How do Splitters Perform Once in Law School? Forum

[YYZ]

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/LSAT-Score- ... rmance.pdf

Take a look at this if you want some statistical correlation between UGPA/LSAT and law school grades.

[Perseus_I]

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/LSAT-Score- ... rmance.pdf

Take a look at this if you want some statistical correlation between UGPA/LSAT and law school grades.

Does this account for multiple LSAT scores? Average LSAT scores or highest?

Most studies like this use the average LSAT score. Many so-called splitters may have an earlier, much-lower LSAT score and, thus, not an average LSAT score such that would make them a splitter according to this study.

[YYZ]

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/LSAT-Score- ... rmance.pdf

Take a look at this if you want some statistical correlation between UGPA/LSAT and law school grades.

Does this account for multiple LSAT scores? Average LSAT scores or highest?

Most studies like this use the average LSAT score. Many so-called splitters may have an earlier, much-lower LSAT score and, thus, not an average LSAT score such that would make them a splitter according to this study.

I don't think the report gives you that answer, but I think you have to assume that it's the LSAT score that the school has associated with the student and used in compiling the average LSAT for the class. So, I'm sure it's the LSAT as computed by schools in their admissions process (either the student's highest LSAT or average LSAT).

The summary of the report is:

LSAT + UGPA = best indicator of law school performance

LSAT alone = next best indicator

UGPA alone = lowest indicator

[McQueen]

TBF, most people at those schools are (a) smart, (b) accustomed to getting decent grades, and (c) not used to being graded on a curve. .

I totally agree. I was advised in advance that receiving a B was likely to happen in law school. In spite of that warning, when I saw my first B, I was stunned. The part I do not “get,” regards the curve and why so much emphasis is placed on 1L. I find these two LS components, inexplicable.

[TatteredDignity]

I find these two LS components, inexplicable.

I find your use of commas, inexplicable.

[JoeFish]

TBF, most people at those schools are (a) smart, (b) accustomed to getting decent grades, and (c) not used to being graded on a curve. I think the last factor gives engineering/hard science majors a distinct advantage

True. Dat.

I was a math major, and got curved hardcore. Your numerical grade didn't matter... I had a 71 in Geometric Topology, which was the 3rd highest grade out of 8 and good for an A-. The scores on our Real Analysis 2 final ranged from 62/70 to 8/70. My UGPA was a 3.23... and I felt pretty good about that, considering the two majors with the lowest GPAs at our UG were mathematics and electrical engineering.

Hell, I love the LS curve... beats an elliptic curve any day *rimshot*

[fascinatingnot]

if T4 counts, I had 2.7 UGPA and 170 LSAT, finished 1L first in class...

[Scribe]

Finished 1st in class at my T14 after 1L year. I had a bottom 25% LSAT score (2 tries none the less) and a high GPA due to an arts marjor in college. So there's that.

LSAT and GPA aren't meaningless, but there are exceptions to every conclusion you would try to draw. Law students love to find trends whether they exist or not. The only real data has already been posted: All pre-law school metrics are bad predictors of 1L performance, but LSAT + GPA is the best, LSAT alone is 2nd, and GPA alone is after that.

[manofjustice]

I find these two LS components, inexplicable.

I find your use of commas, inexplicable.

170

[MrAnon]

If the LSAT makes you nervous a law school exam should give you a panic attack.

[FlanSolo]

If the LSAT makes you nervous a law school exam should give you a panic attack.

In some ways, the LSAT is more nerve wracking because it's going to determine where you go, and thus, how important your law school exams even are. Plus, you get more opportunities in law school. Depending on where you go, you may already have a good sense of your options. Also, in many cases, LSAT takers have been preparing for a much longer, which can make the test itself more nerve wracking. Finally, the LSAT is curved, too - it's kind of the single most important law school exam anyone takes.

[spleenworship]

If the LSAT makes you nervous a law school exam should give you a panic attack.

In some ways, the LSAT is more nerve wracking because it's going to determine where you go, and thus, how important your law school exams even are. Plus, you get more opportunities in law school. Depending on where you go, you may already have a good sense of your options. Also, in many cases, LSAT takers have been preparing for a much longer, which can make the test itself more nerve wracking. Finally, the LSAT is curved, too - it's kind of the single most important law school exam anyone takes.

