Can I use a HIGH SAT score to make a point to an ad comm? Forum

[hijoma]

I have read that some people use low SAT scores and low LSAT scores in contrast to high GPAs to show that their actual academic performance outperforms these measures. My situation puts a twist on this:

I am interested in whether a case can be made that a less than stellar LSAT score can be mitigated by an explanation that it does not reflect an individual's potential due to 1) working in a profession (Big 4 public accounting) that hinders preparation for the LSAT due to the demands of the job and 2) a high undergraduate GPA and a high SAT score indicate success in the classroom and on standardized exams when adequate preparation is available.

Obviously, I know I need to study, study, study, but my work schedule constrains that. Despite quite a bit of practice on actual exams and review of the Logic Games Bible and Logical Reasoning Bible, I seem to be stuck in the low to mid 160s. I think my 1410 (old SAT) and success at a prominent national research university are indicative of my potential. (As additional background, in addition to the Big 4 public accounting soft I have a master's degree in accounting as well and am a CPA. I have a history of serving in leadership roles, including acting as president of an undergraduate organization that demanded a significant amount of time/effort as well as mentoring younger students, including minorities. While being a white male, I'm from part of the country that is geographically isolated and not well represented in the professionally educated echelons of society.)

Would this point about a low LSAT not being representative of my potential due to the aforementioned reasons be worth bringing up, perhaps in an addendum? Any additional feedback? Please, no snarky responses. And yes, I know I need to keep practicing.

[bk1]

No. They won't care.

[vanwinkle]

No. They won't care (unless you are a URM).

FTFY.

[im_blue]

I seem to be stuck in the low to mid 160s. I think my 1410 (old SAT) and success at a prominent national research university are indicative of my potential.

A 1410 SAT is top 4%, while a 165 LSAT is top 8% (which is really top 4% of all accepted law students since half of all LSAT takers don't get in anywhere). So it looks like you're testing right where you should be. If anything you're already overperforming on the LSAT, since the pool of LSAT test takers is likely stronger than the pool of SAT takers.

[Frank]

.

[OGR3]

Law schools don't care about your SATs. Just like law firms don't care about your LSATs.

Should I not have both listed on my resume?

[2014]

I seem to be stuck in the low to mid 160s. I think my 1410 (old SAT) and success at a prominent national research university are indicative of my potential.

A 1410 SAT is top 4%, while a 165 LSAT is top 8% (which is really top 4% of all accepted law students since half of all LSAT takers don't get in anywhere). So it looks like you're testing right where you should be. If anything you're already overperforming on the LSAT, since the pool of LSAT test takers is likely stronger than the pool of SAT takers.

If 100 people take the LSAT and you are in the top 8% that means you are the 92nd best score. If half of those 100 don't go to law school, then the person who had the 92nd best score out of 100 now suddenly has the 42nd best out of 50 since the top 8% can be reasonably assumed to matriculate.
That means top 8% of total turns into top 16% of accepted.

Not that it really applies, but you had math the wrong way.


OP this advice is still credited though. If you are in the 96th percentile for SAT and 92nd percentile for LSAT, they are hardly going to appreciate you claiming that LSAT is not representative of your testing abilities since the numbers are not that far apart.

[pelmen74]

I am interested in whether a case can be made that a less than stellar LSAT score can be mitigated by an explanation that it does not reflect an individual's potential due to 1) working in a profession (Big 4 public accounting) that hinders preparation for the LSAT due to the demands of the job and 2) a high undergraduate GPA and a high SAT score indicate success in the classroom and on standardized exams when adequate preparation is available.

Most people do not practice more than an hour or two a day while doing a practice test on the weekends (that's what I did and scored in the 98th percentile). Even if you work 9 to 8, you still have time to do a two practice sections after work. High GPA, softs, experience, are all obviously important, but they will not compensate for a low LSAT score.

[bgdddymtty]

I seem to be stuck in the low to mid 160s. I think my 1410 (old SAT) and success at a prominent national research university are indicative of my potential.

A 1410 SAT is top 4%, while a 165 LSAT is top 8% (which is really top 4% of all accepted law students since half of all LSAT takers don't get in anywhere). So it looks like you're testing right where you should be. If anything you're already overperforming on the LSAT, since the pool of LSAT test takers is likely stronger than the pool of SAT takers.

Sorry, but this is egregiously inaccurate. Given that the half of LSAT-takers that don't get in anywhere is pretty much the bottom half, being in the top 8% of all LSAT scores means that you're in (roughly) the top 16% of law school students, not the top 4%.

As to OP's original question: Don't do it. Not only does it just sound like an excuse (because it is), but the SAT and the LSAT measure a drastically different set of skills. An adcomm could just as easily look at the evidence you're presenting and conclude that you're well suited for accounting, but not for law.

[Frank]

.

