Putting LSAT on resume: unavoidably toolish?
| adventurous base love of her life | 10/18/05 | | amber filthpig regret | 10/18/05 | | Canary mischievous voyeur | 10/18/05 | | lime reading party | 10/18/05 | | adventurous base love of her life | 10/18/05 | | Hairraiser fanboi hall | 10/18/05 | | adventurous base love of her life | 10/18/05 | | lime reading party | 10/18/05 | | titillating mood lay | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | mint cracking coffee pot indian lodge | 10/19/05 | | dull frozen business firm | 07/02/06 | | Rusted Stain | 07/02/06 | | Appetizing Turquoise Tank Pistol | 07/02/06 | | Concupiscible telephone | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | bateful bearded organic girlfriend | 10/18/05 | | Well-lubricated green azn | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/18/05 | | chestnut vivacious address | 10/19/05 | | orchid bonkers ladyboy chapel | 10/18/05 | | trip faggotry | 10/19/05 | | cruel-hearted ape center | 10/19/05 | | Excitant Police Squad | 10/18/05 | | Supple maroon theatre laser beams | 10/19/05 | | Excitant Police Squad | 10/19/05 | | Chocolate Partner Half-breed | 10/19/05 | | Violet selfie | 07/02/06 | | floppy mad cow disease boiling water | 10/18/05 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/19/05 | | aphrodisiac out-of-control national legend | 10/19/05 | | floppy mad cow disease boiling water | 10/19/05 | | Slap-happy Incel | 10/19/05 | | floppy mad cow disease boiling water | 10/19/05 | | floppy mad cow disease boiling water | 07/02/06 | | Diverse Locale Ratface | 07/02/06 | | Chocolate Partner Half-breed | 10/19/05 | | territorial pearl puppy | 10/19/05 | | Yapping boistinker | 01/18/06 | | olive spectacular step-uncle's house knife | 01/18/06 | | Charismatic Toaster | 10/19/05 | | Rough-skinned heaven corn cake | 10/19/05 | | adventurous base love of her life | 10/19/05 | | Beady-eyed sienna national security agency idea he suggested | 01/18/06 | | lascivious bawdyhouse | 10/19/05 | | Smoky sickened trust fund mad-dog skullcap | 01/18/06 | | Snowy hyperactive windowlicker | 07/02/06 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:28 PM Author: adventurous base love of her life
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: Canary mischievous voyeur
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: lime reading party
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077008) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:34 PM Author: adventurous base love of her life
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077034) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:58 PM Author: lime reading party
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4077188) |
Date: October 18th, 2005 2:33 PM Author: titillating mood lay
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: lascivious bawdyhouse
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: mint cracking coffee pot indian lodge
"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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083555) |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:19 PM Author: Concupiscible telephone
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: lascivious bawdyhouse
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079190) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:23 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor
>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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079208) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:26 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor
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?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079235) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:29 PM Author: lascivious bawdyhouse
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079256) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:33 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor
>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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079282) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:37 PM Author: lascivious bawdyhouse
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079320) |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:21 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor
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: lascivious bawdyhouse
See above.
You guys aren't even bothering to read the OP.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079194) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:24 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy 180 parlor
See above.
You aren't even bothering to get the answer right.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079213) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:25 PM Author: lascivious bawdyhouse
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079225) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:30 PM Author: lascivious bawdyhouse
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079261) |
 |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:38 PM Author: lascivious bawdyhouse
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079336) |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:27 PM Author: bateful bearded 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: Well-lubricated green azn
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4079252) |
Date: October 18th, 2005 7:32 PM Author: orchid bonkers ladyboy chapel
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 18th, 2005 9:06 PM Author: Excitant Police Squad
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 ;)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4080270) |
 |
Date: October 19th, 2005 8:03 AM Author: Supple maroon theatre laser beams
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
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083372) |
 |
Date: October 19th, 2005 8:48 AM Author: Excitant Police Squad
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
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083396) |
Date: October 18th, 2005 9:24 PM Author: floppy mad cow disease boiling water
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
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4080446) |
Date: October 19th, 2005 9:01 AM Author: Chocolate Partner 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 10:53 AM Author: Charismatic Toaster
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!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083670)
|
Date: October 19th, 2005 10:56 AM Author: Rough-skinned heaven corn cake
Incredibly tacky.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4083682) |
Date: October 19th, 2005 11:56 AM Author: lascivious bawdyhouse
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.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#4084050) |
Date: January 18th, 2006 9:34 AM Author: Smoky sickened trust fund mad-dog skullcap
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: Snowy hyperactive windowlicker
bump, my nigga. bump.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=281237&forum_id=2#6122360) |
|
|