Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 191 Webinars
- 10 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 31 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 640 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
Related Discussions
I have an issue with my iPhone...
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
@akistotle could you lock this post? Obviously he is trying to be sarcastic about the other post on Spivey consulting.
I also don’t think this is a good analogy. A post discussing about a law school admissions consulting group does belong to 7sage forum.
My original reply:
@thrillhouse said:
I think we should be careful about criticizing Spivey on the basis of this discussion -- as whoami indicated, what the consultant stated was more like "I can't tell you where to apply but I wouldn't do the T-20. Check out Brooklyn law instead and then transfer into the top-20." So the initial characterization of the consultant's advice as "do not apply to the top 20" is misleading. The consultant's advice seems to be that the top 20 is highly unlikely to admit you, which is why other schools are a better focus. I don't think the consultant is saying that it's impossible to get into a top 20 and so you should definitely not apply to them.
Now is the advice that you're unlikely to get into a top 20 good or bad? It's hard to tell -- that advice might be premised on having seen many applicants with your statistics and # of LSAT takes. Maybe it's bad advice, sure. But I am uncomfortable with a cascade of posters saying that Spivey sucks merely on the basis of a misleading characterization of the advice...
**I agree. I also don't think we are getting the entire story or context.
First, why only 3 lower ranked schools in NY/NJ? Did OP mention he has a preference for schools in NY? Sounds like it. Otherwise, why not consider all the other schools in that range? This tells me something isn't adding up.
Also, OP starts by saying that they "stated... not to apply to any of the T-20."
Then, this turns out to be it was actually:
"more like, I can't tell you where to apply but I wouldn't do the T-20. Check out Brooklyn law instead and then transfer into the top-20."
Then OP stated that they are charging him X amount of dollars to write a LOCI. Then, it turns out to sound more like a "Why X" essay and an LOCI/app update.
As for the alleged advice that you should transfer, I've seen Spivey et al. explain that it's very hard to get into a T13 with a sub 3.0 GPA and If you 100% are dead set on T13, transferring may be the best path. IIRC, he also hedged this with explaining that when people DO get into T13s with sub 3.0 GPAs it's only 1-2 of the schools they've applied to out of many and it's usually very late in the cycle off the waitlist. Just to be clear, I'm paraphrasing and I might not be representing his advice accurately. The point is, that advice doesn't say it's a good idea vs bad idea. Just that it can be the most viable path to the T13 with a low GPA. And there's a lot to unpack and consider otherwise, such as work experience, years since you've graduated, UG major, etc.
Just be careful about accurately representing what people actually say.
@whoami said:
I mean Derek was super cool. He was just out traveling this week so he referred me to Nicholas. Honestly, don't like the guy. Don't care if he reads this.
There's a Spivey thread over on LSL. Express your concerns to him and his company over there. Here isn't the right place to have this discussion.**
@Alex this is a discussion thread. I'll value your input once you actually take the LSAT.
**Noted. You should be more logical and consider input based on whether or not the reasoning makes sense. Not whether someone has taken a test that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. You asked for opinions and guidance and I gave you what I thought was solid advice. If there's a place where your actual concerns can be addressed, wouldn't you agree it makes sense to pursue that course of action? **
@yoojeanie1314
I value OP’s input on their experience with Spivey Consulting. I don’t see why the posts about Spivey Consulting have to be restricted to LSL. 7Sage forum serves as a discussion forum on LSAT/ Law School admissions, and an opinion about a law school admissions consulting group is appropriate here. At least it would help me to make a wise decision on where to invest money for my cycle.
I value OP's input too. Posts about Spivey don't have to be restricted to LSL/anywhere. My point is that I think it makes more sense to see what he has to say about it personally. If OP's looking for help, that's what I think the best advice is anyway. If you're not actually looking for help and just looking to complain, then have at it.
**I didn't dictate anything. What I did say was here [7Sage's forum] isn't the right place to talk about your complaints about another company's consulting services when they are easily accessible through another forum. I hardly think that's the same as restricting all of your views to the parent company. But if that parent company has their CEO and entire staff easily accessible on their forum, yeah, probably makes sense to go figure it out over there.
I'm also not implying OP fabricated anything. However, I do think OP left out important context and certain advice was misrepresented.**
Yeah, maybe I should have worded my post better. I should have been more clear and said I think it would be more productive to take it over to where that company can actually reply and help out OP. I just didn't see what good the thread was going to be if we kept it going.
It doesn't mean OP isn't allowed to post it though.
ETA: Also the analogy is spot on. A post discussing a smart phone does belong on a smart phone forum. The thing is, there are better forums for certain issues. That's all I'm trying to say.
@Alex by your logic, we should not be complaining about LSAC on 7Sage either, since they have a communication channel for official complaints.
Yes. You should. Show us what happens, too.
I'll post my results in this thread
That's not correct. The LSAC's CEO and core team aren't taking questions on the LSAC forum. And, again, I really apologize for not being more clear. It's not that you should/shouldn't complain about it here. I don't actually have any issues with that so long as everyone is accurately represented. I really wanted OP to be able to get the help they* needed. It seemed like the logical thing to point them towards a place where they could get it. I'm a pragmatic guy - I do what makes sense.
Lol
https://media.giphy.com/media/l2JhO3mvX6yGtFJew/giphy.gif
Also, I should be free to post about my iPhone anywhere. Should we restrict all sarcastic posts to the sarcasm forum?
Contrary to what it may seem, I didn't make this thread with the intent be a dick. I just didn't have a chance to reply/defend my replies on the other thread.
@Alex As we have seen from our LSAT studies, having an intent does not mean that you will the impact you intended.
Now there's something we can finally agree on...
@alex I feel like you are a functioning retard. How's that for an argument?
Not an argument. The fact you signed up for an account just to make that comment makes me question your ability to function though.