Interesting - Law School

Sounds like a marketing ploy to try to attract more applications. Neither program is all that highly regarded, so I'm not sure I see the value in doubling up.

The only campus of the State University of New Jersey that's any good is the one in Durham.

Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.

Interesting, could you please forward the link auudetat?

Im quite sure I read an article online yesterday that said # of law school applicants have dropped by about 3-4% in each of the last 2 years. Will post the link if I find it again.

No link. I got a letter - I fit their demographic.

That's the second ABA accredited law school that I have heard of that accepts the GMAT in lieu of the LSAT. Wonder how the trend will continue for other schools?

I don't get why this law school accepts the GMAT, is this because they think aspiring law students would rather take the GMAT, or because law schools feel that they don't already have enough fickle people who don't know what to do with their lives that they want to capture the segment of people who might be applying to business school, but at the last second decide to apply to law school?

I hear ya, Johnny. I think that law school has got to have more "well, I just don't know what else to do" applicants than any other degree program. So yeah, I can relate to what you're saying.

On the other hand, while I think standardized tests are a helpful tool in assessing an applicant, I also don't think that any particular test is the be-all end-all of tests. Perhaps schools want to get more applicants and don't want to put additional hurdles in front of students who have already taken what turns out to be an equally valid test.

I know Stanford GSB just recently started taking the GRE in lieu of the GMAT....perhaps it's all part of a larger trend, as GMATT points out.

I think they're trying to capture the people who want to do the joint degree but dont want to take the lsat.

Does anybody know enough about the following standardized tests to rank them in order of difficulty? It seems like the GMAT has such a narrow scope of material that it focuses on that it's probably one of the easier ones.

MCAT, LSAT, GMAT, GRE

Difficult to say because I have only taken two of the four.

Probably something like-

LSAT
GMAT
GRE

Sorry, I'm not sure how to rank the MCAT.

that sounds like the correct order to me

i would not want to take the mcat, ever

the lsat seems much harder to score in the top percentiles

The lsat ate me for lunch. A naturallight sandwich. Gmat was waayyy less difficult.

Imagine if Pelihu or Rustmonster went for a joint MD/MBA? With a JD already under their belts, they'd be vying for the "King of the Universe" spot. Curious if anybody has ever made such a monumental achievement?

Nonetheless, hat's off to anybody who attempts a joint masters, regardless of the disciplines. If I were ten years younger and had the cash (and balls), I'd definately be tempted to go the JD/MBA route.

I've only taken the GMAT from that list, but judging from my score, I think the GMAT is the easiest. More internationals taking the GMAT thus bringing down the average.

LSATs are taken mostly by motivated American college students.

I took the LSAT. I found it much more difficult than the GMAT.

What I really liked about the GMAT was that my verbal and quant were less than the overall percentile.

Is this common on standardized tests?

I knew a girl at law school that had an MD and had just finished her residency. I remember her telling me that during her first year she hit the cap on federal student loans and had to get a special waiver. Ouch!

I'll vote in the following order:

MCAT
LSAT
GMAT
GRE

I've never taken the GRE, but back in my days as an English major, I did help some people study for it. I think the GRE is an easier exam, and I also think the competition is more lax. It's used so broadly, for so many different graduate programs that I think a majority of the test-takers have no interest or need for doing well on the entire exam. The competition just isn't that fierce.

I voted the MCAT at the top because it tests actual knowledge. I actually think that these types of tests are more straight-forward, but the fact of the matter is that you need to be seriously dedicated and accumulate huge amounts of knowledge, beginning from the moment you set foot on campus, in order to know enough to do well on the MCAT. You also need to factor in that some of the best and brightest have been preparing their entire lives to get into medical school, so the competition is intense.

Regarding some earlier comments about the LSAT, I believe that it is a great test for law school. The LSAT is time intensive - if I recall some 95% of test-takers are not able to finish the sections of the exam working at their normal pace. You need to read really quickly to get through the RC; and they are much more complicated than those found in the GMAT. The CR sections are much more difficult as well, and the timing is such that you must make an immediate decision and move on. For comparison, I finished the GMAT verbal section with 20 minutes to spare (scored 51); with the LSAT I rarely had more than a minute or two to spare in each section.

This is good prep for law school because RC and CR and vital to doing well during the first year. The reading is slow going, and there are a lot of new terms and new ideas to get through you head. As an English major in college, it was no problem to read 80 or 100 pages an hour. During my first year in law school, it was a struggle to get through and understand 15 pages an hour, and I was pretty fast. By the end, most people are back up to normal reading speeds because reading and analysis of the law becomes second nature, but that first year is tough. Those that can get through the LSAT comfortably definitely have an advantage.

The GMAT, well we all know the GMAT. It's definitely more difficult that the GRE, and I think that a much larger percentage of test-takers (as compared to the GRE) prepare intensely to get high scores. The real difference, I believe, is that the GMAT isn't really valued as highly as the LSAT or MCAT, where low scores are death. With the GMAT, 700 or so puts you squarely in the game - that's about 92-93%ile. For the LSAT, you need about 169-170 to be competitive at the top schools, that's about the 97-98%ile (I'm going off the top of my head, things may have changed a bit in the last few years). I don't know how the MCAT is scored, but I do remember lots of friends who got good grades in college but never made it to med school because they didn't do well enough on the MCAT.

Think of it this way, if the GMAT were as important as the LSAT or MCAT, you'd need to score 740+ to be competitive at top 15 schools. Of course, that's not the case; it's nice to score 740+, but 700 should definitely make you competitive at almost any school for that aspect at least. The rest of your application matters more. The lower percentile requirement means that competition is less intense overall - there's not doubt that many people capable of higher score focus on other things once they reach ~700. There are fewer people, when compared to the LSAT and MCAT, that work to squeeze every last point out of the GMAT.