Top Law Schools

Unfortunately, there is no fixed way of converting LSAT scores into
percentile equivalents. Because students sitting for a particular LSAT
administration may do a little better or a little worse than those taking the
test on a different date, percentile equivalents will not be identical across
test administrations.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:

Unfortunately, there is no fixed way of converting LSAT scores into
percentile equivalents. Because students sitting for a particular LSAT
administration may do a little better or a little worse than those taking the
test on a different date, percentile equivalents will not be identical across
test administrations.

Maybe this wasn't the case in 2007, but percentile equivalents are based on the the last three years of test-takers.

Havaianas wrote:Check out this Loyola Law professor Theodore Seto's study...
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=937017
From the intro:

"Indeed, as I began playing with a spreadsheet I had written to
replicate the 2007 U.S. News computations, I discovered that even if
Harvard had reported a perfect median LSAT of 180, it still would have
been ranked third. And even if Yale had reported a median LSAT of just
153 (placing it in the “fourth tier” of law schools ranked by LSAT),9 it still
would have been ranked first. Indeed, Yale would have been ranked higher
than Harvard even if both had been true – if Harvard had reported a perfect
median LSAT and Yale a 153. I was stunned. Was Yale really that much
better than Harvard in all other material respects? If not, what might the
parts of U.S. News’ methodology that led to these counterintuitive results
tell us about the validity of U.S. News’ ranking of other schools?"

D. H2Oman wrote: Stupid hypothetical, if Yale's LSAT median plummeted down to retard land, their peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores would plummet as well.

Havaianas wrote:[strike]Something[/strike] Everything wrong with the US News rankings?...

OperaSoprano wrote:

Havaianas wrote:[strike]Something[/strike] Everything wrong with the US News [strike]Rankings?[/strike] Riggings?

Trifles wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote: Stupid hypothetical, if Yale's LSAT median plummeted down to retard land, their peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores would plummet as well.

Not in one year, before that information even came out or those students hit the workforce. They would still be ranked #1 that first year.

Trifles wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote: Stupid hypothetical, if Yale's LSAT median plummeted down to retard land, their peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores would plummet as well.

Not in one year, before that information even came out or those students hit the workforce. They would still be ranked #1 that first year.

twert wrote:

Trifles wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote: Stupid hypothetical, if Yale's LSAT median plummeted down to retard land, their peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores would plummet as well.

Not in one year, before that information even came out or those students hit the workforce. They would still be ranked #1 that first year.

+1

D. H2Oman wrote:

Trifles wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote: Stupid hypothetical, if Yale's LSAT median plummeted down to retard land, their peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores would plummet as well.

Not in one year, before that information even came out or those students hit the workforce. They would still be ranked #1 that first year.

True, but it's still a stupid hypothetical. Yale is never going to do that.

If they are going to revamp the US News rankings they should probably fix some of the real issues it has now as opposed to some hypotheical problems that aren't even close to realistic.

twert wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote:

Trifles wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote: Stupid hypothetical, if Yale's LSAT median plummeted down to retard land, their peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores would plummet as well.

Not in one year, before that information even came out or those students hit the workforce. They would still be ranked #1 that first year.

True, but it's still a stupid hypothetical. Yale is never going to do that.

If they are going to revamp the US News rankings they should probably fix some of the real issues it has now as opposed to some hypotheical problems that aren't even close to realistic.

the hypothetical is really just to demonstrate that there are weird things going on with the methodology. it prefaces a long discussion of all sorts of wonky things. read the article you'll see what i mean.

D. H2Oman wrote:
I don't disagree, but wouldn't the only way to fix that specific problem be to weigh the LSAT even more.

Derrex wrote:Loyola? Never even heard of it.

twert wrote:

Derrex wrote:Loyola? Never even heard of it.

seriously there's three of em?

Havaianas wrote:Check out this Loyola Law professor Theodore Seto's study...
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=937017
From the intro:

"Indeed, as I began playing with a spreadsheet I had written to
replicate the 2007 U.S. News computations, I discovered that even if
Harvard had reported a perfect median LSAT of 180, it still would have
been ranked third. And even if Yale had reported a median LSAT of just
153 (placing it in the “fourth tier” of law schools ranked by LSAT),9 it still
would have been ranked first. Indeed, Yale would have been ranked higher
than Harvard even if both had been true – if Harvard had reported a perfect
median LSAT and Yale a 153. I was stunned. Was Yale really that much
better than Harvard in all other material respects? If not, what might the
parts of U.S. News’ methodology that led to these counterintuitive results
tell us about the validity of U.S. News’ ranking of other schools?"

JustDude wrote:

Havaianas wrote:Check out this Loyola Law professor Theodore Seto's study...
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=937017
From the intro:

"Indeed, as I began playing with a spreadsheet I had written to
replicate the 2007 U.S. News computations, I discovered that even if
Harvard had reported a perfect median LSAT of 180, it still would have
been ranked third. And even if Yale had reported a median LSAT of just
153 (placing it in the “fourth tier” of law schools ranked by LSAT),9 it still
would have been ranked first. Indeed, Yale would have been ranked higher
than Harvard even if both had been true – if Harvard had reported a perfect
median LSAT and Yale a 153. I was stunned. Was Yale really that much
better than Harvard in all other material respects? If not, what might the
parts of U.S. News’ methodology that led to these counterintuitive results
tell us about the validity of U.S. News’ ranking of other schools?"

Brannigan??? Is that You>!

D. H2Oman wrote:

JustDude wrote:

Brannigan??? Is that You>!

Hey JustDude

JustDude wrote:

Havaianas wrote:Check out this Loyola Law professor Theodore Seto's study...
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=937017
From the intro:

"Indeed, as I began playing with a spreadsheet I had written to
replicate the 2007 U.S. News computations, I discovered that even if
Harvard had reported a perfect median LSAT of 180, it still would have
been ranked third. And even if Yale had reported a median LSAT of just
153 (placing it in the “fourth tier” of law schools ranked by LSAT),9 it still
would have been ranked first. Indeed, Yale would have been ranked higher
than Harvard even if both had been true – if Harvard had reported a perfect
median LSAT and Yale a 153. I was stunned. Was Yale really that much
better than Harvard in all other material respects? If not, what might the
parts of U.S. News’ methodology that led to these counterintuitive results
tell us about the validity of U.S. News’ ranking of other schools?"

Brannigan??? Is that You>!

D. H2Oman wrote:

Havaianas wrote:Check out this Loyola Law professor Theodore Seto's study...
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=937017
From the intro:

"Indeed, as I began playing with a spreadsheet I had written to
replicate the 2007 U.S. News computations, I discovered that even if
Harvard had reported a perfect median LSAT of 180, it still would have
been ranked third. And even if Yale had reported a median LSAT of just
153 (placing it in the “fourth tier” of law schools ranked by LSAT),9 it still
would have been ranked first. Indeed, Yale would have been ranked higher
than Harvard even if both had been true – if Harvard had reported a perfect
median LSAT and Yale a 153. I was stunned. Was Yale really that much
better than Harvard in all other material respects? If not, what might the
parts of U.S. News’ methodology that led to these counterintuitive results
tell us about the validity of U.S. News’ ranking of other schools?"

Stupid hypothetical, if Yale's LSAT median plummeted down to retard land, their peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores would plummet as well.