Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA  (Read 10903 times)

MEMEMEME

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2011, 08:51:13 PM »
Hmmm...someone who HASN'T taken the LSAT saying 159 is low and etc. Yeah, yeah, just for THOSE schools. Trust me, maybe his LSAT isn't going to cut it for those school but he would be harrassed with scholarship offers from third and fourth tier schools if he was applying next year. Also, if any "reasonably" smart person can obtaina 160 and above, how come 159 is the 78th to 79th percentile? I guess everyone else doesn't take it seriously...It's funny, most of the people on this site seemed to have the ability to score in the top 15 percent on the LSAT. I guess only the truly gifted (besides bigs who admits (and man, he should be ashamed of his above the median score) he got a 155) use this board. Yes, bigs, I'm kidding about you being ashamed, of course.

Framboise

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2011, 05:02:33 PM »
OP, I think louiebstef's suggestion is definitely the best one.  And while you're at it, you can contact the schools' admissions office to see how they feel about 3+ LSATs.  I think it would probably only be worth it if you think you can get a 163+, because that would make you a solid candidate for the schools you listed.  My understanding is that top schools especially don't like so many LSAT scores, but then again they only have to report the highest.  I think as long as you're fairly certain you can make a serious jump, then it's totally worth it, but if not, then I guess not.

MEMEMEME, I already clarified that I meant extremely low in the context.  It's definitely a low score for a T30 school (maybe not for Iowa) and some of the schools that the OP listed have medians of 163 and 164 and I already explained why UNC's median of 162 is misleading.  The OP already clarified that with the exception of USC, this is his/her reach school list.  And if you're trying to bring in the 160+ argument again, a 160 is clearly within the ability of the OP, it's just a matter of whether it's worth the money and time for the OP to try again.

And why do you see more people with higher LSAT scores online in law school discussion forums?  Oh, I don't know, maybe because those who are go online trying to become as informed as they can already demonstrate that they care more than the average person about getting into and going to law school.  Those people are naturally much more likely to study harder for the LSAT.  In fact, that's how I found the different forums for law school discussion - I was looking for tips and materials on studying for the LSAT.  I'm taking it seriously and can't afford to spend much money on prep, so I want to choose my materials and methods carefully.  Many others are like that too.

MEMEMEME

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #12 on: January 23, 2011, 12:56:17 PM »
Yeah, I don't believe it. You're indicating then that 80 percent of people taking the LSAT don't try to do the work that it takes to get into law school or a good law school - including becoming informed. That would mean that 80 percent of the people applying to law school in any cycle are lazy as hell and that is contradictory to the personality of a lawyer or law student. In any case, make your judgment after you take the LSAT - thanks.

Tossy

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #13 on: January 23, 2011, 02:48:19 PM »
Quote
You're indicating then that 80 percent of people taking the LSAT don't try to do the work that it takes to get into law school or a good law school - including becoming informed.

You're making some weird assumptions here.  First, not all LSAT takers end up being law school candidates.  Bizarre, but true.  Second, many of the scores that are included in the calculation of the percentile averages are scores of repeat takers which can skew the percentages anyway.  If you are at the 80th percentile, you didn't necessarily do better than 80% of test takers at your particular administration or really any administration.  Your score was better than 80% of scores earned over a selected period of administrations.  Not the same thing.

The argument over whether a 160 (or below) is a good score or a bad score is moot anyway.  The schools will set the standards they choose to set and a score that is good on an absolute scale (80th percentile is good) can be mediocre on a relative scale (80th percentile is mediocre at T14 schools).  Really the only good score is one high enough to get you where you want to go with the money that you need to go there. 

Whether there should be a minimum standard is also a moot issue.  The probability of being accepted into an ABA-approved school drops drastically as you fall below a 150 on the LSAT--that's the 40th percentile of scores and it acts as a de facto bar for many candidates.  I don't see a lot of crying for those folks with the 135s and 141s.  Obviously, most people agree there should be some kind of minimum standard, even if its not an absolute bar, the argument is over where that cut-off is.

MEMEMEME

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2011, 06:32:41 AM »
I think the LSAT scores whether they are using the scale for this administration or the next are pretty consistent year after year. If they weren't and it was that skewed (yes, I get what you're saying about people doing better or worse but really, it doesn't change THAT much) the test itself would have no indicative value of law school performance because it wasn't consistently quantifiable. I suppose if any of you have time and want to prove me wrong on this, please go compile a list of the median scores of all of the law schools and see (ABA-approved, of course) and let me know what you come up with percentage-wise. Oh, please take into account the size of the class for each school. 2010 would be a good year to use.

