Top Law Schools

I'm curious if there is a strong correlation here. Do you think most HYP folks are able to get into HYS? How would the student bodies (as a whole, not accounting for actual age differences) compare to each other in terms of smartness, ability etc. I imagine undergrad has more issues with legacy, slackers, etc. detracting from student quality.

CordeliusX wrote:I'm curious if there is a strong correlation here. Do you think most HYP folks are able to get into HYS? How would the student bodies (as a whole, not accounting for actual age differences) compare to each other in terms of smartness, ability etc. I imagine undergrad has more issues with legacy, slackers, etc. detracting from student quality.

over half of HYP u-grad applicants have no shot at HYS law schools, so I think they are quite different student bodies in favor of the law schools, at least in smartness. we can see this because H u-grad has the highest median LSAT in the nation, at 166. that means half score below that, and therefore have no shot at the big 3.

HYP u-grads might be more "well rounded", active in clubs, and better connected though based on the admissions criteria.

CordeliusX wrote:Do you think most HYP folks are able to get into HYS?

No, they're not.

Certainly not, with a median GPA/LSAT of around 3.6/166, I would say the bottom half of HYP can't even get T14.

<-- one of the former, not of the latter.

Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

englawyer wrote:

CordeliusX wrote:I'm curious if there is a strong correlation here. Do you think most HYP folks are able to get into HYS? How would the student bodies (as a whole, not accounting for actual age differences) compare to each other in terms of smartness, ability etc. I imagine undergrad has more issues with legacy, slackers, etc. detracting from student quality.

over half of HYP u-grad applicants have no shot at HYS law schools, so I think they are quite different student bodies in favor of the law schools, at least in smartness. we can see this because H u-grad has the highest median LSAT in the nation, at 166. that means half score below that, and therefore have no shot at the big 3.

HYP u-grads might be more "well rounded", active in clubs, and better connected though based on the admissions criteria.

166 is the mean, mayn. I'd bet you over half are scoring above 166.

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

Or is the group of Harvard students who take the LSAT substantially different from the average Harvard student?

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

It means you can't equate the SAT to the LSAT very easily.

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

As racist as it might sound, the slightly lower LSAT score might be due to the lack of Asians bumping up the LSAT average.

Say what you will, Asians dominate the SAT because they know how to write standardized tests. There are exceptions though.

Gamecubesupreme wrote:

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

As racist as it might sound, the slightly lower LSAT score might be due to the lack of Asians bumping up the LSAT average.

Say what you will, Asians dominate the SAT because they know how to write standardized tests. There are exceptions though.

Pretty sure Asians score the same or lower than whites on the LSAT.

And what are you talking about "lack of Asians"?

JSUVA2012 wrote:Pretty sure Asians score the same or lower than whites on the LSAT.

And what are you talking about "lack of Asians"?

The Asians taking the LSAT aren't the same group of Asians who took the SAT.

JSUVA2012 wrote:Pretty sure Asians score the same or lower than whites on the LSAT.

It's old data, but in 1997-1998, Asians averaged 150.84 while caucasians averaged 151.96. From 1991-1998 caucasians consistently averaged about 2-3 points higher.

--LinkRemoved--

vanwinkle wrote:

JSUVA2012 wrote:Pretty sure Asians score the same or lower than whites on the LSAT.

It's old data, but in 1997-1998, Asians averaged 150.84 while caucasians averaged 151.96. From 1991-1998 caucasians consistently averaged about 2-3 points higher.

--LinkRemoved--

Exactly.

However, Asians who take the MCAT and the GMAT score, on average, the highest of all racial groups.

Hmmmm, why do I have a bad feeling I've inadvertently started a flame war.

Gamecubesupreme wrote:

JSUVA2012 wrote:Pretty sure Asians score the same or lower than whites on the LSAT.

And what are you talking about "lack of Asians"?

The Asians taking the LSAT aren't the same group of Asians who took the SAT.

You're thinking about this way too hard.

Harvard has a mean LSAT of 166. That's the highest of any UG in the country, to my knowledge. And you're trying to explain why it's so "low." Think about that for a second.

OP's question is a dumb one. At every single school in the country the law students are going to be brighter, on average, than the undergrad population. We don't need to slice and dice and analyze - this is intuitive, folks.

Gamecubesupreme wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:

JSUVA2012 wrote:Pretty sure Asians score the same or lower than whites on the LSAT.

It's old data, but in 1997-1998, Asians averaged 150.84 while caucasians averaged 151.96. From 1991-1998 caucasians consistently averaged about 2-3 points higher.

--LinkRemoved--

Exactly.

However, Asians who take the MCAT and the GMAT score, on average, the highest of all racial groups.

Hmmmm, why do I have a bad feeling I've inadvertently started a flame war.

Asians on average probably score lower on the LSAT because the LSAT is very heavily based on strong English comprehension skills... probably more so than any other higher level test. Thus Asians who are not born in America will always be slightly handicapped in terms of speed of reading and things like that...

vanwinkle wrote:

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

It means you can't equate the SAT to the LSAT very easily.

i like this.

Tofu wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

It means you can't equate the SAT to the LSAT very easily.

i like this.

Ummm...not really.

