa, for example) or wanting to continue volunteer work with respect to gay rights and what better way to be on the forefront of the political war in California than to be in San Francisco during law school, etc. Reasons for attending a certain school (or being in a certain location) actually fit in nicely with many personal statement topics, but I do understand it can be hard to avoid the seemingly inevitable “Why X Law School” concluding paragraph. Other options would be including this information in an addendum or in a separate letter to the law school. For example, it can be worked in with an addendum explaining inconsistent undergraduate grades. “I learned that I perform better academically when surrounded by a support system. My brother and his wife live in Boston and I would save money during law school by living with them. As a result, I would not have to work during law school as I did during college and my grades would therefore not be hampered by my financial obligations.” The important thing is that the reason be sincere and persuasive, rather than a platitude. Telling a law school “New York is the hub of the financial world and an exciting city” is a waste of space and not going to get you anywhere.


2. You write that students can increase the number and amount of scholarship offers by telling one law school about a competing school's scholarship offer. What are some ways to increase financial aid without an initial scholarship in the first place?

First, I want to clarify the difference between “scholarship” and “financial aid.” Financial aid includes loans. If an admitted student does not have any scholarship offers, she could still mention another school would be cheaper to attend because she could live at home or because it’s a public school. There are also private scholarship sources (not restricted to a particular school) for resourceful students.


3. In your book, you mention that you're often viewed as the champion of applicants shooting for 4th-tier "regional law schools." When I interviewed admission consultant Anna Ivey, she suggested these law schools aren't worth the investment of time and money. How would you respond?

Oh, I have responded to Anna’s opinions on this subject! I have a lot of respect for Anna but this is one point on which we agree to disagree. I stand by my response (originally posted in September 2007 on my blog).

If someone is going to law school for the sole purpose of going to BigLaw, then Anna’s theory carries quite a bit of weight in normal economic circumstances. However, in today’s world, BigLaw is no longer a security blanket with a promise of $160k right out of school. These firms are turning away people they’ve hired and firing associates! It could actually be argued that the economic impact of the current recession will be worse on law students at Top-14 schools because many of them were depending on these high paying jobs and may be unwilling to consider (or might appear overqualified for) jobs that graduates of lower ranked schools might accept.

Putting that aside, I stand by the following: the value of a legal education directly relates to the effort a law student puts in – not just to grades and law review, but to networking and marketing. I interviewed Kevin Houchin, Esq., author of “Fuel the Spark: 5 Guiding Values for Success in Law School and Beyond” on BlogTalkRadio.com. We spent a lot of time talking about the “Other 90%” – those not planning to go to BigLaw – and how they can build careers while still in law school. There are so many examples of people who succeed in life and in law without a “brand name” law school – I would never say to someone that only a certain kind of legal education is worthwhile. The key is to be smart about the debt you’re taking on and having reasonable salary expectations. It’s very possible to build connections and a brand for yourself while still a law student. Finding a job/career might take a little more creativity now that BigLaw jobs are drying up; self-motivated students face no limits on what they might earn after law school.


4. At 168 pages, your book is shorter than many other law school admission books. For example, I've reviewed How to Get Into the Top Law Schools by Richard Montauk, which is over 600 pages. What do you think are some of the advantages that applicants gain from a more concise book?

Brevity is underrated! I love to take a client’s 4 page personal statement and turn it into one that’s 500 words –and it’s usually stronger as a result. I actually say in my book, “Cutting a personal statement to size shouldn’t mean sacrificing content; it should require you to really think about your message and what is essential to include for you to prove that message.” I think the same applies to law school admission guidebooks.

It should be noted that I include no sample personal statements in my book – they are great page fillers, but I don’t believe in giving people personal statement examples. I want each personal statement to be unique, and so many law school admission books include really trite and unimpressive personal statements. Instead, I share an entire chapter of specific “do’s and don’ts” regarding personal statements. I also include four “Case Studies” of applicant profiles and suggestions of how each could use the personal statement as an opportunity to highlight a particular strength or overcome a weakness or concern a law school admission officer might have based on his background. Instead of showing people essays that don’t apply to their lives, such as the “I overcame a brain injury” and “I spent all day talking to Homeless Mary at the shelter” I wanted to show the backgrounds of four potential applicants that almost everyone can relate to and provide several ideas for effective personal statement topics in each case.

For example, here’s the first case study in the book (from page 93):

I am three years out of college and I’ve held a few jobs. I worked as a mortgage broker’s assistant, then as a publishing assistant, then sold classified ads for an online magazine. What do I write my personal statement about?
For those of you a few years out of college who have held 2-3 jobs that weren’t promotions within the same company or industry, then applying to law school can appear insincere. It can look like you’re floundering and still trying to find yourself. When objectively analyzing your resume, consider the impact of this trend and consider ways to overcome it, perhaps by emphasizing a volunteer position or thinking about ways the jobs actually have more in common with each other than meets the eye, or considering how each ob has actually allowed you to come closer to the conclusion that law school is the right next step for you. You might also consider this theme by sharing a story from your personal life about the impact a lawyer had on your family’s situation, even if the impact was negative.