1) The LSAT isn't really curved in a traditional way
2) Law school exams are curved.
3) 1L grades are even more important as the LSAT because they determine, literally, the rest of your career.
4) Finals happen after 16 weeks of hideous confusion are are horribly stressful.
5) Law school exams are not learnable in the same easy way the LSAT was
6) For the above reasons (and many more), law schools exams are waaaaaay worse than the LSAT. I would actually take 5 LSATs at the end of each semester rather than take Finals. HTH.

[notedgarfigaro]

If the LSAT makes you nervous a law school exam should give you a panic attack.

In some ways, the LSAT is more nerve wracking because it's going to determine where you go, and thus, how important your law school exams even are. Plus, you get more opportunities in law school. Depending on where you go, you may already have a good sense of your options. Also, in many cases, LSAT takers have been preparing for a much longer, which can make the test itself more nerve wracking. Finally, the LSAT is curved, too - it's kind of the single most important law school exam anyone takes.

1) The LSAT isn't really curved in a traditional way
2) Law school exams are curved.
3) 1L grades are even more important as the LSAT because they determine, literally, the rest of your career.
4) Finals happen after 16 weeks of hideous confusion are are horribly stressful.
5) Law school exams are not learnable in the same easy way the LSAT was
6) For the above reasons (and many more), law schools exams are waaaaaay worse than the LSAT. I would actually take 5 LSATs at the end of each semester rather than take Finals. HTH.

Add 7)law school exams can be extremely arbitrary, whereas you know exactly what you're getting with the LSAT, and more importantly, 8 )you can retake the LSAT, 1L grades are forever.

[JoeFish]

I would actually take 5 LSATs at the end of each semester rather than take Finals.

I'd rather take an LSAT each day than show up for class

[yogurt31]

i wonder if theres any correlation between lowish gpa/high LSAT splitters and lowish/median 1L gpa and writing onto law review

[Perseus_I]

If the LSAT makes you nervous a law school exam should give you a panic attack.

I highly disagree. Law school exams were much less nerve-wracking after doing practice exams and pre-writing some answers (on the several that allowed outside materials). But, as a slow typist, I had more of a time disadvantage than I did on the LSAT.

[Perseus_I]

i wonder if theres any correlation between lowish gpa/high LSAT splitters and lowish/median 1L gpa and writing onto law review

It could plausibly be the opposite. Someone with a high GPA in a writing-intensive, liberal artsy subject who gets owned on Contracts, multiple choice Property, and the time constraints of lawl school exams and the LSAT could very well write onto Law Review. In fact, I know someone like this.

[yogurt31]

i wonder if theres any correlation between lowish gpa/high LSAT splitters and lowish/median 1L gpa and writing onto law review

It could plausibly be the opposite. Someone with a high GPA in a writing-intensive, liberal artsy subject who gets owned on Contracts, multiple choice Property, and the time constraints of lawl school exams and the LSAT could very well write onto Law Review. In fact, I know someone like this.

yeah it probably makes more sense for splitters to end up as the opposite, high gpa and no law review maybe.

[2014utLaw]

.

[SG09]

I'm a splitter at a T10 (top 25% LSAT, bottom 25% GPA). 1L 1st semester GPA was ~top 5%. 2nd semester GPA was ~bottom third. Cumulatively top quarter. Take that for what it's worth I guess.

[HeavenWood]

I'm a splitter at a T10 (top 25% LSAT, bottom 25% GPA). 1L 1st semester GPA was ~top 5%. 2nd semester GPA was ~bottom third. Cumulatively top quarter. Take that for what it's worth I guess.

That's a crazy drop. What do you think happened?

[SG09]

Actually, on second thought, I might hold off on answering that one in detail.

But I'll just say, appropriately for this thread, I think it had something to do with the very same reasons that I was a splitter in the first place.

[wormhole]

A couple years ago, a poster got into Boalt with a 154. I'd like to know how s/he did.

[FeelTheHeat]

2.8/166, UF, top third. GPA is a hell of a lot better than UG was lol