[bk1]

This is a resume for law school or firm jobs?

You ask that question like it matters.

[Frank]

.

[OGR3]

This is a resume for law school or firm jobs?

You ask that question like it matters.

lol, true. Yeah, dude, don't list any scores on your resume. For law schools, they will know your LSAT score. For firms or whatever, it doesn't matter one iota.

I'm doing it anyway. And I'm listing my projected gpa.

[bk1]

I'm doing it anyway. And I'm listing my projected gpa.

Not sure if serious.

[Frank]

.

[OGR3]

lol, true. Yeah, dude, don't list any scores on your resume. For law schools, they will know your LSAT score. For firms or whatever, it doesn't matter one iota.

I'm doing it anyway. And I'm listing my projected gpa.

Flame.

I'm glad you caught my sarcasm the second time around.

[Frank]

.

[bk1]

I'm glad you caught my sarcasm the second time around.

Oh the internet...

[Lonagan]

The only way to mitigate a low LSAT score is to retake it and get a higher one. I'm sure there is some exception somewhere, but the circumstances are going to be extremely rare.

[awesomepossum]

Please, no snarky responses.

[TaipeiMort]

I have read that some people use low SAT scores and low LSAT scores in contrast to high GPAs to show that their actual academic performance outperforms these measures. My situation puts a twist on this:

I am interested in whether a case can be made that a less than stellar LSAT score can be mitigated by an explanation that it does not reflect an individual's potential due to 1) working in a profession (Big 4 public accounting) that hinders preparation for the LSAT due to the demands of the job and 2) a high undergraduate GPA and a high SAT score indicate success in the classroom and on standardized exams when adequate preparation is available.

Obviously, I know I need to study, study, study, but my work schedule constrains that. Despite quite a bit of practice on actual exams and review of the Logic Games Bible and Logical Reasoning Bible, I seem to be stuck in the low to mid 160s. I think my 1410 (old SAT) and success at a prominent national research university are indicative of my potential. (As additional background, in addition to the Big 4 public accounting soft I have a master's degree in accounting as well and am a CPA. I have a history of serving in leadership roles, including acting as president of an undergraduate organization that demanded a significant amount of time/effort as well as mentoring younger students, including minorities. While being a white male, I'm from part of the country that is geographically isolated and not well represented in the professionally educated echelons of society.)

Would this point about a low LSAT not being representative of my potential due to the aforementioned reasons be worth bringing up, perhaps in an addendum? Any additional feedback? Please, no snarky responses. And yes, I know I need to keep practicing.

Study longer and harder. I know a kid who was stuck in the 160s a few weeks before test day. He made the jump into the 170s the week before the test. He got a 180 on the day of the test.

The SAT is nothing like the LSAT. The only thing that is tested on the LSAT that is marginally tested on the SAT is reading comprehension. However, LSAT reading comp incorporates reading for argumentative structure and logical reasoning. Therefore, you are in a different world.

If you are in the 160's now, you are either 1) maxing out your mental abilities, or 2) haven't worked hard enough and smart enough to change the way your brain is wired. Train your brain to think a new way like the rest of us had to and forget the past.

[clevinger33]

Wait, a 1410 is an impressive SAT score? I thought anything <1500 was TTT.

[SullaFelix]

I have read that some people use low SAT scores and low LSAT scores in contrast to high GPAs to show that their actual academic performance outperforms these measures. My situation puts a twist on this:

I am interested in whether a case can be made that a less than stellar LSAT score can be mitigated by an explanation that it does not reflect an individual's potential due to 1) working in a profession (Big 4 public accounting) that hinders preparation for the LSAT due to the demands of the job and 2) a high undergraduate GPA and a high SAT score indicate success in the classroom and on standardized exams when adequate preparation is available.

Obviously, I know I need to study, study, study, but my work schedule constrains that. Despite quite a bit of practice on actual exams and review of the Logic Games Bible and Logical Reasoning Bible, I seem to be stuck in the low to mid 160s. I think my 1410 (old SAT) and success at a prominent national research university are indicative of my potential. (As additional background, in addition to the Big 4 public accounting soft I have a master's degree in accounting as well and am a CPA. I have a history of serving in leadership roles, including acting as president of an undergraduate organization that demanded a significant amount of time/effort as well as mentoring younger students, including minorities. While being a white male, I'm from part of the country that is geographically isolated and not well represented in the professionally educated echelons of society.)

Would this point about a low LSAT not being representative of my potential due to the aforementioned reasons be worth bringing up, perhaps in an addendum? Any additional feedback? Please, no snarky responses. And yes, I know I need to keep practicing.

No. Because 1410 isn't that high.

[whymeohgodno]

This thread is fucking retarded.

[20160810]

The SAT is important, but law schools are generally more concerned with your PSAT, AP European History, and Learner's Permit Exam scores.