In your review of Mr. Montauk’s book, you actually said much of it would only apply to applicants seeking admission to a Top-10 school. My book is concise but the advice within it is intended to apply to all law school applicants, no matter their aspirations. It’s about how to best present yourself – whoever YOU are – and you don’t present different versions of yourself to different schools based on that school’s ranking. Besides, one person’s reach school might be Columbia, but another person’s reach school might be CUNY – both applicants benefit from the advice in my book.

LSAT's Predictive Ability | Interview

LSAT Blog Predictive Ability InterviewMichelle Fabio, the About.com Law School Guide, recently interviewed me about the LSAT's predictive ability, among other things.

Our discussion follows.

1. When should potential law school students take the LSAT? That is, how long before they want to apply to law school should they sign up for the test?

For students who are still in college, take the LSAT in October or February of your junior year if possible. This allows you to do the bulk of your studying over the summer or winter break at a more leisurely pace. You want to ensure that studying for the LSAT will not detract from your junior-year grades.

Too many students wait to take the LSAT until the October or December of their senior year. However, since law school applications are reviewed and decided upon soon after they're submitted, early applicants face less competition. By taking the LSAT earlier, you avoid the scrutiny those taking it in the 11th hour will face.

Whether or not you're in college, try to take the LSAT by June of the year you intend to apply. This way, you can apply to law schools on the day they begin accepting applications. Try to take the LSAT no later than September/October of the year you intend to apply.

Sign up for the exam as early as possible. Contrary to popular belief, there's no limit to how early you can register. However, the best and most convenient LSAT test centers fill up quickly, so registering is not something to leave for the last minute.


2. How long before the test should they start LSAT prep--and when should they stop?

Far too many students fail to allow enough time to adequately prepare. 1-2 months is not adequate for the vast majority of students, especially when they have to balance LSAT prep with school or work.

Students who shoot for high scores (as well as those who shoot for mid-level scores) need time to fully understand the various sections, to develop strategies for attacking them, and to work on pacing and endurance strategies. I recommend students devote a minimum of 3 months of preparation and that they study on a regular basis during this period of time.

Take the day before the LSAT off and just relax. Do anything low-key and fun to get your mind off the exam. Last-minute cramming won't help because this isn't a memorization exam.


3. How important is the writing portion of the LSAT, and how much time should LSAT takers spend on preparing for it?

The writing sample is unscored, so it's not a big deal compared with the rest of the exam. However, law school admission officers are able to see it, and some choose to do so.

Fortunately, it only takes 5 minutes to learn everything you need to know for the writing sample. I wrote a blog post a while ago called "How to Prepare for the LSAT Writing Sample" that covers this info.


4. Even if they don’t do anything else to prepare for the exam, what is the single most important LSAT takers can do to be ready?

Review recent LSAT PrepTests. Familiarity with the question-types is crucial. However, reviewing PrepTests is necessary but not sufficient (too much time with the LSAT leads me to structure my sentences this way more often than I'd like).


5. You seem to believe the LSAT can be learned. If this is true, what does this suggest about the test's validity? Will a high LSAT score lead to high 1L grades?

People who ace the LSAT and ace law school tend to fall into the same categories:
  1. They're geniuses and just "get it" the first time around.
  2. They study around the clock. As a result, they walk around bleary-eyed, drink lots of coffee, sleep very little, and buy pencils in bulk.
If someone is able to learn the LSAT, this suggests they're more likely to do well in law school than someone who was not able to learn the LSAT.

Standardized exams get a lot of criticism, and much of it is deserved. However, I believe the LSAT is a good independent predictor of law school performance. People born with the "LSAT mindset" are likely to do well on the LSAT and in law school. People who intensively prepare for the LSAT and eventually acquire the LSAT mindset are likely to intensively study in law school and eventually get the law school mindset.

For more information on its predictive validity for 1L GPA, I highly recommend checking out a study conducted by Marjorie Schultz and Sheldon Zedeck. They're the two professors behind the Looking Beyond the LSAT project.

In reviewing past studies, they report LSAT and undergraduate GPA are both good predictors of 1L GPA, with LSAT being a better predictor than undergraduate GPA. The LSAT alone has a correlation of .35, undergraduate GPA alone has a correlation of .28. Together, they have a correlation of .49 with 1L GPA. See page 61 of their study, "Identification, Development, and Validation of Predictors for Successful Lawyering" (PDF).

An excellent point Schultz and Zedeck make, however, is that 1L GPA should not be the only variable measured. For instance, we should also concern ourselves with students' law school GPAs as a whole and students' future success in the field of law. This is what Looking Beyond the LSAT's proposed test would attempt to do by adding a personality component. However, just as the LSAT mentality can be learned, students can learn to display desired personality traits, even if only for the purposes of an additional exam.


