Lower LSAT scores in Canadian Law schools

[rizz]

Or how about that most Canadians who are scoring 170+ are probably applying (and attending) schools in the US.

That isn't true at all.

[nerfco]

Canadians scoring highly on the LSAT do not necessarily wish to go to Toronto. Canadian schools tend to be more regional as a whole than top US law schools. I did not even consider applying to law school in Toronto, for example. (I did not apply to any Canadian schols, but if I had, it would have been to UVic and UBC.)

I would also believe that Canadians scoring highly on the LSAT are more likely to attend top American law schools, further reducing the pool of 170+ applicants to schools like Toronto.

I doubt assertions that Canadians as a whole are not as good at standardized tests as Americans, merely due to the lack of an SAT or ACT to enter into undergrad.

[keelee]

Or how about that most Canadians who are scoring 170+ are probably applying (and attending) schools in the US.

That isn't true at all.

Actually, yes, it probably is. Canadian schools are pretty regional. UT or McGill can get you a job in New York City, but the oppurtunities they offer aren't as great as a T10 US school, which a 170+ gets you into. There really isn't anoter explanation for why UT has lower LSAT scores. On a whole, given Canada's better education system, one would expect Canadians get average higher scores.

[rizz]

Actually, yes, it probably is. Canadian schools are pretty regional. UT or McGill can get you a job in New York City, but the oppurtunities they offer aren't as great as a T10 US school, which a 170+ gets you into. There really isn't anoter explanation for why UT has lower LSAT scores. On a whole, given Canada's better education system, one would expect Canadians get average higher scores.

Did you read the thread? I guess Canadian schools are "regional" if you consider all of Canada a "region." We don't have standardized testing here. We haven't been prepped from grade nine for the SATs. There is a much smaller pool of applicants leading to less people at the top to fill the class.

[rizz]

Canadians scoring highly on the LSAT do not necessarily wish to go to Toronto. Canadian schools tend to be more regional as a whole than top US law schools. I did not even consider applying to law school in Toronto, for example. (I did not apply to any Canadian schols, but if I had, it would have been to UVic and UBC.)

I would also believe that Canadians scoring highly on the LSAT are more likely to attend top American law schools, further reducing the pool of 170+ applicants to schools like Toronto.

I doubt assertions that Canadians as a whole are not as good at standardized tests as Americans, merely due to the lack of an SAT or ACT to enter into undergrad.

Can I ask why you want to go to school in the U.S.? Are you planning to practice there and if so how are you going to deal with the immigration issue?

[keelee]

Actually, yes, it probably is. Canadian schools are pretty regional. UT or McGill can get you a job in New York City, but the oppurtunities they offer aren't as great as a T10 US school, which a 170+ gets you into. There really isn't anoter explanation for why UT has lower LSAT scores. On a whole, given Canada's better education system, one would expect Canadians get average higher scores.

Did you read the thread? I guess Canadian schools are "regional" if you consider all of Canada a "region." We don't have standardized testing here. We haven't been prepped from grade nine for the SATs. There is a much smaller pool of applicants leading to less people at the top to fill the class.

I was born in Vancouver. I know very well know how Canadian school works. It makes perfect ense that Canadians with a 170+ would perfer to go to the US, and while no, I don't have facts to back my statement up (neither do you, however), that's what I believe the answer is.

I don't buy that Canadians do worse on the LSAT on average. I truly doubt it considering Canada's superior education system. They probably do better, even if they aren't used to standarized tests. While I have not lived in Canada for a long time, many of my friends are still from there, and the majority that took the SAT and did very well went to top schools in the states, rather than staying in Canada. I doubt that pattern is different for those going to law school.

[rpk8785]

The whole crap about Canadians not being prepped in standardized testing so therefore they fare worse on the LSAT is garbage, pure garbage.

Actually, if you look at the LSAC data (www.lsac.org, follow the links under publications), Canadians fare slightly better on the LSAT on average than south of the border.  It's true, if you've got 170+ and you've got a chance to go to HYSCCN, you're probably going to go to HYSCCN in many cases, doesn't matter who you are or where you're from.

[radar1]

Lack of experience leading to lower scores in standardized tests was just a hypothesis of mine. It's interesting that on average Canadians do better.

The original question in this thread was why do CDN law schools have a lower LSAT requirement, and I do strongly believe that is because standardized tests are not traditionally a part of the Canadian education system, and so they chiefly secondary to GPA and soft factors.

Take York/Oz for example.. don't they factor in the LSAT as "one semester of studying"?

[mark_ede]

The main reason is probably that Canadian undergraduate institutions while not certainly not without their differences, are not nearly as variable as American institutions (it is not a "level playing field" certainly but it is still far less differentiated), making GPA a more reliable indicator. This means Canadian law school admissions can be less reliant on tests.

Similarly because the Canadian law school market is regionalized and less differentiated in of itself there is less of a need to create the same intense hierarchy of admissions.

[rpk8785]

I disagree.  Homogeneity is a common and mistaken assumption about the quality of Canadian higher education - there may not be as much variation as there is down south, but there is still a lot more than some people would care to admit (ie Lakehead/Laurentian/Trent vs Queen's/McGill/U of T).  There are a number of "universities" up here that are essentially nothing more than glorified community colleges in many ways.  Adcomms do recognize this and take that into account, they're pretty used to seeing the quality of students that come out of different institutions.  You also see that major variation when you get into the job market - a degree from Lakehead U just doesn't look the same on the ol' resumé for a recruiter. 

Additionally, some of the low quality institutions do practice pretty widespread grade inflation up here (Trent is one university that is pretty notorious for that).