schools' mean LSAT Forum
- Dead Ringer
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:07 pm
Re: Re:
I would be more interested in there 75th percentile scores. In any case I beat my school's mean by 20 points.yalie10 wrote:Actually, a 165 is 93.5% and a 166 is 95%.Dead Ringer wrote:I think that is unbelievably impressive. Their mean is the 90th percentile of all LSAT takers. It shows that they really are selecting very bright people and/or motivated people. My UG's mean is 153, pathetic, but hardly surprising from what I saw of the work ethic there.tiefenbr wrote:I can't believe Yale and Harvard are only 165 and 166!
-
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:38 pm
Re: Re:
That would be the most interesting. I'll drop by my pre-law office and look ours up.Dead Ringer wrote:I would be more interested in there 75th percentile scores. In any case I beat my school's mean by 20 points.yalie10 wrote:Actually, a 165 is 93.5% and a 166 is 95%.Dead Ringer wrote:I think that is unbelievably impressive. Their mean is the 90th percentile of all LSAT takers. It shows that they really are selecting very bright people and/or motivated people. My UG's mean is 153, pathetic, but hardly surprising from what I saw of the work ethic there.tiefenbr wrote:I can't believe Yale and Harvard are only 165 and 166!
Our 50% is 163.
-
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:01 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
the high ivy LSAT is also a function of a higher portion of their students knowing how important the LSAT is and making sure that they take a prep course or self-study ahead of time. a lot of them have been groomed for success from an earlier age than most. something to consider.
-
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:38 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
You'd think that, but a lot of people take it randomly. Also, I'm pretty sure the median is going to be higher than the mean. I'll run over in a bit and check.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:38 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
Percentile of Test Takers | LSAT Percentile
36 | 95+*
18 | 90-94*
10 | 85-89
9 | 80-84*
So an educated guess for the 25-50-75 would be
80-92-99
Percentile of Test Takers | LSAT Percentile
11 | 3.8+
19 | 3.6-3.79*
26 | 3.4-3.59*
21 | 3.2-3.39*
So an educated guess for the 25-50-75 would be
3.45-3.5-3.65
159-164-172
Mean: 3.4/163
36 | 95+*
18 | 90-94*
10 | 85-89
9 | 80-84*
So an educated guess for the 25-50-75 would be
80-92-99
Percentile of Test Takers | LSAT Percentile
11 | 3.8+
19 | 3.6-3.79*
26 | 3.4-3.59*
21 | 3.2-3.39*
So an educated guess for the 25-50-75 would be
3.45-3.5-3.65
159-164-172
Mean: 3.4/163
Last edited by mcds on Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Vasia
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 4:03 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
USC(Southern California) has mean LSAT of 158 not 157 according to my LSDAS report.
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:27 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
.
Last edited by EntertainMeLaw on Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- JustDude
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:07 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
That means you are a king of moronsEntertainMeLaw wrote:I had transcripts from 4 schools (3 I attended full-time)....
Syracuse University - 152
Quinnipiac University - 149
SUNY Albany - 150
SUNY Oneonta - 148
I am not sure I completely understand the significance of the LSAT scores of the undergrad......
For instance... what does it mean that my degree granting school (SUNY Oneonta) avg 148 and I may get a 160?
-
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:55 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
Weak. The LSAT favors rich kids who: a) don't have to work while in school and b) can afford the $1000+ prep courses.
I'm not wading into whether or not it's fair, but rather discounting the unfounded correlation that low LSAT scores = a stupid student body.
I'm not wading into whether or not it's fair, but rather discounting the unfounded correlation that low LSAT scores = a stupid student body.
- RVP11
- Posts: 2774
- Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
I agree. One of the factors resulting in LSAT mean differences is undoubtedly the relatively intelligence of student bodies, but there are tons of other factors, too. Financial means, ambition, drive, the availability of LSAT classes, quality of LSAT instructors in the area, etc.CWF V wrote:Weak. The LSAT favors rich kids who: a) don't have to work while in school and b) can afford the $1000+ prep courses.
I'm not wading into whether or not it's fair, but rather discounting the unfounded correlation that low LSAT scores = a stupid student body.
I went to a school where the LSAT mean is right around 150, and here's an example that sums it up: a friend of mine, a VERY bright guy, took an LSAT cold and scored 164 (to go with his 3.9 GPA). He didn't think there was any way to improve (and I didn't know better back then to inform him) and there were no commercial classes within three hours of our backwoods university. So he stuck with the 164, was accepted to a few schools between 15-25 but rejected at Berkeley. With the 175+ he's probably capable of, he'd quite possible be HYS-bound.
Something tells me his story is a lot more common at middle-of-nowhere state universities than it is at Ivies and other top schools where overachieving is the name of the game and the level of preparation is much higher.
-
- Posts: 703
- Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 2:44 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
This is just false. The LSAT is learnable but only to a certain point. It doesn't take that much effective studying time to get very close to your full potential. Anyone can find the time for this if they try.CWF V wrote:The LSAT favors rich kids who: a) don't have to work while in school and b) can afford the $1000+ prep courses.
Personally, I studied for three weeks on my own outside of working full time and that was just enough for me. Then I went on to teach those prep courses to those rich kids, and the ones who weren't working diligently on their own never did well anyway. The courses are just a luxurious and hand-holding way to study for the LSAT, they are not at all necessary to maximizing your score.