6. Finally, on a personal level, what inspired you to become an LSAT tutor?

You might think I'm crazy for saying this, but I actually enjoy the LSAT. It's a better exam than most despite the fact that it, like most exams, is "learnable." It's rewarding to see students feel themselves "getting smarter" as they learn the LSAT mindset.

Photo by garryknight



Beating the LSAT Interview on Legal Blog

The Blackbook Legal Blog recently interviewed me about LSAT preparation.

In the interview, I answer the following questions:

1. Can the LSAT be learned?

Without a doubt, the LSAT can be learned. There's no question on that matter. The easiest and fastest way to improve is to become familiar with various LSAT question-types. This doesn't take very long, but the payoff is minimal. The quickest way to see a significant improvement is to learn solid diagramming techniques for the Logic Games. This takes a moderate amount of time. The next step is to understand the LSAT mindset. This is the most difficult task. It's like becoming a Jedi or seeing through the Matrix.


2. Is the LSAT a good predictor of law school performance?

I believe that the LSAT is a good independent predictor of law school performance. People born with the LSAT mindset are likely to do well on the LSAT and in law school. People who intensively prepare for the LSAT and eventually acquire the LSAT mindset are likely to intensively study in law school and eventually get the law school mindset.



3. What is the LSAT mentality?

Learn to be critical and skeptical of arguments, avoid taking things at face value, consider potential alternative causes for any result and potential alternative explanations for any conclusion, devote obsessive attention to detail, understand nuances and apply general principles to specific situations.



4. How long does it take to adequately prepare for the LSAT?

1-2 months is not adequate for the vast majority of students, especially when they have to balance LSAT prep with school or work. Students who shoot for high scores (as well as those shooting for mid-level scores) need time to fully understand the various sections, to develop strategies for attacking them, and to work on pacing and endurance strategies. I recommend that students devote a minimum of 3 months of preparation and that they study on a regular basis during this period of time.


Law School Selection and Prep Advice | Interview

I recently interviewed Ursula Furi-Perry, Esq., author of Law School Revealed, via email. Our discussion follows.

1. You write that one benefit of waiting before attending law school is that you can gain exposure to the legal field to determine whether or not you truly like the law. However, don't most paralegals do mind-numbing busywork? If that's the case, won't the majority of paralegal applicants be discouraged through this exposure, even if this dislike of the law is unfounded? As a follow-up, what kind of meaningful and substantive experience can applicants get prior to law school?

Actually, paralegals serve a valuable function at many firms and often perform substantive legal tasks, such as legal research, writing, drafting, investigation, interviewing, and assisting attorneys with trial preparation. Those substantive tasks can introduce a future law student to legal concepts, process, and terminology, which can be helpful when trying to navigate, survive, and succeed during the first year of law school.

I believe that either a full-time position at a law firm or other legal employer or a part-time or volunteer position can provide prospective law students with valuable experience. Again, the benefit of working or volunteering in a legal setting isn't just limited to substantive or practical knowledge: students can gain insight into different legal environments by working or volunteering in a legal position, which in turn can help them determine whether the law really is the right fit for them.

Having worked in the field before and during law school helped solidify my desire to become a lawyer. It also opened my eyes to the wide variety of career paths one can choose with a law degree, which is such a versatile and valuable degree.


2. You describe legal writing as being much different than undergrad-style writing. How does it differ, and what types of books/websites can prospective law students use to practice this writing style prior to law school?

In my opinion, successful legal writing has the following characteristics: clarity and precision; thorough and polished analysis; a clear identification and statement of the issue or thesis being addressed; good organization and flow; and overall readability, including attention to proofreading and editing. Those characteristics don't differ all that much from other forms of good writing. What is different is the method. Legal writing requires students and lawyers alike to master a very precise analytical formula (whether using IRAC or one of its "sister" methods like TRAC or CRAC,) where the writer: states the (I)ssue; conveys his or her knowledge of the applicable (R)ule of law; (A)nalyzes the problem by applying the rule of law to the facts; and (C)oncludes on the call of the question and the issue. (Note: In the TRAC method, the writer states a thesis rather than a legal issue/question; in CRAC, the writer begins by stating a conclusion.) Because lawyers, judges, and legal professionals use this same method of analysis in practice, it is essential that law students learn it in school. Writing is the lawyer's craft--so, polishing one's analytical and writing skills as a law student is extremely important.


3. You devote a few pages to law school prep courses. What topics do law school prep courses cover, who (if anyone) "needs" one, and what books/websites would you recommend for someone who wants to self-study rather than take one?

Law school prep courses can serve as a valuable overview of what students can expect during the first year in law school. For example, I profiled the Law Preview course, which offers an overview of the subjects students will study, such as Torts and Contracts, as well as an overview of legal writing, study skills, case briefing, and outlining. I think most students benefit from a law school prep course, particularly those who know little about legal education and what to expect during the first year.