Is it any coincidence that Harvard undergraduates have the highest average LSAT score? Is it any coincidence that Yale is second, followed by Princeton? Is it also a coincidence that almost every college's average SAT score strongly correlates with its average LSAT score?

The LSAT tests different skills than the SAT, if for no other reason than the lack of a scored writing section and a math section. I also think that the subset of HYP students who are interested in going to law school is probably not representative of the student body as a whole. That being said, I've been kind of shocked as to the percentage of my classmates who attended Ivy League schools. I constantly find myself in groups and situations where everyone is an Ivy graduate. As for those HYP students I know who've compared their Harvard Law classmates to undergrad classmates the general consensus has been that there are no slackers at the law school but once you cut that group out, the difference isn't that pronounced. Everybody's smart, everybody works hard, everybody has fun, everybody Wangs Chung.

ilovethelsat wrote:

Tofu wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

It means you can't equate the SAT to the LSAT very easily.

i like this.

Ummm...not really.

Is it any coincidence that Harvard undergraduates have the highest average LSAT score? Is it any coincidence that Yale is second, followed by Princeton? Is it also a coincidence that almost every college's average SAT score strongly correlates with its average LSAT score?

Yes, there's an overall correlation, but that doesn't mean there's any individual equation in scores at all. You're taking two entirely different and separate things and confusing them with each other.

I'd expect Harvard kids in general to do better on the LSAT than kids at Suffolk or Northeastern, but that's not the same as saying I expect every Harvard kid to get a 179 and be eligible for HYS just because Harvard is one of if not the best UG in the nation.

ilovethelsat wrote:

Tofu wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:

ilovethelsat wrote:Harvard's average SAT score is 1480/1600. Does that mean a 1480 on the SAT roughly equal to a 166 on the LSAT? Or does the average Harvard student study much harder for the SAT than for the LSAT?

It means you can't equate the SAT to the LSAT very easily.

i like this.

Ummm...not really.

Is it any coincidence that Harvard undergraduates have the highest average LSAT score? Is it any coincidence that Yale is second, followed by Princeton? Is it also a coincidence that almost every college's average SAT score strongly correlates with its average LSAT score?

i was moreso talking about how you can't easily equate an sat score to an lsat score

vanwinkle wrote:

ilovethelsat wrote:

Tofu wrote:

vanwinkle wrote: It means you can't equate the SAT to the LSAT very easily.

i like this.

Ummm...not really.

Is it any coincidence that Harvard undergraduates have the highest average LSAT score? Is it any coincidence that Yale is second, followed by Princeton? Is it also a coincidence that almost every college's average SAT score strongly correlates with its average LSAT score?

Yes, there's an overall correlation, but that doesn't mean there's any individual equation in scores at all. You're taking two entirely different and separate things and confusing them with each other.

I'd expect Harvard kids in general to do better on the LSAT than kids at Suffolk or Northeastern, but that's not the same as saying I expect every Harvard kid to get a 179 and be eligible for HYS just because Harvard is one of if not the best UG in the nation.

There's still a correlation between SAT and LSAT scores at the individual level.

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/sa ... cores.html

R^2 = .38, which is particularly impressive because the sample size was small and biased toward high-scoring students.

ilovethelsat wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:Yes, there's an overall correlation, but that doesn't mean there's any individual equation in scores at all. You're taking two entirely different and separate things and confusing them with each other.

I'd expect Harvard kids in general to do better on the LSAT than kids at Suffolk or Northeastern, but that's not the same as saying I expect every Harvard kid to get a 179 and be eligible for HYS just because Harvard is one of if not the best UG in the nation.

There's still a correlation between SAT and LSAT scores at the individual level.

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/sa ... cores.html

R^2 = .38, which is particularly impressive because the sample size was small and biased toward high-scoring students.

That would be an overall correlation, which is what I said there was. .38 is pretty high in terms of correlation but not anywhere near high enough that you could start making individual equation claims along the lines of "a 1480 on the LSAT roughly equals a 166 on the LSAT". That's not at all what this correlation data supports.

vanwinkle wrote:

ilovethelsat wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:Yes, there's an overall correlation, but that doesn't mean there's any individual equation in scores at all. You're taking two entirely different and separate things and confusing them with each other.

I'd expect Harvard kids in general to do better on the LSAT than kids at Suffolk or Northeastern, but that's not the same as saying I expect every Harvard kid to get a 179 and be eligible for HYS just because Harvard is one of if not the best UG in the nation.

There's still a correlation between SAT and LSAT scores at the individual level.

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/sa ... cores.html

R^2 = .38, which is particularly impressive because the sample size was small and biased toward high-scoring students.

That would be an overall correlation, which is what I said there was. .38 is pretty high in terms of correlation but not anywhere near high enough that you could start making individual equation claims along the lines of "a 1480 on the LSAT roughly equals a 166 on the LSAT". That's not at all what this correlation data supports.

Damnit.. This would have been great for my analysis project.

That data set is 70 samples. Worthless.

for what it's worth, my lsat teacher swears more than anything else that one's lsat "potential" (for higher scorers) is within 1-2 points of their equivalent verbal sat score...kind of...it's easier to explain with examples

720 = 172

690 = 169

600 = 160

you get the idea. he strongly discourages his students from actually taking the exam unless their practice tests are right around if not above what their score "should" be, according to their verbal sat