SAT/LSAT Conversion Forumla

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
OldBlue
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:56 am

SAT/LSAT Conversion Forumla

Postby OldBlue » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:39 am

Someone posted this on that "other" forum.

I found it interesting and thought I'd relay it. It was EXACTLY on for me.

LSAT = (SAT*/21) + 101 (m.o.e +/-5)


*old 1600 based SAT

User avatar
snap
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 3:12 pm

Postby snap » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:41 am

Based on this formula I should've gotten a 167 or so. I was such a slacker in high school...

User avatar
edgarderby
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:51 pm

Postby edgarderby » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:42 am

wow.

hit it dead on for me.

Soulofheaven8
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:29 pm

Postby Soulofheaven8 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:44 am

According to this formula I should've gotten a 176; that would have been nice.

User avatar
wolverine37
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:27 pm

Postby wolverine37 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:46 am

I wish I got that on my LSAT.

iwanttogotolawschool
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:23 pm

Postby iwanttogotolawschool » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:55 am

Dead on for me.

User avatar
Corsair
Posts: 3997
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 1981 12:25 am

Postby Corsair » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:55 am

..

User avatar
the rza
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:33 am

Postby the rza » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:56 am

gave me a 160, got a 167

Da Stain
Posts: 520
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:50 am

Postby Da Stain » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:56 am

spot on. f'in creepy

User avatar
chris0805
Posts: 646
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:12 pm

Postby chris0805 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:59 am

Pretty dead on for me... though I did drop seven points from my last three practice tests to the real thing... not sure that means anything at all though.

jlbarde
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 12:00 am

Postby jlbarde » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:01 am

gave me a 171, I got a 168. woulda been nice, but I also took the SAT 5 times... and my first couple scores were much much worse

User avatar
Dadric
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:25 am

Postby Dadric » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:07 am

Took the ACT, not the SAT.

Wish there was a formula for that =/

User avatar
cc0800
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:31 pm

Postby cc0800 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:11 am

gave me 167, i got a 170

User avatar
edgarderby
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:51 pm

Postby edgarderby » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:11 am

1570-1600 35
1510-1560 34
1450-1500 33
1390-1440 32
1350-1380 31
1310-1340 30
1270-1300 29
1230-1260 28
1200-1220 27
1160-1190 26
1120-1150 25
1090-1110 24
1050-1080 23
1010-1040 22
970-1000 21
930-960 20
890-920 19
840-880 18
800-830 17
750-790 16
700-740 15
630-690 14
570-620 13
510-560 12
450-500 11
410-440 10
400 9

User avatar
Origin
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:56 pm

Postby Origin » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:14 am

Said I should have got a 168. I win.

User avatar
TheRedDeath
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:00 am

Postby TheRedDeath » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:16 am

Gave me a 167, actually got a 169. Not bad.

troutbeck
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:39 pm

Postby troutbeck » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:16 am

got it exactly
very cool

User avatar
edgarderby
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:51 pm

Postby edgarderby » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:17 am

Kayos, that means:

YOU GOT LUCKY, SON!

But congrats anyway. Enjoy Yale when the time comes. haha

rms5005
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:02 pm

Postby rms5005 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:24 am

wow thats pretty sick...said i shudda got a 165--got a 172 but only after getting a 160 the first time so 166 avg...pretty dead on

User avatar
awesomerossum
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:39 pm

Postby awesomerossum » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:25 am

I should've gotten a 180.

purplepansy
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:45 pm

Postby purplepansy » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:42 am

Took the ACT, not the SAT.


Works for ACT too pretty much.
I just used a converter I found through google, found the range of SAT scores I would've had and it gave me mine perfectly if I chose the correct range.

User avatar
Dadric
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:25 am

Postby Dadric » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:47 am

Using the range for my ACT score Edgar posted, it says I should have gotten a 166...lower than my cold diagnostic. Looks like I'm WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER on this one.

Hitachi
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 4:38 pm

Postby Hitachi » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:07 am

Nice, 1660 on the SAT for Rossum

prettypithy
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:08 am

Postby prettypithy » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:32 am

Am I the only one who doesn't get it? I'm perplexed. I got a 1350--someone tell me what my LSAT score should be!

User avatar
awesomerossum
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:39 pm

Postby awesomerossum » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:42 am

Sorry, I use a different formula for calculating SAT-LSAT correlation. My old tutor said that one's starting point should be the verbal score with the last zero removed and a one added to the front.

I scored an 800 on the verbal. Technically, I should've started from a 180.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 10 guests