why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

User avatar
Zeta
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:33 pm

why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby Zeta » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:46 am

I'm not complaining (157) but why is it that we get to retake w/ no real penalty?
I'd be pissed if I'd been denied entry into a top school in the past if, even after having scored 180 on a retake, the average was still not good enough.
Not that I'd ever have a shot at a top school even w/ an initial 180. I'm just curious as to why the sea change occurred.

User avatar
Bildungsroman
Posts: 5548
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby Bildungsroman » Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:00 pm

iirc, a few years ago schools had to report your averaged score. When that changed and they could report your highest score, suddenly they decided that was the better practice.

User avatar
dextermorgan
Posts: 1138
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 12:37 am

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby dextermorgan » Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:13 pm

US News and World Report, of course.

User avatar
alwayssunnyinfl
Posts: 4100
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:34 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby alwayssunnyinfl » Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:21 pm

Zeta wrote:I'm not complaining (157) but why is it that we get to retake w/ no real penalty?
I'd be pissed if I'd been denied entry into a top school in the past if, even after having scored 180 on a retake, the average was still not good enough.
Not that I'd ever have a shot at a top school even w/ an initial 180. I'm just curious as to why the sea change occurred.


Also, I'm almost certain that you'd have a decent shot at a top school with a 180

User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby cahwc12 » Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:14 pm

Bildungsroman wrote:iirc, a few years ago schools had to report your averaged score. When that changed and they could report your highest score, suddenly they decided that was the better practice.


This is incorrect as far as I know. I was going to apply in the 2007 cycle and the issue was that some schools averaged and some schools took the highest LSAT score to make their medians look better. So, in an effort to guard against that gaming, USNWR started only reporting the highest LSAT to solve the problem. Now, some schools still say that they "consider" both scores, but really I think there isn't really any situation except for 170+ --> 140 (slight hyperbole) that would raise an eyebrow, positively or negatively.

User avatar
Zeta
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:33 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby Zeta » Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:37 pm

does that mean that schools never used the average as the qualifier?

Big Dog
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby Big Dog » Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:42 pm

Actually, it was the ABA that changed policy back in ~2006, to require that law schools only report only the highest scores of matriculated students.

User avatar
Zeta
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:33 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby Zeta » Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:43 pm

why?

User avatar
alwayssunnyinfl
Posts: 4100
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:34 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby alwayssunnyinfl » Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:18 pm

Zeta wrote:why?

With the huge increases in preparation that LSAT takers engage in now, the initial score is pretty useless.

Also, it encourages the "retake until 180" mentality, which is a boon for LSAC.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: why aren't the scores averaged anymore?

Postby CanadianWolf » Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:57 pm

More money for LSDAS & the test prep industry.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, Baidu [Spider], dianersg, dontsaywhatyoumean, Instrumental, judill, mrgstephe, Snowjon, theboringest and 11 guests