For those who choose to self-study, I recommend that they learn how to properly read and brief a case (I devote a large part of an entire chapter to this skill in my book) as well as put together a law school course outline (likewise.) There are a couple of books I recommend on honing legal writing skills: The Lawyer's Craft by Glaser, Lieberman, Ruescher, and Boepple Su, and Just Writing by Enquist and Oates. I also recommend that you visit the National Jurist and PreLaw Magazine.

Along with three other law professor colleagues, I am putting together a comprehensive yet concise set of study materials for first-year law students. Please read our 1L BootCamp and Bar Exam BootCamp blogs for tips and advice on academic success in law school and on the bar exam, along with information about product release dates.

Finally, be sure to visit your prospective law schools' websites for information on academic support, study skills, and recommended resources. Many schools provide invaluable help and links to resources online. Remember: the administrators at your law school are there to help you -- use their help wisely!


4. What factors are important to consider when choosing a law school?

In my book, I pinpoint the following factors as the most important to consider when choosing a law school:

The school’s reputation with legal employers and the general legal community. A law degree will do you no good if you can’t find a job after graduation; so before you pick a school, consider the school’s reputation among lawyers, law firms, and other legal employers.

Alumni employment rates, bar pass rates, and career satisfaction. How well the school’s graduates do and how happy they report to be in their careers can be good indicators for what may await you if you graduate from the school. You can find some employment data through the National Association for Legal Professionals, to which many law schools report their statistics.

Rankings. Several sources rate U.S. law schools annually: the U.S. News & World Report’s Top 100 Law Schools [Ed: See today's post on the new US News law school rankings - SS] and Ultimate Guide to Law Schools, and the ABA-LSAC Official Guide to ABA-Approved Law Schools, to name a few. Focusing solely on the rankings may mean that you fail to consider other factors and end up at the school that may be the right ranking, but the wrong fit. Still, to some extent, a law school’s ranking, reputation, and job placement rates are all connected.

Location. Even if you think you couldn’t care less about where you spend the next three years as a law student, you should give your law school’s location some serious thought.

Faculty accessibility. Many law schools have a great reputation and are ranked high on the lists, yet their faculty may not be as accessible to students as faculty at other schools—simply because the faculty may be pulled in many different directions.

Cost. Most people can’t afford to pay the (often six-figure) price tag for law school in cash. So, at some point, you have to consider what law school will cost you, how you plan to finance your legal education, and how and when you can expect to see a return on your investment.

Admission requirements. You may have your sights set on a particular school, but if you can’t get in, you won’t go there.


5. Anything else you'd like to add?

Law school for me was an extremely rewarding experience. Though law school often gets a bad reputation as a stressful, competitive experience where you'll barely survive, you can thrive and succeed as a law student. Be sure you approach law school for the right reason: because you've done your research and determined that the law degree is the right path for you, not because you're lured by money or someone else is pushing you to go to law school. Also be sure to make the most of your law school experience: participate in activities, explore clinical and practical programs, consider internships and externships, look into academic concentrations, and check out opportunities for international legal study. Law schools today offer an incredible variety of exciting programs. Make your legal education your own!


Ursula Furi-Perry, Esq. is the author of more than 300 published articles and six books on legal topics, including Law School Revealed (Jist Publishing, 2009) and Your First Year as a Lawyer Revealed (Jist Publishing, forthcoming in 2010.) She is an adjunct professor of legal writing and analysis and the incoming Director of Academic Support at the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover.

Cornell Law School Admissions Dean | Interview

This is the 4th post in the "Better Know a Law School" series. Richard Geiger is Cornell Law School’s Associate Dean for Enrollment and Communications. He received his law degree from Boston University and after clerking for a federal district court judge, practiced at law firms in Washington, D.C. and Boston. From 2003-2005, he served as Chairman of the Board of the Law School Admission Council. Cornell ranked 12th among law schools in US News and World Report this year.


1. What's special about Cornell's international law program? What can someone specializing in international law do during their time at Cornell and beyond?

International law has been a signature program at Cornell for a very long time. What makes it special at this point is that it covers not just the curricular elements you would expect from a top law school, but the programmatic and institutional elements as well. For example, even though we’re a relatively small law school, we have formal study abroad relationships with 15 different law schools around the world; we offer summer institutes in Paris and Suzhou, China; and our degree possibilities include two different U.S./French law degrees, a U.S./German law degree, a three-year J.D./ LL.M. in international and comparative law, and a J.D. with a specialization in international legal affairs. We’re also part of a truly wonderful university that has a wide range of international area studies and other programs that are available to our students for course credit, or just for enrichment. All of this means that our students end up with excellent career options in both private and public international law.


2. The FAQ section of your website emphasizes that all applications are read thoroughly. Would you please describe the typical application review process and how much time is devoted to each part of the application?

