Admissions profile

LSAT

Not provided

CAS GPA

Not provided

1L START YEAR

Not provided

Discussions

Admissions · Classifying as a splitter?

chloedlmiller568

Sunday, Oct 10 2021

Thanks, I really appreciate the resource!!

Admissions

•

Sunday, Oct 10 2021

chloedlmiller568

Classifying as a splitter?

Hi all,

I hope everyone's law school applications are going well. I'm wishing everyone all the good luck.

While I know at this point is out of my control, I'm trying to understand if I would classify as a splitter at some of the T14 law schools - mainly HYS - and understand where I stand this cycle.

My LSAC GPA is 3.86 (which hovers between the 25th - 50th percentile for the top schools, below the 25th percentile for YLS) and my LSAT score is at/above the 75th percentile for all of these schools. I'm trying to understand which of these schools I should consider a stretch vs. a target.

Any/all thoughts are welcome and helpful. Thank you.

PrepTests ·

PT102.S2.Q6

chloedlmiller568

Sunday, Jun 27 2021

I was reluctant to choose AC C because I thought about other designed tests...

Say, if doctors were testing for polio, potentially couldn't this same chain of reaction happened, using isolated polio proteins? In which cause, the ability to cause a reaction needn't be exclusive to the proteins present in the TB bacterium, it only needs to be exclusive in the context of this test.

Can someone help explain what I'm missing here?

#help

PrepTests ·

PT106.S2.Q16

chloedlmiller568

Sunday, Jun 27 2021

Can someone explain to me why this answer feels like a SA answer vs NA? I'm getting tripped up trying to continually follow the distinction between the two in approaching questions.

I selected D, but the answer ultimately felt like an SA answer.

#help (Added by Admin)

PrepTests ·

PT109.S4.Q24

chloedlmiller568

Thursday, Apr 08 2021

This makes sense to me when not considering prior lessons -- i.e. don't attack the premises or conclusion. This to me -- stating that we can use workers more efficiently, thus NOT need to let them go + save money on outside costs, feels like it's attacking the premise that workers MUST be let go to cover for the $600 tax refund. Is that not right?