The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Putting LSAT on resume: unavoidably toolish?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:28 PM Author: Low-t base jew I'm only considering it because I have like two things on my resume as is. Also, it's significantly above my school's 75%ile, so I figure it will help me stand out. I don't see how this is really any worse than mentioning your GPA; they're both accomplishments. Thoughts? Acrimony? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4076987) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:30 PM Author: adventurous cyan immigrant You're right, it WILL make you stand out...the same way the guy who puts his high school on the resume stands out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077000) |
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:30 PM Author: Stirring Crusty Parlour Bbw go for it, if u enjoy auto-dings. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4076998) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:31 PM Author: violent olive sanctuary stock car I wouldn't do it. If it's high compared to your grades/school it just makes you look like a smart slacker which is the exact opposite of what firms want in their associates.
If it's not above your grades then it's redundant. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:34 PM Author: Low-t base jew I'm at 1L and haven't had grades yet. Also, my UG GPA is high, as well, so they might assume I'm a 166 if I don't enlighten them.
Seriously, though. It is an accepted proxy for ability. I don't see why UG GPA is so obviously OK, but LSAT is taboo. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:55 PM Author: crawly cruise ship did you get a scholarship from your school? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077165) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:58 PM Author: Low-t base jew No. I just had a bad admissions cycle. I don't think schools were big fans of my PS. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077182) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:58 PM Author: violent olive sanctuary stock car Hmm, then it might be ok. Definitely once you're a 2L I would drop it.
Personally I wouldn't do it, but I could be wrong. I'd check with your OCS to see what they think. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:33 PM Author: Spectacular yellow philosopher-king legend do it. i like seeing people fail. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077024) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:58 PM Author: slippery selfie regret If you don't have many grades yet, I think it makes sense, just like putting down UG GPA. I actually got a paralegal job doing this. Lawyers respect it, unless you then proceed to flub up law school. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077183) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 10:13 AM Author: Thriller point idea he suggested "I actually got a paralegal job doing this."
Me too. I didn't put it on my resume, but the hiring manager asked straight up. As soon as I told her, the tenor of the interview changed completely. She said, "That's a winner. THat's a winner of a score!" and then told me that she was going to do what she could to get me hired. |
|
Date: July 2nd, 2006 10:35 AM Author: sickened high-end french chef tanning salon 170 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122433) |
|
Date: July 2nd, 2006 4:19 AM Author: bronze address I've wondered this too. I haven't yet applied to law school and my resume is pretty damn thin - I guess it's worth a shot to send some resumes around for paralegal work and include my LSAT score, since I wouldn't be getting the job otherwise (and likely won't get it anyway). Not that I think paralegal work will increase my chances with law schools but it beats what I'm doing now. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122330) |
|
Date: July 2nd, 2006 10:19 AM Author: Chestnut ape rigpig I fail to see why your LSAT score must be a part of this plan (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122422) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:19 PM Author: Claret trailer park macaca I would NOT put my LSAT score. Most career services offices frown upon it. I doubt they do so for no reason. I think it is pretentious. Just because you have a good LSAT score does not mean you're a good law student or that you will be a good lawyer. It is much more important to show grades and work product. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079180) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:21 PM Author: slippery selfie regret I think you're correct when you have other stuff to show, like grades or WP.
However, when you don't, the fact that it is "pretentious" is not enough of a reason not to use it. Hell, going to HLS is "pretensious", and so are law review and academic honors. That's kind of the whole point. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:23 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Stage Generalized Bond >Hell, going to HLS is "pretensious", and so are law review and academic honors.
No, they aren't. "Pretentious" means that there is some kind of "pretense" going on -- in other words, that you're putting up some kind of front. HLS, law review, and academic honors (at least good ones like summa and PBK) are GENUINELY prestigious and reflect on your substantive achievements. That is not true of the LSAT outside of the admissions context. It is meant to predict first year grades; nothing more. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:25 PM Author: slippery selfie regret Given that your LSAT is the key determinant of whether you get into HLS (or any top law school), this appears a distinction without a difference. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079221) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:26 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Stage Generalized Bond Why don't you continue to argue about the way the world ought to be, and I'll keep telling people how it is.