Our process is aimed at getting to know the answers to two basic questions: (1) is the person likely to thrive academically at our school; and (2) will he or she be the kind of person who will actively engage not only the classroom environment, but everything else that goes on here. To assess these things, we rely on every part of the application. There is no real formula to it because everyone is different. In fact, we shy away from numerical cut-offs and mechanical approaches precisely because we don’t want to miss people for whom the numbers simply aren’t good predictors of success. Remember, we’re a small school and we can’t hide admissions mistakes. This gives us a strong incentive to get it right.


3. Your website makes it seem like professors are accessible to students 24/7. While I'm exaggerating here, are they really that down-to-earth and open to student contact? How do they have the time? Shouldn't they spend their time writing in journals and taking cases to court?

Great question. How is it that our faculty can consistently be rated as top scholars and top teachers, and still have time to engage with our students personally? The short answer is that the faculty/student culture really encourages and supports full engagement. Our faculty are consumed not just with their scholarly activities, but with having a real impact on our students. Plus, don’t forget that many of our students are already very accomplished people who faculty enjoy getting to know as individuals. The long answer will require a visit to our school. Spend a day here while we’re in session and all will be made clear! I promise.


4. Anything else?

Just a couple of things: First, city people are often worried about what it will be like in Ithaca for three years. My response to that is to remember that we’re part of a very large university (19,000 or so) and that Ithaca is a very lively place. But more importantly, remember that the law is essentially an urban profession. The common denominator for most of our graduates is that they end up in a major urban area. So, for most of our students, their time in Ithaca may literally be the only time they’ll be able to experience the wonderful lifestyle that a place like Ithaca offers. Second, most people tell me that once they start to get to know more about Cornell they are amazed at the wide range of possibilities we are able to offer our students even though we’re relatively small and not located in a big city. Of course, once again, a visit is the best way to discover the surprises that Cornell and Ithaca offer.

Yale Law Journal Editor-in-Chief | Interview

I recently interviewed Ben Taibleson, current Editor-in-Chief of the Yale Law Journal (on Wikipedia), via email. Our discussion follows.

1. How did you become Editor-in-Chief of the Yale Law Journal?

The Yale Law Journal Editor-in-Chief is elected by the full membership of the Journal. The EIC candidates first submitted written materials outlining why we wanted the position and how we felt about a set of Journal policy questions. We then gave a short speech and answered questions at a pre-election forum. Each Journal member then ranked the EIC candidates, and the rankings were used to determine the winner.


2. Would you please explain how a typical volume of the journal is put together?

The Yale Law Journal is composed of lengthy faculty-written articles, shorter, often solicited, faculty-written work and very high-quality Yale Law student pieces. The Journal receives thousands of submissions for each volume, so a great deal of work goes into selecting our content. We also put a lot of time and energy into our multi-stage editing process. Each volume's scholarship is then divided into a number of issues and distributed electronically and in print.


3. How do you manage to balance your YLJ responsibilities and all your reading?

I am heavily involved in just about everything the Journal does, so my YLJ responsibilities are proving to be very substantial. My predecessor has given me a ton of great advice on how to strike a healthy balance, though, and my colleagues are so talented and hardworking that my job won't be as tough as it otherwise might . The quantity of work borders on the absurd, but it's a lot of fun, and I am incredibly lucky to have the privilege to do it. I doubt that many people with real jobs, kids, etc. would shed too many tears for my entirely voluntary workload.


Ben Taibleson was born outside Chicago and grew up in Milwaukee. He studied Economics and Political Science at the University of Wisconsin, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, and spent a year traveling and working in Africa and Asia before starting at Yale Law. His father is an attorney and his mother a high school dance teacher in Milwaukee; he has two exceedingly talented younger brothers whom he loves very much.

Law School Admission Consultant | Interview

I recently interviewed Anna Ivey, a law school admission consultant, via email. Our discussion follows.

1. In one blog post, you write, "Most ABA-approved law schools are not worth the investment." This is a rather shocking statement. When I first read it, I thought you made a typo and that you'd meant to say "most non-ABA-approved schools..." In your opinion, what conditions must be met for a school to be worth the investment?

I know it's strange for people to hear that opinion, because there are so many people out there who want to go to law school at any cost. There are also a lot of well-intentioned parents and pre-law advisors who treat a law degree as an all-purpose degree that's suitable for anyone.

But law schools aren't all the same, and they don't set graduates up for the same kinds of opportunities or income streams, on average. I would never say to someone, "Don't go to school X, ever," because some people really are just looking for the intellectual challenge, or to acquire a particular skill. And that's fine if money is no object, but for most people it is. For that reason, I encourage people to be rather ruthless in their cost-benefit analysis, and to be honest with themselves about the risks and costs involved.

At a very basic level, I don't think a particular law school program makes sense if it doesn't set up its graduates with decent odds to carry the loans they'll have to take out in order to attend. What people end up paying to go to law school varies tremendously, so each person has to make his own assessment about projected income vs. loan carrying costs. Many applicants are not realistic about what kinds of salary prospects they'll have coming out of a given program, or how far up the class rankings they'll need to be to make the kinds of salaries they're expecting to earn. If you have to be in the top 10% of your class to make the six figures you'll need right out of law school to start paying back your loans, that might be too risky a proposition, for example.

