Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?  (Read 1412 times)

deleted

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #10 on: October 20, 2005, 01:18:46 PM »
i'm thinking they aren't motivated -C-

steve112sms

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
    • AOL Instant Messenger - steve112sms
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #11 on: October 20, 2005, 01:22:22 PM »
There are a few 150's and below posters around here. They are indeed outnumbered, but I think this board in general tends to attract overachievers since in general they wll be much more concerned about success and leech onto neurotic boards like this one. For instance you'll also note that most people around these parts have already applied and compared to the general application pool, very few people apply this early.

mapko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #12 on: October 20, 2005, 02:28:46 PM »
i remember speaking to a couple of people on Oct 1 during the scheduled 10 min break, and they were both taking the test just for the heck of it... they didn't really study, but were curious to see how they would do... the LSAT is a pretty well-known test, so I'm sure a lot of people will put down a 100 bucks to write it, if nothing then for the satisfaction of saying "yeah, i took the lsat"  ::)
CGPA-3.7; LSAT-oct 05

TheJesus

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 299
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #13 on: October 20, 2005, 02:31:49 PM »
b- some of us are lying about our scores and adding 10 points


B, obviously

steve112sms

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
    • AOL Instant Messenger - steve112sms
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #14 on: October 20, 2005, 02:34:37 PM »
so I'm sure a lot of people will put down a 100 bucks to write it, if nothing then for the satisfaction of saying "yeah, i took the lsat"  ::)

Even though that's pretty stupid, I wouldn't roll my eyes over it. I say the more people like that, the merrier. All that means is a better scale for me.

sck

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2005, 03:17:08 PM »
Before I was really seriously deciding I wanted to do the law school thing, I actually did consider taking the lsat just to see how I did. Mostly because I had several people tell me I would do really well on it.

I could never bring myself to spend the money 'just to see' though.
LSN
Nontrad, with a crazy split

Thomas 239

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 266
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2005, 05:08:34 PM »
so I'm sure a lot of people will put down a 100 bucks to write it, if nothing then for the satisfaction of saying "yeah, i took the lsat"  ::)

Even though that's pretty stupid, I wouldn't roll my eyes over it. I say the more people like that, the merrier. All that means is a better scale for me.

The curve is not affected by the performance of test-takers as it is in the SAT's. You'll notice that the %tile rankings for a 170, 180, et cetera have changed over time, whereas on the SATs, they're held almost constant. The scale is used to level the playing field so that all tests are theoretically the same overall difficulty (when you take into account the scale as well as the difficulty of the questions) and so that a 170 represents the same level of achievement as a 170 on another test- *not* so that a 170 always represents a top 1%-tile score or whatever.
GPA: :/
LSAT: 171 (Oct. 05)

UGAfootballfanatic

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #17 on: October 21, 2005, 06:41:48 AM »
I have to disagree- the scale IS intended to represenet the same %tiles over time, though it's not always successful. The POINT is that the scores and %tiles are comparable over tests because the scale (not the raw, mind you) is adjusted by those little statisticians at the LSAT to fit a bell curve. I forget what the standard deviation is, but I know the test is on a normal distribution.

Scunning

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #18 on: October 21, 2005, 09:00:33 AM »
I'm probably in the high 150/low 160 range (if I'm lucky). There are a couple of reasons that I don't post:

a) When you're in my range it's a tad intimidating to read all the posts like 'If I get a 168 I'll kill myself.' I guess I wonder what a lowly 150er can offer to all you high achievers.
b) I'm in my 30s, have a decent job in enviornmental planning, and don't feel like it's the end of the world if I don't get a high enough score. Therefore I'm not having a baby about the results coming out today or monday or next week for that matter.
c) Following on from (b) I guess a part of me did the LSAT for the heck of it while the other part is just realistic in terms of where my standardized testing abilities lie (I'm from Ireland and had never even seen a standardized test before the LSAT). Again, not sure what I can offer a board like this except maybe a bit more life experience.
d) I stumbled upon LSD the week of the LSAT. It seems like everyone knows everyone at this point so I probably don't want to be coming out of left field with posts.

That said, good luck everyone!!!

lawgeek

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: So who are the <150 LSAT takers anyway?
« Reply #19 on: October 21, 2005, 09:14:01 AM »
Well said, Scunning.  I am in the same situation. 

I have really enjoyed reading and laughing at all the posts over the past week.  I'm glad my 150 will help lower the curve for all you 165+ takers that I am jealous of.

Good luck to all. 
The heights by great men reached and kept, were not attained by sudden flight.  But they, while their companions slept, were toiling upward in the night.  - Longfellow