I'm guessing that you haven't reviewed law student resumes at a competitive firm or judicial chambers, or worked in legal employment counseling. Correct? |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:29 PM Author: slippery selfie regret It appears that you are the one that is more concerned with the way the world ought to be, as opposed to how it is.
I've actually worked at a competitive firm, and spoke with their hiring personnel. I was hired as a paralegal primarily on the basis of my LSAT score, and was told as much by the attorneys involved.
If there are no grades earned yet by the student in question, there is no reason to think they would apply a different analysis to 1L's. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:33 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Stage Generalized Bond >there is no reason to think they would apply a different analysis to 1L's
Yes, there is. The 1L has been admitted to and enrolled at a law school. The LSAT score is now passe.
>It appears that you are the one that is more concerned with the way the world ought to be
Where did I make any claims as to whether firms/judges are wise or unwise to look at this the way they do? I described what they do, and explained their reasoning. I don't really care whether they're right. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:37 PM Author: slippery selfie regret Are you being deliberately obtuse?
Law firms are rational actors. They didn't hire me because I'd be attending a top school. They hired me because my LSAT score indicated I had a good head for the kind of work I'd be doing.
They would apply the same rationale to a student who had no grades yet to point to in his law school career.
You apparently don't really know what firms do, which is fine. Your attempt to predict their reasoning, though, doesn't really make much sense.
If the student DID in fact have grades (especially a full years worth), this would apparently be a different situation. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:21 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Stage Generalized Bond NO. It's very tacky. And unless you got 175+, competitive employers will think you are too ignorant to realize you're bragging about nothing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079186) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:21 PM Author: slippery selfie regret See above.
You guys aren't even bothering to read the OP. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:24 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Stage Generalized Bond See above.
You aren't even bothering to get the answer right. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:25 PM Author: slippery selfie regret No, that would be you.
Moreover, you appear to be leaving opening the possibility that the OP SHOULD include his LSAT if it is above 175. This isn't even a clear answer. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:27 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Stage Generalized Bond No, I'm saying that if the LSAT is under 175, then there are two good reasons not to include it, and if it's over 175, then there's only one good reason. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079241) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:30 PM Author: slippery selfie regret Thanks for clarifying your answer. However, it's still wrong.
If someone has no grades yet to report, there is no reason to leave out what is in fact the best predicter of how the student will do academicially. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:34 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Stage Generalized Bond The reason is that there's a convention which decrees that doing so is tacky. That's reason enough not to wear an orange-and-green tie to an interview, and it's reason enough not to put your LSAT on your resume once you're in law school. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079301) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:38 PM Author: slippery selfie regret The problem is that your abstract belief that this is a proper convention doesn't make it so.
How else do you expect the student in question to stand out? I imagine some firms might not like it, but it's also more likely to impress someone somewhere along the line. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:27 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy market organic girlfriend Quite toolish indeed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079244) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:29 PM Author: indecent step-uncle's house gunner I disagree, I put it on my resume and it became a talking point. Often this simple number resulted in an offer for not only the firm, but also a secluded weekend in the Hamptons with the hiring partner's hot but unspoiled daughter.
The trick is packaging. On my resume I put: 178, better than any of you fucks. |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:31 PM Author: slippery selfie regret Titcr. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079267) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 10:27 AM Author: cream kitchen messiness TITBSR (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083593) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:32 PM Author: beta area IF you're an insecure black professor at Stanford, it's completely acceptable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079271) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 3:14 AM Author: light dopamine ticredited in the 98th percentile (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083228) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 3:37 AM Author: big field queen of the night link? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083244) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 9:06 PM Author: scarlet jap home this may not apply to OP, because I am applying for student associate type positions prelaw but:
I put my LSAT score on my resume and of 2 unsolicited resume mailings I had callbacks on BOTH.