I'm actually not alone in having these reservations. If you look at some of the blog postings I've written over the years (here and here), I've referred to a front-page article in the Wall Street Journal as well as a law school dean who said, to his credit, that law schools should be ashamed of themselves if they take students' money without giving them good enough job prospects to justify that expense. Let me quote the dean of New York Law School:

"We should be ashamed of ourselves. We own our students' outcomes. We took them. We took their money. We live on their money to pay to come to San Diego [where the conference was held]. And if they don't have a good outcome in life, we're exploiting them....Maybe the chance at being in the top 10% is not a good enough lottery shot in order to effectively spend $120,000 and see it blow up at the end of three years of law school."

That's powerful language, right?

There's also a really interesting chart put out by NALP, the Association for Legal Career Professionals (don't ask me why their acronym doesn't match their name; go figure). If you look at the chart for graduates from the class of 2007, the line showing the salary distribution is pretty odd looking, with two peaks:

Lawyer Salaries Graph

Here's what NALP says about that chart:

What this image makes visually manifest is the two very different legal employment markets that law school graduates face. While 16% of starting salaries were $160,000, far more, 38%, were $55,000 or less. The first peak in the graph reflects salaries of $40,000 to $60,000, with salaries of $40,000 and $50,000 each accounting for about 10% of salaries. Collectively, salaries in the $40,000 - $60,000 range (approximately the total area reflected under the left peak) accounted for 42% of salaries. Salaries reflected under the right peak, including the smaller bulge over $145,000, accounted for 22% of salaries.

Mind you, this was before BigLaw (the firms that pay the big bucks right out of law school) started imploding, laying off attorneys, and instituting hiring freezes (take a look at Above The Law if you want the grim and gory details), so that second peak for the class of 2009 might not look as rosy when the chart for 2009 eventually gets released. But in any event, most applicants I talk to don't think they're going to be the ones making $55K or less, and if they're taking out substantial loans, that's a tough way to go financially (see my blog posting here).


2. Along the same lines, what about applicants for whom the legal profession is a lifelong dream? Wouldn't you agree that not everything about one's career can be measured in dollars?

I'm very sympathetic to people who have dreamed their whole lives of going to law school. Of course not everything can be measured in dollars, but a law degree is a financial investment, among other things, and the math has to make sense no matter what your motivations are for going to law school. Applicants need to be realistic about what they're getting themselves into. I know it's not pleasant to hear "this might not make sense for you," or "this might not make sense for you given these factors," but I would argue it's better to do that analysis before making that big investment than afterwards.

I also feel an ethical obligation to be honest with people about their prospects, just as I would want someone to be brutally honest with me if I woke up one day and said, "hey, I know I'm pushing 40 and I can't touch my toes on most days, but it's been my life-long dream to be a professional ballet dancer. Will you help me spend six figures to pursue that dream?" If that ever happened, I hope someone would sit me down and have a very candid talk with me.

I also encourage people to get their feet wet in the legal world in some capacity before jumping into law school. They might have dreamed their whole lives of becoming lawyers, but many people have no realistic idea about what kinds of things lawyers do all day long, or what the different trade-offs are. Popular culture dramatizes and romanticizes lawyers all the time, so I understand the seduction of the law. But as with anything, real life is usually very different, and aspiring law school applicants owe it to themselves to have some understanding of what they're getting themselves into. Obviously you can't go out and practice law before you have a law degree, but you can observe a lot about the profession and different options out there even if you're just temping for a legal staffing firm in an administrative capacity, or you're volunteering for a non-profit legal aid clinic a few hours a week. Seeing legal practice up close and in real life can be a very clarifying experience, whether you end up loving it or hating it or just seeing some other side of it that you hadn't known about before.


3. What are some examples of addendum topics that applicants should avoid?

I find LSAT addendum essays the least helpful, simply because you can always take the test again if you really believe that your current score isn't accurate, or you had a bad day, or the proctor screwed up, or whatever. Of course that assumes that you've planned ahead sufficiently to give yourself opportunities to take the test multiple times before you apply, but "I didn't plan ahead properly" is never a good argument to make in an addendum either.

In contrast, GPAs and transcripts can sometimes benefit from explanation. Admissions officers can't read minds, so if there's some kind of rocky patch in your transcript, and there's a backstory there that you think they should know about, that kind of addendum can be helpful. Not everyone with a rocky transcript has a good backstory, of course -- some people don't have very compelling reasons for why their transcripts look the way they do -- so even GPA addendum essays require judgment. In my experience, many applicants want to submit addendum essays just to get something off their chests, but that doesn't mean it's always a good idea to send them in.

I've written more about addendum essays here.