EDIT: The LSAT certainly does favor people who are determined, ambitious, effective, and thorough in their preparation. But these have an actual causal link to high performance (as does intelligence). Any correlation with kids that have a lot of free time or money is just that: a correlation.
Last edited by bigben on Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- JustDude
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:07 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
He isnt that bright after all...jsporter wrote:I agree. One of the factors resulting in LSAT mean differences is undoubtedly the relatively intelligence of student bodies, but there are tons of other factors, too. Financial means, ambition, drive, the availability of LSAT classes, quality of LSAT instructors in the area, etc.CWF V wrote:Weak. The LSAT favors rich kids who: a) don't have to work while in school and b) can afford the $1000+ prep courses.
I'm not wading into whether or not it's fair, but rather discounting the unfounded correlation that low LSAT scores = a stupid student body.
I went to a school where the LSAT mean is right around 150, and here's an example that sums it up: a friend of mine, a VERY bright guy, took an LSAT cold and scored 164 (to go with his 3.9 GPA). He didn't think there was any way to improve (and I didn't know better back then to inform him) and there were no commercial classes within three hours of our backwoods university. So he stuck with the 164, was accepted to a few schools between 15-25 but rejected at Berkeley. With the 175+ he's probably capable of, he'd quite possible be HYS-bound.
- RVP11
- Posts: 2774
- Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
He's bright. Uninformed, didn't do the research he should have or talk to the right people (to find out the LSAT was learnable). But bright.JustDude wrote:He isnt that bright after all...jsporter wrote:I agree. One of the factors resulting in LSAT mean differences is undoubtedly the relatively intelligence of student bodies, but there are tons of other factors, too. Financial means, ambition, drive, the availability of LSAT classes, quality of LSAT instructors in the area, etc.CWF V wrote:Weak. The LSAT favors rich kids who: a) don't have to work while in school and b) can afford the $1000+ prep courses.
I'm not wading into whether or not it's fair, but rather discounting the unfounded correlation that low LSAT scores = a stupid student body.
I went to a school where the LSAT mean is right around 150, and here's an example that sums it up: a friend of mine, a VERY bright guy, took an LSAT cold and scored 164 (to go with his 3.9 GPA). He didn't think there was any way to improve (and I didn't know better back then to inform him) and there were no commercial classes within three hours of our backwoods university. So he stuck with the 164, was accepted to a few schools between 15-25 but rejected at Berkeley. With the 175+ he's probably capable of, he'd quite possible be HYS-bound.
I'm not saying that doing the necessary research and having a certain level of ambition and drive are not correlated to LS performance. The LSAT measures preparation almost as much as it measures a certain kind of intelligence.
-
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:32 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
.
Last edited by kritiosboy on Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:17 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
S. Carolina - 151, from a friend, I believe it was June 2007
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 2:09 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
If the LSAT is anything like the SAT, I'll be able to have a job and not spend any money on test prep to do well. (800 Math, 760 Verbal). I will agree that standardized tests favor 'rich kids' to an extent but there are some not-so-rich kids who can do really well on these tests without needing to study.CWF V wrote:Weak. The LSAT favors rich kids who: a) don't have to work while in school and b) can afford the $1000+ prep courses.
I'm not wading into whether or not it's fair, but rather discounting the unfounded correlation that low LSAT scores = a stupid student body.
However, I have heard that getting a 1500+ on the SAT without prep is easier than getting a 170+ on the LSAT without prep.
So, I guess that's how the two tests are different.
The logic on the LSAT is probably tougher than the SAT's 'baby logic'.
-
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 6:59 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
stupid question
why is posting your UG and its lsat avg a privacy issue?
why is posting your UG and its lsat avg a privacy issue?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Lizface killah
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 7:28 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
UVA is 160 this year.
- Veritas
- Posts: 2695
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
this thread is useless. let it die!
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:42 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
Regarding the importance of your undegraduate institution...Several years ago I had the privalege of seeing a copy of a document used by a top professional school to weigh the GPA of its applicants for internal admissions purposes. It was a list of schools grouped into multiple tiers. The top tier (about 15 schools) had 0.6 added to the GPA. The bottom tier had 0.4 or 0.6 (don't remember exactly) subtracted from their GPA. Thus a 3.0 at Harvard (obviously in the top group) was regarded as a 3.6, whereas a 3.0 at "X" College in the bottom tier was regarded as a 2.4 or a 2.6. I remember being very surprised at how drastic the differences were!
- biggamejames
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:27 pm
Re: schools' mean LSAT
I don't believe this. If it were true, my cycle would have looked much worse.danconstan wrote:Regarding the importance of your undegraduate institution...Several years ago I had the privalege of seeing a copy of a document used by a top professional school to weigh the GPA of its applicants for internal admissions purposes. It was a list of schools grouped into multiple tiers. The top tier (about 15 schools) had 0.6 added to the GPA. The bottom tier had 0.4 or 0.6 (don't remember exactly) subtracted from their GPA. Thus a 3.0 at Harvard (obviously in the top group) was regarded as a 3.6, whereas a 3.0 at "X" College in the bottom tier was regarded as a 2.4 or a 2.6. I remember being very surprised at how drastic the differences were!
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login