Law School Discussion

I think what we're saying is high LSAT scores are a good predictor of high grades

I think the tone of most of the posts though suggests that those with lower LSATs are doomed to the bottom of their class.  In light of the intensity that this discussion has taken, its important to remember that a lot of things need to be assumed to make that correlation significant.  In reality, the world doesn't function "ceteris paribus."

Additionally, its important to note that law schools theoretically use this information to only admit people to their schools who have a reasonable potential to do well.  While some people in each school will inevitably make Cs, law schools shouldn't reasonably expect any individual applicant to fall into that category at the point they are admitted.  I mean, if your goal was to propigate the existing curve, wouldn't you simply admit some 135 LSAT 2.0 GPAs to make up the bottom of the curve, some 156 LSAT 3.3 GPAs to make up the middle of the curve and then just reserve the top 10-15% if the class for the exceptional grades and LSATs.

You guys all obviously missed the first lesson in your undergrad stats class... correlation does not equal causation.  While a .3 or .4 may indicate a strong correlation it also indicates a lot of noise in the analysis (a lot of other factors being relevant to 1L grades.)

This can also be seen in the smoking/lung cancer example... there is a strong correlation between smoking and lung cancer, but not all smokers get lung cancer, and some people who never smoke do.  It is known that genetics also play a part in the equation.  Some people are simply more predisposed to cancer than others.

I think the most rational perspective is to not feel doomed by lower than average LSATs and not rest on above average LSATs.  Either way, law school will require a lot of work to be successful and that work will most likely be more determinative of success than one Saturday in June or October.