LSAT-GRE correlation?

[lsat-fear]

Does anyone know about how well the GRE and LSAT percentiles correlate? I know they test different skills, so there wouldn't be any formulaic conversion, but it seems that people who do well on one would do well on the other. What kind of score would you expect from someone with a GRE of 1330 (690V+640Q)?

I'm sure that this has been asked before, but I'm new here, so I just decided I'd ask once more.

[littleone]

While I doubt there's an official correlation, my guess is that since you did well on the GRE, you would also do well on the LSAT, as long as you put in the time to prepare. I got the same verbal score on the GRE as you did (the quantitative score is irrelevant in this case) and have been scoring in the upper 160s-low 170s on my practice LSATs, without taking a prep class. I took the older GRE which still had the analytical section, so I was familiar with the logic games, but you can just pick up an LSAT prep book (I recommend Powerscore's Logic Games Bible) and get more practice on those. I actually expect to do better on the LSAT than I did on the GRE because the LSAT's a paper test, so you can skip questions and come back to them and go back and check answers and change them, which I was annoyed that I couldn't do on the computer-based GRE. Also, unlike the GRE, you don't have to memorize vocab words or anything for the LSAT so you don't have to worry about being tested on the most obscure words in the English language. I think if you have a good history of standardized test-taking, you should be fine. Best of luck!

[dwharris2]

lsat-fear,
The LSAT is sui generis. Assume no correlation with any other test. That is, draw no conclusion about how you'll score based on your other test scores. It rewards preparation and penalizes presumption.
Yours,
dwharris2

[austin]

I'd love to know the answer to that same question, actually . I took the GRE a few years ago, got almost the exact same score you did and went on to get an MA. Now I'm thinking I'd like to go to law school, so I just took the September 30 LSAT.

This is just my opinion, but I found the LSAT and the GRE to be very different tests. Even if you just took the GRE, I would definitely study for the LSAT. The GRE tests more heavily on vocabulary and IMHO, the Reading Comprehension section is more straight-forward, asking about what you just read in the passage.

The LSAT RC will ask you about things like the author's opinion, what the author is likely to disagree with, why the author wrote the passage, etc. Additionally, the Logical Reasoning section of the LSAT has no counterpart on the GRE, and LR comprises half of the LSAT. And unless you took the GRE at least five years ago (like I did), the Logic Games will be completely new.

As to whether or not a good GRE scores means a good LSAT score...honestly, I have no idea. I can only hope!

[Ken]

Back in the day (you know you are getting past your prime when you start paragraphs this way) there was a strong correlation between how one did one their GRE Analytical section and the LSAT. This section was very similar to a watered down LSAT, with logic games and some arguments.

I scored a 790 on this section, a 99%, and received a 173 on the LSAT, also 99%.

However, due to the elimination of this section your GRE score is no longer much of a proxy for your LSAT score as the Verbal and Math sections really do not prepare you for the LSAT as has been described earlier.

Of course, some people are just good at standardized tests and taking tests under extreme pressure. Thus, this skill will assist you when taking the LSAT. I took the GRE a week before the LSAT and I felt relaxed while taking the LSAT (perhaps the 3 beers I had before the test?).

Thus, I would extensively study for the LSAT because your past studies for the GRE have not prepared you much at all. At the same time, I would be confident in your success because you do have experience and success on a past standardized test.

[ooo294422]

Back in the day (you know you are getting past your prime when you start paragraphs this way) there was a strong correlation between how one did one their GRE Analytical section and the LSAT. This section was very similar to a watered down LSAT, with logic games and some arguments.

I scored a 790 on this section, a 99%, and received a 173 on the LSAT, also 99%.

However, due to the elimination of this section your GRE score is no longer much of a proxy for your LSAT score as the Verbal and Math sections really do not prepare you for the LSAT as has been described earlier.

Of course, some people are just good at standardized tests and taking tests under extreme pressure. Thus, this skill will assist you when taking the LSAT. I took the GRE a week before the LSAT and I felt relaxed while taking the LSAT (perhaps the 3 beers I had before the test?).

Thus, I would extensively study for the LSAT because your past studies for the GRE have not prepared you much at all. At the same time, I would be confident in your success because you do have experience and success on a past standardized test.

Ken, do you recommend to go to graduate schools before applying to law schools? I can get into master of Social Welfare at UCLA.

[Lyov Myshkin]

Does anyone know about how well the GRE and LSAT percentiles correlate? I know they test different skills, so there wouldn't be any formulaic conversion, but it seems that people who do well on one would do well on the other. What kind of score would you expect from someone with a GRE of 1330 (690V+640Q)?