So screw you no-it-alls ;) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 8:03 AM Author: grizzly lodge This post is hilarious on so many levels.
"student associate type positions prelaw"
Just say file clerk or runner please
"2 unsolicited resume mailings"
you mean they don't do OCI for student associate type positions prelaw?
"callbacks"
OMG LOL WTF ROFL LMAO PWN3D |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 8:48 AM Author: scarlet jap home www.finnegan.com
click careers
student associates are on the website. They are also patent agents with billing rates >$200
chill out man... you'll get that biglaw job too (just keep that pretensious air about you, its very warm & inviting)
edit: and I say unsolicited because at the time, the firm was not advertising for the position |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 8:58 AM Author: abusive orchid haunted graveyard half-breed the funniest part is "no-it-alls." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083407) |
|
Date: July 2nd, 2006 11:09 AM Author: crystalline travel guidebook Nice closer. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122467) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2005 9:24 PM Author: drab party of the first part pozpig under the circumstances described, it's probably useful. and the extent to which people want to proclaim that it is categorically a blunder to do so is quite overstated. however, the circumstances in which it will be neither redundant nor unimpressive to incluse it are relatively unusual.
resumes and, especially, cover letters are regularly passed around and ridiculed. the ill-advised inclusion of an LSAT score is hardly the only reason |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 7:00 AM Author: slippery selfie regret Generally true, but is your writing style usually this convoluted? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083357) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 8:50 AM Author: greedy chad theatre you must be new around here (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083399) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 10:01 AM Author: drab party of the first part pozpig that seems unusually awful. i was caught between brief writing and an attempt at normal communication (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083507) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 11:18 AM Author: House-broken zippy keepsake machete church (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083764) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 11:39 AM Author: drab party of the first part pozpig it really is; it seems like an almost random collection of words (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083906) |
|
Date: July 2nd, 2006 8:21 AM Author: drab party of the first part pozpig i just read this again, and it still strikes me as one of the most poorly writtedn posts of all time (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122377) |
|
Date: July 2nd, 2006 10:56 AM Author: arousing well-lubricated church building mad-dog skullcap Chin up. It's not that bad. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122453) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 9:01 AM Author: abusive orchid haunted graveyard half-breed It is definitely toolish. But it might help at some firms. The two are not exclusive. Even if it gets you a job, it is toolish. At firms with intensive tool-screening, you are not likely to get an offer. Ask your CS people which firms do this. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083411) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 10:41 AM Author: onyx 180 theater stage I wonder if he could offset the toolishness by using an amusing or whimsical font. Like put "LSAT 169" in big bubble letters (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083624) |
|
Date: January 18th, 2006 3:23 AM Author: Self-absorbed frum sweet tailpipe property this post is a flash of brilliance (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4846657) |
|
Date: January 18th, 2006 3:24 AM Author: nighttime henna elastic band Laserlike. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4846660) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 10:53 AM Author: anal excitant indian lodge genital piercing the biggest problem with this thread is in the title... "unavoidably toolish?"
there IS no such thing as being unavoidably toolish. toolishness is something a person chooses to be and is totally avoidable.
edit: and no, you should not put your LSAT score on your resume!
|
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 10:56 AM Author: sexy crackhouse deer antler Incredibly tacky. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083682) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 11:26 AM Author: Low-t base jew How is it any tackier than including your UG GPA, though? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083808) |
|
Date: January 18th, 2006 6:15 AM Author: Brass internet-worthy senate reading party Are you really this fucking stupid? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4847004) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 11:56 AM Author: slippery selfie regret You could certainly argue that it's toolish, but you kind of have to be a major tool to become a successful biglaw attorney.
A better question is whether it would be effectve. If you have nothing else to distinguish yourself, it will probably be more effective than nothing. |
|
Date: January 18th, 2006 9:34 AM Author: green corn cake clown Put it right next to your bench press and the number of girls you've banged. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4847106) |
|
Date: July 2nd, 2006 5:41 AM Author: cordovan weed whacker bump, my nigga. bump. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122360) |