Fram- I objected to your stating that a 160 was easy enough to pull off and any reasonably intelligent person could do it, that was all. I just think you should take the test and see how you do. Maybe I did, maybe I didn't - but it's irrelevant because I know some lawyers who scored ten points lower than me in their day and are pretty good.

Tossy

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #15 on: January 24, 2011, 11:47:49 AM »
Quote
The LSAT scores whether they are using the scale for this administration or the next are pretty consistent year after year. If they weren't and it was that skewed (yes, I get what you're saying about people doing better or worse but really, it doesn't change THAT much) the test itself would have no indicative value of law school performance because it wasn't consistently quantifiable

No, I'm referencing the fact that you seem to think that LSAT percentiles refer to percentiles of test takers.  That's not true.  The percentile refers to scores gathered over a range of administrations.  One test taker can be responsible for many scores.  An 80th percentile on the LSAT doesn't necessarily place you in the top 20% of test takers so there is not necessarily a corresponding 80% of angry candidates scoring lower.  An 80th percentile on the LSAT might only place you in the top 25% or 30% of test takers.  I'm not talking about the predictive value of the LSAT at all.

MEMEMEME

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #16 on: January 24, 2011, 03:29:39 PM »
I don't know, do people real improve that much on the second run? I heard that they basically stay within the score band unless they didn't prep the first time and did a lot the next time. I don't know, mine was a first shot score and it pretty much corresponding with the vast majority of the preptests I took (twenty preptests). I did study, but I believe that I already had logic knowledge from undergrad courses and that I was at my peak.

Tossy

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #17 on: January 24, 2011, 04:03:58 PM »
Quote
I don't know, do people real improve that much on the second run? I heard that they basically stay within the score band unless they didn't prep the first time and did a lot the next time.

It doesn't matter if they improve or not.  If the same test taker posts up a 150 and at the next administration posts up another 150, both scores of the same test taker will count when calculating percentages on future exams.  One test taker, two scores.  Actually if they stay within their score range it could skew the bottom portion of the percentile calculations even more because people with lower scores retake at higher rates than folks with higher scores.

You know, nevermind, if you don't get it, you don't get it. 

bigs5068

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1474
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #18 on: January 24, 2011, 04:47:51 PM »
If you want to get technical then the percentiles can change depending on different administrations etc. All anyone is trying to say is that different people have different scores. Maybe it was a lack of effort, maybe they studied wrong, or maybe they just are incapable of getting a 160 or maybe a million other factors came into play. However, if you look at most test takers the majority of them did not get a 160. You did CONGRATS! Honestly, that is awesome! However, to say anyone could get a 160 shows a lack of understanding in my opinion.

I personally see people do things everyday that I don't think I could do.  Many of these people will say performing open heart surgery is not that hard. Or building a skyscraper is not that difficult I personally think it is. Maybe any reasonably intelligent person could figure it out, but I think it takes a certain intelligence and raw talent to be able to handle all the intangibles to perform open heart surgery. People that score 160 or even 170 have a great intelligence for patterns, thinking quickly, and just MC tests in my opinion. It is great that they have it and you should be happy you do. It is honestly awesome and maybe anyone can get a 160. It seems that most LSAT takers are college graduates who did reasonably well in undergrad and studied for the LSAT. The majority of these people don't score a 160. No matter what the percentile is for the next administration etc go to up to anyone who has taken the LSAT and I would bet the majority of them did not score a 160. The numbers will back me up on that. If there is some magic way to guarantee a 160+ LSAT for every somewhat intelligent person you should start selling it right away. I would even pony up some money to help you out. As far as I know it doesn't exist and Kaplan or any other course does not offer a refund if someone doesn't score a 160 or higher.

So the point of that babbling is it is awesome you scored a 160+ on your LSAT. You obviously worked hard on achieving that score, but I think it is possible you have a knack for the test on top of  the work you put into achieving a high score. That is just my opinion though. .

Tossy

  • Guest
Re: 159 LSAT, 3.6 GPA
« Reply #19 on: January 24, 2011, 05:53:48 PM »
Quote
So the point of that babbling is it is awesome you scored a 160+ on your LSAT. You obviously worked hard on achieving that score, but I think it is possible you have a knack for the test on top of  the work you put into achieving a high score. That is just my opinion though. .

It's obvious to me that your problem is that instead of reading what people actually write, you read a few words and then assume (wrongly) what it is you think they are saying.  Your assumptions are astonishing in their breadth, stupidity and bitterness.