I'm sure that this has been asked before, but I'm new here, so I just decided I'd ask once more.

of course there's a correlation, specifically with the intelligence of the test-taker. not that i'm saying that either the lsat or gre are iq tests but they will reflect a certain baseline of intellectual capacity.

look... a really really dumb person (like an illiterate moron who can't count) isn't going to be able to do well on either the lsat or gre. so in that case, low lsat would correlate to low gre.

likewise, einstein is likely not getting median on either the lsat or gre. so high lsat would correlate to high gre. but there are more variables than just intelligence (like if you studied more for one than the other, or perhaps you fucking kick ass at math but you can't read for shit which would entail a better gre than an lsat score) so that slightly muddles the picture.

i would assume though that given enough data, that yes there would be a correlation.

[messiah_cakes]

At this point, there should be very little correlation.

The GRE tests basic algebra and vocabulary, so you can easily (and quickly) cram material, and then regurgitate. The verbal section is easy: you can memorize 500 words with a 95% probability of appearing on the test. The math should come as no surprise, if you're comfortable with algebra. Overall, you can just review basic forms, and it'll be a cinch.

The preparation that is required for the LSAT is immensely different. If you were successful with one type of preparation, that certainly does not guarantee that you'll be successful with another.

Then there's the issue of test-taking anxiety: when taking the GRE, I got a big, isolated cubicle, in a sound-proof room. On top of that, we got earplugs, walking in. And, since it's interactive, you know when you got a question wrong, so you can always change your strategy and your level of focus, as the test moves on. Since you can take it as many times as you can, the pressure is almost non-existent.
None of these apply to your LSAT test.

And, if your LSAT score can vary between individual PT's, and between your PT average and your Test Day score, then I'm inclined to believe that test-taking anxiety is fairly significant.

I guess some people might put forth the argument that, if you do well in one, then you're likely to be a very motivated individual. But, I beg to differ. Some of the material in the GRE comes easily to people that have had a humanities undergraduate education. They could theoretically do well in the GRE, and lack the abilities required to study for the LSAT

TL;DR: Ugh, no.

[d34d9823]

At this point, there should be very little correlation.

This argument relies on the simplistic assumption that one's skill levels at different cognitive tasks are independent. In fact, everyone I know who does very well on any standardized test does well on all standardized tests. See here for some hard data on SAT vs. LSAT: http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/sat-lsat-correlation-predict-scores.html. I would expect a similar correlation for GRE.

[messiah_cakes]

This argument relies on the simplistic assumption that one's skill levels at different cognitive tasks are independent.

Actually, that was only 1/2 of the argument. There was that whole other section about last minute test-taking anxiety being a factor in test-day performance.

But I digress. O_o I think there have been quite a few TLS threads where people viciously argue for both sides of the generalist/specialist cognitive problem--that is, the question of whether an individual needs specialized experience and practice, or general and inherent cognitive abilities, to perform well on a single task (in this case, the LSAT).

BUT, I can't imagine anyone would seriously claim that different tasks don't require different skill sets and natural abilities. After all, playing video games (spacial) is definitely different from.....learning a language (recall).

My point is actually that the GRE *IS* an entirely different animal from virtually every other type of standardized test.

In fact, everyone I know who does very well on any standardized test does well on all standardized tests.

"Everyone that you know" is a biased, statistically insignificant group of people.

And, again, the GRE is structurally different from other tests. So, a comparison between the *LSAT* and the *SAT* is ....irrelevant.... because neither of those are, in fact, the GRE.

[MiamiUG]

This argument relies on the simplistic assumption that one's skill levels at different cognitive tasks are independent.

Actually, that was only 1/2 of the argument. There was that whole other section about last minute test-taking anxiety being a factor in test-day performance.

But I digress. O_o I think there have been quite a few TLS threads where people viciously argue for both sides of the generalist/specialist cognitive problem--that is, the question of whether an individual needs specialized experience and practice, or general and inherent cognitive abilities, to perform well on a single task (in this case, the LSAT).

BUT, I can't imagine anyone would seriously claim that different tasks don't require different skill sets and natural abilities. After all, playing video games (spacial) is definitely different from.....learning a language (recall).

My point is actually that the GRE *IS* an entirely different animal from virtually every other type of standardized test.

In fact, everyone I know who does very well on any standardized test does well on all standardized tests.

"Everyone that you know" is a biased, statistically insignificant group of people.

And, again, the GRE is structurally different from other tests. So, a comparison between the *LSAT* and the *SAT* is ....irrelevant.... because neither of those are, in fact, the GRE.

