LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )

Is this a good idea?

Yes
25
37%
No
20
30%
No, and I'm jealous
22
33%
 
Total votes: 67

nerd1

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 11:35 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby nerd1 » Sat May 20, 2017 3:17 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Yeah, I'm just suspicious of the idea that the LSAT really tests skills necessary for law school significantly more effectively than any other standardized test.


I think you know this too and it is too obvious to state again. But I will just say this. Currently, there is simply no other test that tests skills necessary for law school performance better than the LSAT. Being able to understand and dissect conditional statements and causal reasoning is fundamental to studying law. Speed is essential too given the amount of reading per day a typical 1L student has to handle. Not only is GRE easier (I took it), but also it tests skills such as math and vocab which are not as important as speedy and accurate analytical, logical thinking for succeeding in law school. Obviously, the LSAT cannot meaningfully predict one's success in the legal industry. But that's true with anything we do in preparation for or during school. Life is not just about studying hard, being diligent and smart. Networking ability and connections matter tremendously.

And I think the retakes limitation had a value apart from simply limiting the number of stupid people applying to law schools. There are no retakes in life. When you make a mistake that is significant enough, you just get fired. You just cannot f up a job big time and ask for a retake in a professional setting. Because the stakes are obviously a lot lower when it comes to taking a test, people should be able to take a test again but there should be some limits to force people to think more seriously about their tests. Of course smart and diligent people will do so regardless of the number of retakes they are allowed to do. But most young people, the vast majority of people applying to law schools, are not thoughtful enough.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29317
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat May 20, 2017 6:25 pm

nerd1 wrote:Being able to understand and dissect conditional statements and causal reasoning is fundamental to studying law.

See, I think this overstates matters. I'm not convinced that studying formal logic to succeed in the LR sections of the LSAT really translates into success studying law. (People who succeed on the LSAT without studying are just naturally really smart; people who succeed after lots of study have serious work ethic/organizational skills. Both these kinds of people are well-equipped to do well in law school.) Don't get me wrong, I know about the studies showing greatest correlation between LSAT and grades with 1L success, but it's not a spectacular correlation and I don't think toppling the LSAT is going to result in less qualified law students.

re: no retakes in life, I think under that logic, there's no reason to allow three takes. If you're going to allow three there's no reason not to allow more.

User avatar
Impressionist

Bronze
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby Impressionist » Sat May 20, 2017 6:46 pm

But isn't it some people's argument that the GRE is flat out easier? I haven't taken it, but if true, then that could mean people who are not super smart and do not put in a ton of work could get high scores. Isnt this the opposite of what we want from high scorers? Since the super smart or hard workers will score high as well, then you lose any meaningful way to differentiate applicants using the GRE.

YellowWolf

New
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:49 am

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby YellowWolf » Sat May 20, 2017 7:45 pm

I think people tend to forget that both the GRE and LSAT are standardized exams. The content may be easier on the GRE (I am not sure, I have no experience with the test), but the curve will be tighter. Think about this, to score 170+ on the LSAT you can get approximately 10-15 questions wrong and still be in the 95+ percentile. With the GRE the scaling will be much tighter. You probably need a near perfect raw score to get 95+ percentile on the GRE (much less room for error). I've been reading through several threads on TLS and I keep reading comments such as "the GRE is such a joke I know person X who got 99th percentile after studying for a week". Guys... the test is standardized, only 1% of writers can score in the 99th percentile.
Last edited by YellowWolf on Sat May 20, 2017 7:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Nebby

Diamond
Posts: 31199
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby Nebby » Sat May 20, 2017 7:47 pm

I keep a list of all of the lawyers I've sonned who likely have a higher LSAT than I

User avatar
Impressionist

Bronze
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby Impressionist » Sat May 20, 2017 8:05 pm

YellowWolf wrote:I think people tend to forget that both the GRE and LSAT are standardized exams. The content may be easier on the GRE (I am not sure, I have no experience with the test), but the curve will be tighter. Think about this, to score 170+ on the LSAT you can get approximately 10-15 questions wrong and still be in the 95+ percentile. With the GRE the scaling will be much tighter. You probably need a near perfect raw score to get 95+ percentile on the GRE (much less room for error). I've been reading through several threads on TLS and I keep reading comments such as "the GRE is such a joke I know person X who got 99th percentile after studying for a week". Guys... the test is standardized, only 1% of writers can score in the 99th percentile.


But there is an issue of granularity with the raw score, no? Lsat seems to avoid this with difficulty level, tho I could be entirely off base here.

YellowWolf

New
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:49 am

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby YellowWolf » Sat May 20, 2017 8:20 pm

Impressionist wrote:
YellowWolf wrote:I think people tend to forget that both the GRE and LSAT are standardized exams. The content may be easier on the GRE (I am not sure, I have no experience with the test), but the curve will be tighter. Think about this, to score 170+ on the LSAT you can get approximately 10-15 questions wrong and still be in the 95+ percentile. With the GRE the scaling will be much tighter. You probably need a near perfect raw score to get 95+ percentile on the GRE (much less room for error). I've been reading through several threads on TLS and I keep reading comments such as "the GRE is such a joke I know person X who got 99th percentile after studying for a week". Guys... the test is standardized, only 1% of writers can score in the 99th percentile.