4. What are some examples of impressive extracurriculars within the reach of ordinary applicants?

There's no right answer to that, because admissions officers don't really have a list of preferred extracurriculars. What matters is quality of experience. They like to see that someone committed to the activity in a meaningful way, and took on additional responsibility over time. It's always good to see demonstrated accomplishments and leadership. That's very different from signing up for a bunch of activities and putting down "member" for each one -- that's pretty transparent, and admissions officers know that you don't have to do more than sign up for an email list in order to do that. They'd rather see longer-term commitment and depth of experience in a smaller number of activities (or even just one) than breadth. Superficial participation won't score you many points with admissions officers. For that reason, many applications ask you to list hours per week for activities -- that gives admissions officers a sense of how committed you were (or not).

I've also heard from applicants who are worried that their list of activities is so slim, and often that's because they were working paid jobs (whether they're still in school or have already graduated). That's OK. For the same reason, when you list your jobs, make sure to list hours per week. That gives the admissions officer a sense of what your obligations were outside the classroom, and work experience is impressive as well. They look at your resume to get a sense of how you spend your time, whether it's in activities or paid work, and they try to get a sense of what you've accomplished inside and outside the classroom given those various time commitments.


5. Anything else?

When I look at the recession, and how quickly the law firm landscape has been imploding and the business model changing, I like to remind applicants that a JD does not mean job security. In times past it did to some degree, but those days are gone and might never come back. Law school often attracts risk-averse people, so it can come as a shock to them when they realize that they're not getting what they thought they were bargaining for. Law school applicants have to be prepared to be very entrepreneurial about their careers.


Anna Ivey is the former Dean of Admissions at the University of Chicago Law School and president of Anna Ivey Consulting. She and her team work one-on-one with applicants as they navigate the admissions process and chart their legal careers. She is author of The Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions and The Ivey Files blog.

Logic Made Easy by Bennett | Interview

I recently interviewed Dr. Deborah Bennett, author of Logic Made Easy, via email. Our discussion follows.

1. How did you first become interested in logic, and why do many people find it difficult?

I first became interested in logic as a child, when my father used to bring logic puzzles to the dinner table. The whole family discussed them and tried to solve them. To this day, my brother, sister and I still love puzzles.

I believe that many people find logic difficult for several reasons. First, untangling a puzzle or argument like those found on the LSAT requires tenacity. Indeed, most people give up. Whereas some of us think it is fun, most people stop listening or reading the details, throwing up their hands in frustration. Secondly, being logical requires understanding a vocabulary in a certain way, and by certain rules. Yet, those rules do not necessarily follow the ordinary rules of language that we grew up learning and hear and use every day.


2. In your book, you clearly lay out several laws of logic and common fallacies that the LSAT tests. Did you write Logic Made Easy with LSAT preparation in mind?

I did not write Logic Made Easy with the LSAT in mind, but I did have the law in mind as one of those professions in which an understanding of logic was crucial. Attorneys need to be logical in reading and interpreting legal issues, but they may also have to educate a jury in logic when arguing a point.


3. Do we really need to be logical all the time? Can't machines do that for us?

In the same way that we don’t need to use standard English all of the time, we need not be logical all of the time. Our friends and family know us in ways that others don’t, and we communicate with them in ways that are comfortable for us. However, with the wider world it is important to think logically and speak logically. Machines can’t be logical for us. In fact, we need logic to program and run the machines.


4. Why are people so imprecise with language in ordinary conversation? How can we improve our logic in everyday life?

Many people are imprecise in their use of ordinary language. The rules of conversation allow for the listener to supply information. In fact, it is a compliment to the listener for the speaker to assume that not all information is necessary. If we are conversing, the more information I assume you know the more flattered you will be. At the other extreme, if I explain every detail necessary to be perfectly unambiguous you might be insulted that I am patronizing or pedantic—even talking down to you.

I believe that we can improve our logic in everyday life. We can improve our language and logic by thinking critically about everything we hear, read, write, and say. We should ask ourselves what language means and try not to read our own meaning into it. We should ask not only what a sentence says but also what the sentence does not say. By thinking about the logic of the language of others, our own language should become more precise.


Deborah Bennett is the author of Logic Made Easy: How to Know When Language Deceives You (W. W. Norton 2004) and Randomness (Harvard University Press 1998). She is a Professor of Mathematics at New Jersey City University and loves bridge, crossword puzzles, and Su Doku, as well as logic puzzles of all types. Dr. Bennett is happily married to actor/composer, Michael Hirsch.

Michigan Law School Admissions Dean | Interview

This is the 3rd post in the "Better Know a Law School" series. Sarah Zearfoss is Assistant Dean and Director of Admissions at the University of Michigan Law School. A member of the Michigan bar, she stays active in the practice of law as a volunteer attorney for the ACLU. Michigan ranked 9th among law schools in US News and World Report this year.

1. To what degree do you use the LSAT's Writing Sample?

A lot of applicants appear to make an assumption that the LSAT writing sample never gets looked at–and that’s not a safe assumption!

We use it in a lot of different ways. At the most basic level, we always at least glance at it, and that means someone who uses only three-quarters of a page out of the available two pages will stand out, as will the folks who draw pictures, or write repeatedly, "I know you’re not reading this." And I don’t mean that they stand out in the way that one hopes to in the admissions process.

For some applications, we routinely take a much closer look, particularly when we have reason to be concerned about writing abilities (based on a major or something else in the background suggesting a lack of writing experience, or based on a comment in a recommendation letter, or based on writing quality elsewhere in the application). The standard in those cases isn’t a highly rigorous one, to be sure, but we’re looking for a lack of mimicry between the question and the answer, a facility with basic grammar and spelling, and a reasonably coherent argument. It’s surprising how frequently people don’t meet that minimal standard.

And apart from how Admissions Office staff views the sample, there are always the faculty, an unpredictable lot. At Michigan, faculty don’t have a heavy involvement in reviewing files, but I would say at least 50% of those who do look at files consider the LSAT writing sample as the single most interesting element of the application materials. No, I’m not kidding. My colleagues at some other schools have confirmed this idiosyncrasy.

Bottom-line, applicants would be well-served to approach the writing sample with seriousness. You have to sit there for the duration anyway, so you might as well put a little effort into it, right? Treating it cavalierly could leave a big negative impression on a reviewer.


2. What are some changes that students at Michigan would like to see, and what is Michigan doing to implement these changes?

I hear a pretty steady drumbeat of requests for a more tropical climate, but we resist this–I have the power, absolutely, but I choose not to use it because I think it would cut down on study time and ultimately result in less-prepared graduates. I have only the best interests of our students at heart.

In all seriousness, I don’t think there are any Major Issues that we see student concerns coalescing around at the moment. If there were, I have no doubt that they’d get a lot of swift attention from the administration, which in my experience is remarkably responsive. But that said, there are certainly often small coalitions around certain topics, and when they come up, sustained attention gets devoted to figuring out the right answer, a process that can take some time.

One recently solved example: we have heard from students in recent years that they would like a clinic with an international law focus. The challenge was how to put that into effect while being committed to Michigan’s vision of clinical work, which involves considerable hands-on involvement by the student attorneys–as opposed to assigning students one small paragraph in a giant brief being actually written by a faculty member for filing with an international court, an experience we didn’t think would provide much pedagogical benefit. The answer has turned out to be, one, an international transactional clinic focusing on microfinance, which just took off this year, and two, a human-trafficking clinic, which will get started next year. Both will involve considerable client involvement, a core value, while having a central international-law component. Those new clinics didn’t come about quickly; it took us a couple of years between starting to get the requests and figuring out the best way to effect the project. But the end result is terrific, and much better for not having been knee-jerk.

Another issue that has been the subject of sustained dialogue between students and administration in recent years involve public-interest funding, and how to come up with more institutional support. That’s an area where we’ve already seen some wonderful changes, such as a commitment to 2L summer funding for public interest jobs--but we’re also in the midst of trying to think of other new, creative solutions.

And a third issue that has been consuming some energy and attention recently is the question of grading and curves. There have been changes at other schools, so some students have naturally questioned whether we should reexamine our own approach–in fact, our faculty and administration raised the question themselves, independently. But that’s a puzzle we’re at the beginning of solving, and it’s not an easy one; we have concerns that moving to, for example, no grades or no curve could result in risk-aversion by legal employers about hiring our students–employers tell us that they worry a lack of grades means a lack of engagement by students, with the result being a poorly educated lawyer. No one wants to do anything that makes it harder for students to get the jobs they want, obviously. So we’re continuing to grapple with these issues; while we may not have come up with a solution yet, it’s not for lack of approaching the question seriously. That, ultimately, is what students should ask of their institution–not that they get a "yes" answer on every request, but that the requests be given attention and consideration.


3. What are some of the most common / funniest mistakes you've seen in students' applications?

Certainly the most common mistake is sending in an impassioned essay about why an applicant desperately wants to attend.... some other law school, not Michigan. Meanwhile, someone in Charlottesville is scratching his head about why the same student is writing at length as to Ann Arbor’s merits as the ideal student community. We try not to hold that against anyone, though, and only rarely do we actually weep at our sense of rejection.

The funniest kind of mistake I see is beginning an essay with a quote that is misattributed. Given that one of the most fundamental skills of a lawyer is research, this usually strikes me as dispositive. I first started as an admissions dean at just this time of year, when a lot of deny letters had already gone out. One denied applicant, very aggrieved, insisted on meeting with me. I now know how completely unproductive these meetings invariably are, but I was very idealistic at the time and agreed to the meeting, thinking I could give some helpful guidance (even though I hadn’t actually been the admissions dean who had made a decision on her application). The first thing I pointed out to her was that her essay misattributed a famous poem to the wrong author, and that the mistake made a really bad first impression. Her reaction was outrage; she said it showed beyond doubt that she had written her own essay, and hadn’t paid a professional to do it, and that was to her credit. Certainly, the quick thinking was to her credit, but doing her own work was a basic expectation, and her argument didn’t result in a different outcome.