LOL @ d34dluk3 completely ignoring the other argument and basically just repeating himself.

[Barbie]

I don't know how well one could predict another, unless, say, you find draws between the math and logic in general, and they both have reading passages. Without studying at all, I got a 1250 or something on the GRE, and with little study (around 4 PTs) I got a 163 on the LSAT. I don't know what percentage that puts my GRE score but I would guess they are near similar, esp since I didn't really study much for one over the other.

[d34d9823]

This argument relies on the simplistic assumption that one's skill levels at different cognitive tasks are independent.

Actually, that was only 1/2 of the argument. There was that whole other section about last minute test-taking anxiety being a factor in test-day performance.

But I digress. O_o I think there have been quite a few TLS threads where people viciously argue for both sides of the generalist/specialist cognitive problem--that is, the question of whether an individual needs specialized experience and practice, or general and inherent cognitive abilities, to perform well on a single task (in this case, the LSAT).

BUT, I can't imagine anyone would seriously claim that different tasks don't require different skill sets and natural abilities. After all, playing video games (spacial) is definitely different from.....learning a language (recall).

My point is actually that the GRE *IS* an entirely different animal from virtually every other type of standardized test.

In fact, everyone I know who does very well on any standardized test does well on all standardized tests.

"Everyone that you know" is a biased, statistically insignificant group of people.

And, again, the GRE is structurally different from other tests. So, a comparison between the *LSAT* and the *SAT* is ....irrelevant.... because neither of those are, in fact, the GRE.

Well, this is reasonable criticism, even if I don't agree with any of it. The real problem here is that without data, saying it does correlate is not supported, but saying it doesn't is also not supported. My personal experience would lead me to believe it does correlate, but that's obviously not the case for everyone.

[Sentry]

why has this thread been necro'd twice?

[d34d9823]

why has this thread been necro'd twice?

Because your mom wasn't available.

[Sentry]

why has this thread been necro'd twice?

Because your mom wasn't available.

--ImageRemoved--

[northphx]

I got 1550 (750V + 800Q, 99%) on the GRE and 770 (99%) on the GMAT but only 171 on the LSAT, though I took the GRE and GMAT when I was much younger (early 20's) and had more time to study.

Does anyone know about how well the GRE and LSAT percentiles correlate? I know they test different skills, so there wouldn't be any formulaic conversion, but it seems that people who do well on one would do well on the other. What kind of score would you expect from someone with a GRE of 1330 (690V+640Q)?

I'm sure that this has been asked before, but I'm new here, so I just decided I'd ask once more.

[ksjayhawk]

This is probably more difficult than any of you have suggested.

First, you probably want to know the populations on which any test you are comparing was normed (i.e., the population from which they derived the bell curve). For example, the SAT was likely normed on a random sample of high school students in the U.S., whereas the LSAT was probably normed on a random sample of college graduates applying to law school. Both of these are assumptions; I have not actually investigated the norms.

Assuming these groups are accurate, you would then compare your percentile on each test because the raw scores are on different scales and have different means/standard deviations. However, it is not as simple as comparing 75th %ile on SAT and 75th %ile on LSAT and saying there is a high correlation. Those percentiles would mean entirely different things. The former is the 75th percentile of high school students applying to law school, whereas the second is the 75th percentile of college grads applying to law school. Assuming all college grads took the SAT (which is not true), all B would be A (i.e., all LSAT takers would be former SAT takers), but not all A would be B.

Back to the 75th percentile. If 1 million kids took the SAT the year you took it, you would have been in the top 250k. Assuming (and this is a broad assumption) that only the top half of SAT takers took the LSAT, your 75th percentile would now be the 50th percentile on the LSAT, ceteris paribus.

Even then, it's not that simple. All of this is based on the assumption that there is no change in individuals over time. People have different life experiences between the time they take the two tests. Different amounts of time may elapse between the two tests. Your mood may be different in the two tests, and mood influences your memory and ability to think. The test-taking environment also matters. If the kid next to you at the SAT had excessive flatulence that distracted you, but this did not happen at the LSAT, the correlation strength may be different from that of a person who had the same testing conditions both times.

Possibly the most methodologically sound way to do it would be to randomly assign half of high school students to take the SAT and then the LSAT consecutively, and then have the other half of students take the tests in the opposite order. Then there would minimal effect of environment (unless something changed between tests), and you could control for the effects of test-taking fatigue. Applicability, however, would be questionable.

[8ballistic]

They mostly test different skills, so there really isn't a strong correlation. The reading comprehension sections probably have some correlation, but that is about it.