But there is an issue of granularity with the raw score, no? Lsat seems to avoid this with difficulty level, tho I could be entirely off base here.


You are certainly right. I think the main difference is the role luck plays on LSAT vs GRE. Guess two questions correct on the GRE and it probably has a huge impact on your final score.

grades??

Silver
Posts: 984
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:55 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby grades?? » Sat May 20, 2017 8:54 pm

YellowWolf wrote:
Impressionist wrote:
YellowWolf wrote:I think people tend to forget that both the GRE and LSAT are standardized exams. The content may be easier on the GRE (I am not sure, I have no experience with the test), but the curve will be tighter. Think about this, to score 170+ on the LSAT you can get approximately 10-15 questions wrong and still be in the 95+ percentile. With the GRE the scaling will be much tighter. You probably need a near perfect raw score to get 95+ percentile on the GRE (much less room for error). I've been reading through several threads on TLS and I keep reading comments such as "the GRE is such a joke I know person X who got 99th percentile after studying for a week". Guys... the test is standardized, only 1% of writers can score in the 99th percentile.


But there is an issue of granularity with the raw score, no? Lsat seems to avoid this with difficulty level, tho I could be entirely off base here.


You are certainly right. I think the main difference is the role luck plays on LSAT vs GRE. Guess two questions correct on the GRE and it probably has a huge impact on your final score.


People also forget how many more people take the GRE. So even if its standardized, there are many more 99 percentile scores being given out than in the lsat world.

Npret

Silver
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby Npret » Sat May 20, 2017 9:19 pm

YellowWolf wrote:
Impressionist wrote:
YellowWolf wrote:I think people tend to forget that both the GRE and LSAT are standardized exams. The content may be easier on the GRE (I am not sure, I have no experience with the test), but the curve will be tighter. Think about this, to score 170+ on the LSAT you can get approximately 10-15 questions wrong and still be in the 95+ percentile. With the GRE the scaling will be much tighter. You probably need a near perfect raw score to get 95+ percentile on the GRE (much less room for error). I've been reading through several threads on TLS and I keep reading comments such as "the GRE is such a joke I know person X who got 99th percentile after studying for a week". Guys... the test is standardized, only 1% of writers can score in the 99th percentile.


But there is an issue of granularity with the raw score, no? Lsat seems to avoid this with difficulty level, tho I could be entirely off base here.


You are certainly right. I think the main difference is the role luck plays on LSAT vs GRE. Guess two questions correct on the GRE and it probably has a huge impact on your final score.

Guessing makes a difference because the GRE scales as you take it. If you miss easier questions you won't see the harder questions. (At least that is my understanding.)
There are paper exams given most are computer based.

enoca

Bronze
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:28 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby enoca » Sun May 21, 2017 5:00 am

YellowWolf wrote:I've been reading through several threads on TLS and I keep reading comments such as "the GRE is such a joke I know person X who got 99th percentile after studying for a week". Guys... the test is standardized, only 1% of writers can score in the 99th percentile.


But the GRE and the LSAT don't have the same population set. Something like 600,000 people take the GRE every year, a 1/3 of them coming from outside the US. That's vs. like 100,000 LSATs total. The median LSAT taker is probably a better candidate compared to the median GRE taker just due to the nature of self-selective specialization.

It is absolutely possible for the majority of 95th and up LSAT folks to be in the 99th percentile on the GRE. (Or something similar)
Last edited by enoca on Sun May 21, 2017 5:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

enoca

Bronze
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:28 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby enoca » Sun May 21, 2017 5:05 am

Npret wrote:What else has been used to predict law school success? You mean it's better than GPA alone?


Here's is LSAC's section on predictiveness:

The correlation between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades varies from one law school to another (as does the correlation between GPA and first-year law school grades). During 2016, validity studies were conducted for 168 law schools. Correlations between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades ranged from .12 to .61 (median is .41). The correlations between UGPA and first-year law school grades ranged from .02 to .50 (median is .27). However, correlations between LSAT scores combined with undergraduate grade-point averages and first-year law school grades ranged from .26 to .68 (median is .50).

(a) I would love to know which school had a .02 correlation between UGPA and 1L GPA.

(b) I would love to see data like this for GRE, but it doesn't exists as far as I know.

Npret

Silver
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby Npret » Sun May 21, 2017 6:19 am

enoca wrote:
Npret wrote:What else has been used to predict law school success? You mean it's better than GPA alone?


