ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:27 am


User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby prezidentv8 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:34 am

This can only end in ___________.

User avatar
El_Gallo
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:23 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby El_Gallo » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:35 am

Wow, that would be crazy.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:36 am

.,.,...,..,..,:,,:,...,:::,...,:,.,.:...:.,:.::,.

I totally ripped this from Xo bro.

SuperFreak
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:11 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby SuperFreak » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:38 am

That seems a stupid thing to do.

{EDIT: Can you guys remove the XO references? That place reeks.}

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:52 am

I think the extreme focus on LSAT median is crazy. But removing the best indicator for 1L performance is silly.

I bet Boalt drops it first.
Last edited by 09042014 on Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
hokie
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:32 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby hokie » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:54 am

:shock: :shock:

SuperFreak
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:11 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby SuperFreak » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:58 am

Desert Fox wrote:I think the extreme focus on LSAT median is crazy. But removing the best indicator for future performance is silly.

I bet Boalt drops it first.


LSAT is barely the best indicator for future performance ahead of GPA. That said, I wouldn't remove it simply for that reason alone.

Alternatively, when someone says they "ripped" something from another site, please remember that the other site ripped it from somewhere else. If anyone deserves credit for this article, it is Law.com for keeping us informed of their nefarious plans to ruin the profession.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby paratactical » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:59 am

SuperFreak wrote:That seems a stupid thing to do.

{EDIT: Can you guys remove the XO references? That place reeks.}

Wait, you're afraid of a thread that even mentions XO?

SuperFreak
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:11 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby SuperFreak » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:02 pm

paratactical wrote:
SuperFreak wrote:That seems a stupid thing to do.

{EDIT: Can you guys remove the XO references? That place reeks.}

Wait, you're afraid of a thread that even mentions XO?


I'm not afraid. I just don't think we should give undue credit to that hellhole.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:02 pm

SuperFreak wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:I think the extreme focus on LSAT median is crazy. But removing the best indicator for future performance is silly.

I bet Boalt drops it first.


LSAT is barely the best indicator for future performance ahead of GPA. That said, I wouldn't remove it simply for that reason alone.

Alternatively, when someone says they "ripped" something from another site, please remember that the other site ripped it from somewhere else. If anyone deserves credit for this article, it is Law.com for keeping us informed of their nefarious plans to ruin the profession.


LSAT is significantly better than GPA, even when Law classes are basically sorted by LSAT score ( the LSAT range for most schools is statistically tiny).

SuperFreak
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:11 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby SuperFreak » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:07 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
SuperFreak wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:I think the extreme focus on LSAT median is crazy. But removing the best indicator for future performance is silly.

I bet Boalt drops it first.


LSAT is barely the best indicator for future performance ahead of GPA. That said, I wouldn't remove it simply for that reason alone.

Alternatively, when someone says they "ripped" something from another site, please remember that the other site ripped it from somewhere else. If anyone deserves credit for this article, it is Law.com for keeping us informed of their nefarious plans to ruin the profession.


LSAT is significantly better than GPA, even when Law classes are basically sorted by LSAT score ( the LSAT range for most schools is statistically tiny).


I don't remember this being the case in research. I think the LSAT has a better correlation, but not that much better. The values are like .34 versus .29 which aren't really worth mentioning in the long run. GPA + other factors determine the majority of law school performance, so losing the LSAT wouldn't be the end-all-be-all, especially if it were replaced with a similar examination. All things being equal, I would prefer the LSAT remain.

I also think that in spite of the ABA pressure the status quo will remain the same in the forseeable future.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:14 pm

SuperFreak wrote:
I don't remember this being the case in research. I think the LSAT has a better correlation, but not that much better. The values are like .34 versus .29 which aren't really worth mentioning in the long run. GPA + other factors determine the majority of law school performance, so losing the LSAT wouldn't be the end-all-be-all, especially if it were replaced with a similar examination.


But those other factors aren't known.

I'll try to find the study, but someone wrote a paper claiming that the correlation for the LSAT would be much higher if schools didn't have such small LSAT ranges.

Imagine if everyone at UVA had a 170. The correlation would have to be zero.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby D. H2Oman » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:15 pm

SuperFreak wrote:I don't remember this being the case in research. I think the LSAT has a better correlation, but not that much better. The values are like .34 versus .29 which aren't really worth mentioning in the long run. GPA + other factors determine the majority of law school performance, so losing the LSAT wouldn't be the end-all-be-all, especially if it were replaced with a similar examination. All things being equal, I would prefer the LSAT remain.

I also think that in spite of the ABA pressure the status quo will remain the same in the forseeable future.



Because classes are preselected by LSAT bro. Come on. GTFO. Half the class at GULC is between the 95th and 98th percentile.

User avatar
ArchRoark
Posts: 1000
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2010 2:53 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby ArchRoark » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:18 pm

What would poor splitters do then?

SuperFreak
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:11 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby SuperFreak » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:20 pm

Desert Fox wrote:But those other factors aren't known.


True.

I'll try to find the study, but someone wrote a paper claiming that the correlation for the LSAT would be much higher if schools didn't have such small LSAT ranges.

Imagine if everyone at UVA had a 170. The correlation would have to be zero.


On the other hand, a null hypothesis doesn't really prove anything.

D. H2Oman wrote:Because classes are preselected by LSAT bro. Come on. GTFO. Half the class at GULC is between the 95th and 98th percentile.


I'm sure the correlation goes up but I'd suspect GPA correlation would probably go up as well. I can't comment on the relationship because I don't know.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:32 pm

I'm sure GPA correlation would go up if the range is increased, but for the vast majority of law schools the GPA range is very high already. Most schools below the top 50 have GPA 25/75 splits of .5 or more.

User avatar
glewz
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby glewz » Sat Jan 22, 2011 5:04 am

Desert Fox wrote:I'll try to find the study, but someone wrote a paper claiming that the correlation for the LSAT would be much higher if schools didn't have such small LSAT ranges.

Imagine if everyone at UVA had a 170. The correlation would have to be zero.


There were studies done that validate what you're saying. In some other countries, (I forget the specific ones) schools admit a whole range of scores, and those with the highest LSATs excelled.

I heard this in a lecture on the LSAT given by a UVa professor.

User avatar
NoleinNY
Posts: 1031
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby NoleinNY » Sat Jan 22, 2011 6:04 am

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't work for the ABA. And poof. Here we are.

User avatar
niederbomb
Posts: 962
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby niederbomb » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:42 pm

What would poor splitters do then?


I'm sure GPA correlation would go up if the range is increased, but for the vast majority of law schools the GPA range is very high already. Most schools below the top 50 have GPA 25/75 splits of .5 or more.


There were studies done that validate what you're saying. In some other countries, (I forget the specific ones) schools admit a whole range of scores, and those with the highest LSATs excelled.


Besides the LSAT, what other factors would law schools consider that wouldn't privilege rich kids whose parents can send them to expensive private undergrads and unpaid internships? I'm all for revamping the LSAT to include more RC and replacing LG with a Quant section (for example), but doing away with it altogether without a replacement seems like an inane idea.

1) GPA (ineffective but no bias)
2) EC's. Possibility for bias. If EC's are a huge part of your admissions criteria, would you rather take the kid who had to tend bar over the summer to pay for college at the state school or the Dartmouth kid who took an unpaid internship in Nigeria to work on women's rights issues?
3) Quality of UG institution (huge socio-economic bias)
4) Personality, biased, but maybe in a good way.

User avatar
edgarfigaro
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:53 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby edgarfigaro » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:48 pm

doesn't matter, USNWR already stated that even if ABA dropped the req., they'd still factor LSAT in the rankings.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:54 pm

niederbomb wrote:1) GPA (ineffective but no bias)
2) EC's. Possibility for bias. If EC's are a huge part of your admissions criteria, would you rather take the kid who had to tend bar over the summer to pay for college at the state school or the Dartmouth kid who took an unpaid internship in Nigeria to work on women's rights issues?
3) Quality of UG institution (huge socio-economic bias)
4) Personality, biased, but maybe in a good way.


1) There would be bias because private schools generally have much higher grade inflation than state schools.

2-3) You are 100% right

4) I think personality should factor in somewhat. Not sure it really biases toward upper class as much as it biases against really lower class.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby vanwinkle » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:54 pm

edgarfigaro wrote:doesn't matter, USNWR already stated that even if ABA dropped the req., they'd still factor LSAT in the rankings.

Where did they say this?

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby 09042014 » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:56 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
edgarfigaro wrote:doesn't matter, USNWR already stated that even if ABA dropped the req., they'd still factor LSAT in the rankings.

Where did they say this?


Even if they did what is stop Michigan from making the LSAT optional and taking 50% students with 4.0's with no LSAT.

User avatar
edgarfigaro
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:53 pm

Re: ABA panel considering making the LSAT optional

Postby edgarfigaro » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:59 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
edgarfigaro wrote:doesn't matter, USNWR already stated that even if ABA dropped the req., they'd still factor LSAT in the rankings.

Where did they say this?


http://www.usnews.com/blogs/college-ran ... kings.html




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], carlos_danger, guybourdin and 6 guests