Here's is LSAC's section on predictiveness:

The correlation between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades varies from one law school to another (as does the correlation between GPA and first-year law school grades). During 2016, validity studies were conducted for 168 law schools. Correlations between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades ranged from .12 to .61 (median is .41). The correlations between UGPA and first-year law school grades ranged from .02 to .50 (median is .27). However, correlations between LSAT scores combined with undergraduate grade-point averages and first-year law school grades ranged from .26 to .68 (median is .50).

(a) I would love to know which school had a .02 correlation between UGPA and 1L GPA.

(b) I would love to see data like this for GRE, but it doesn't exists as far as I know.


Yes I know this data. Not incredibly convincing of LSAT usefulness to me.

MS9 said LSAT plus GPA is the best predictor of law school success but as far as I know there aren't any others so I don't know what "best" means when there is no alternative? GPA alone is all I could think of. Thanks for posting the GPA alone data but I wanted to know what MS9 meant.

There has to be pilot study data on GRE but considering the first class of students in Arizona State admitted with the GRE last year are the only actual data points, you are correctly assuming the data doesn't exist.

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby cavalier1138 » Sun May 21, 2017 6:52 am

Npret wrote:MS9 said LSAT plus GPA is the best predictor of law school success but as far as I know there aren't any others so I don't know what "best" means when there is no alternative? GPA alone is all I could think of. Thanks for posting the GPA alone data but I wanted to know what MS9 meant.


I think what he actually said in that post was that the LSAT alone has been a better predictor of law school success than any analogous standardized test has been of success in another field. So the LSAT is a better predictor of success in law school than the MCAT is of success in med school or than the GRE is of success in any field of graduate studies. This isn't that surprising (well, I thought the MCAT might have a similar correlation), and it's why so many graduate programs use the GRE as a formality, not as an actual test.

I'd be more interested to see which schools had a lower correlation between LSAT and law school performance. I'd bet good money that the higher you go in the rankings, the less of a correlation is seen. Once you're in the T14, the 25/50/75 bands are much narrower, so it would make sense that the difference of a single point between students wouldn't correlate to higher grades in 1L.

Npret

Silver
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby Npret » Sun May 21, 2017 9:13 am

cavalier1138 wrote:
Npret wrote:MS9 said LSAT plus GPA is the best predictor of law school success but as far as I know there aren't any others so I don't know what "best" means when there is no alternative? GPA alone is all I could think of. Thanks for posting the GPA alone data but I wanted to know what MS9 meant.


I think what he actually said in that post was that the LSAT alone has been a better predictor of law school success than any analogous standardized test has been of success in another field. So the LSAT is a better predictor of success in law school than the MCAT is of success in med school or than the GRE is of success in any field of graduate studies. This isn't that surprising (well, I thought the MCAT might have a similar correlation), and it's why so many graduate programs use the GRE as a formality, not as an actual test.

I'd be more interested to see which schools had a lower correlation between LSAT and law school performance. I'd bet good money that the higher you go in the rankings, the less of a correlation is seen. Once you're in the T14, the 25/50/75 bands are much narrower, so it would make sense that the difference of a single point between students wouldn't correlate to higher grades in 1L.


He said "it correlates better than anything else they currently have..." that is what makes me wonder what else there was? I mean my Mom took the LSAT in 1979 so it has to have been used for decades at this point. I was curious of he knew of something else.

You are absolutely correct that he says it's a better predictor than other exams.

viewtopic.php?p=9998002#p9998002

Npret

Silver
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: LSAC has eliminated the 3 max takes in 2 years rule

Postby Npret » Sun May 21, 2017 9:16 am

Npret wrote:
cavalier1138 wrote:
Npret wrote:MS9 said LSAT plus GPA is the best predictor of law school success but as far as I know there aren't any others so I don't know what "best" means when there is no alternative? GPA alone is all I could think of. Thanks for posting the GPA alone data but I wanted to know what MS9 meant.


I think what he actually said in that post was that the LSAT alone has been a better predictor of law school success than any analogous standardized test has been of success in another field. So the LSAT is a better predictor of success in law school than the MCAT is of success in med school or than the GRE is of success in any field of graduate studies. This isn't that surprising (well, I thought the MCAT might have a similar correlation), and it's why so many graduate programs use the GRE as a formality, not as an actual test.

I'd be more interested to see which schools had a lower correlation between LSAT and law school performance. I'd bet good money that the higher you go in the rankings, the less of a correlation is seen. Once you're in the T14, the 25/50/75 bands are much narrower, so it would make sense that the difference of a single point between students wouldn't correlate to higher grades in 1L.


He said "it correlates better than anything else they currently have..." that is what makes me wonder what else there was? I mean my Mom took the LSAT in 1979 so it has to have been used for decades at this point. I was curious of he knew of something else.

You are absolutely correct that he says it's a better predictor than other exams.

viewtopic.php?p=9998002#p9998002


Sorry couldn't get the quote to work that's the link to his post.



Return to “Law School Admissions Forum�

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests