Top Law Schools

I can't remember my exact SAT score/can't find my SAT reports (it's been 7 years)...American/Loyola Marymount are asking for SAT scores. any advise?

Aren't they on most undergraduate transcripts? So they may have them when they receive the LSAC file. Plus, this is just on the application right? Just shoot a quick email asking, sure it isn't a problem.

Call College Board, or whatever the SAT company is called- that's your best bet I'd think. They usually have them on file. If not you can ask your UG if they have your application records. You can ask your HS guidance counselors too, apparently they sometimes have them.

nothingetsby wrote:I can't remember my exact SAT score/can't find my SAT reports (it's been 7 years)...American/Loyola Marymount are asking for SAT scores. any advise?

Go to the website (collegeboard.com maybe?). I just did that and recovered my user/pw from the website and it was nice and easy, unlike trying to get the same info from the ACT's website.

thanks everyone!

also, do you think they really take into consideration SAT score when evaluating us?!

not really. They may use this as a way to see how you actually did in college compared to how you did on the entrance exam to see if you have a history of out performing your test scores or underperforming them. However this would only give you a very slim boost, if at all.

I was thinking of attaching my SAT scores to show a history poor standardized test scores. Has anybody else done this? I'm not entirely sure how to do this.

What affect will it have?

I took the both the ACT and the SAT and my scores were seriously divergent, I got a 29 on the ACT and a 1080 on the SAT (1660 out of 2400 if you count the experimental writing section at the time).

I was only going to put the ACT score on my apps because I figured they wanted to see good scores throughout college and high school, they generally ask for one or the other. But now I'm thinking I can use my low SAT score as evidence I don't test well on standardized tests. My practice LSATS are around 163-165, but the added anxiety of the real thing could make it drop a few points. Since my 1080 SAT was obviously a poor indicator of how I did in college (3.9 UGPA, MCL and several awards and other honors), does anyone have any suggestions for which one or both I should put on? Or if you think it will sound like I'm making up excuses for a poor LSAT score if I write an addendum?

happyshapy wrote:What affect will it have?

I took the both the ACT and the SAT and my scores were seriously divergent, I got a 29 on the ACT and a 1080 on the SAT (1660 out of 2400 if you count the experimental writing section at the time).

I was only going to put the ACT score on my apps because I figured they wanted to see good scores throughout college and high school, they generally ask for one or the other. But now I'm thinking I can use my low SAT score as evidence I don't test well on standardized tests. My practice LSATS are around 163-165, but the added anxiety of the real thing could make it drop a few points. Since my 1080 SAT was obviously a poor indicator of how I did in college (3.9 UGPA, MCL and several awards and other honors), does anyone have any suggestions for which one or both I should put on? Or if you think it will sound like I'm making up excuses for a poor LSAT score if I write an addendum?

I don't think it will sound like you are making up excuses. I know some of the schools I am applying to specifically say that you can address a history of low test scores in your LSAT addendum. Why not mention both ACT and SAT scores?

flgator10 wrote:

happyshapy wrote:What affect will it have?

I took the both the ACT and the SAT and my scores were seriously divergent, I got a 29 on the ACT and a 1080 on the SAT (1660 out of 2400 if you count the experimental writing section at the time).

I was only going to put the ACT score on my apps because I figured they wanted to see good scores throughout college and high school, they generally ask for one or the other. But now I'm thinking I can use my low SAT score as evidence I don't test well on standardized tests. My practice LSATS are around 163-165, but the added anxiety of the real thing could make it drop a few points. Since my 1080 SAT was obviously a poor indicator of how I did in college (3.9 UGPA, MCL and several awards and other honors), does anyone have any suggestions for which one or both I should put on? Or if you think it will sound like I'm making up excuses for a poor LSAT score if I write an addendum?

I don't think it will sound like you are making up excuses. I know some of the schools I am applying to specifically say that you can address a history of low test scores in your LSAT addendum. Why not mention both ACT and SAT scores?

well I figured if they wanted to see a history of high scores I would put the ACT, and if it would benefit seeing a low SAT score not influencing my high GPA, I would put my SAT score. But I guess it really doesn't matter that much.

flgator10 wrote:

happyshapy wrote:What affect will it have?

I took the both the ACT and the SAT and my scores were seriously divergent, I got a 29 on the ACT and a 1080 on the SAT (1660 out of 2400 if you count the experimental writing section at the time).

I was only going to put the ACT score on my apps because I figured they wanted to see good scores throughout college and high school, they generally ask for one or the other. But now I'm thinking I can use my low SAT score as evidence I don't test well on standardized tests. My practice LSATS are around 163-165, but the added anxiety of the real thing could make it drop a few points. Since my 1080 SAT was obviously a poor indicator of how I did in college (3.9 UGPA, MCL and several awards and other honors), does anyone have any suggestions for which one or both I should put on? Or if you think it will sound like I'm making up excuses for a poor LSAT score if I write an addendum?

I don't think it will sound like you are making up excuses. I know some of the schools I am applying to specifically say that you can address a history of low test scores in your LSAT addendum. Why not mention both ACT and SAT scores?

They're not gonna care.

rad law wrote:

flgator10 wrote:

happyshapy wrote:What affect will it have?

I took the both the ACT and the SAT and my scores were seriously divergent, I got a 29 on the ACT and a 1080 on the SAT (1660 out of 2400 if you count the experimental writing section at the time).

I was only going to put the ACT score on my apps because I figured they wanted to see good scores throughout college and high school, they generally ask for one or the other. But now I'm thinking I can use my low SAT score as evidence I don't test well on standardized tests. My practice LSATS are around 163-165, but the added anxiety of the real thing could make it drop a few points. Since my 1080 SAT was obviously a poor indicator of how I did in college (3.9 UGPA, MCL and several awards and other honors), does anyone have any suggestions for which one or both I should put on? Or if you think it will sound like I'm making up excuses for a poor LSAT score if I write an addendum?

I don't think it will sound like you are making up excuses. I know some of the schools I am applying to specifically say that you can address a history of low test scores in your LSAT addendum. Why not mention both ACT and SAT scores?

They're not gonna care.

I mean I guess not for HYS, but I wasn't even thinking of applying to those or any t14.

rad law wrote:

flgator10 wrote:

happyshapy wrote:What affect will it have?

I took the both the ACT and the SAT and my scores were seriously divergent, I got a 29 on the ACT and a 1080 on the SAT (1660 out of 2400 if you count the experimental writing section at the time).

I was only going to put the ACT score on my apps because I figured they wanted to see good scores throughout college and high school, they generally ask for one or the other. But now I'm thinking I can use my low SAT score as evidence I don't test well on standardized tests. My practice LSATS are around 163-165, but the added anxiety of the real thing could make it drop a few points. Since my 1080 SAT was obviously a poor indicator of how I did in college (3.9 UGPA, MCL and several awards and other honors), does anyone have any suggestions for which one or both I should put on? Or if you think it will sound like I'm making up excuses for a poor LSAT score if I write an addendum?

I don't think it will sound like you are making up excuses. I know some of the schools I am applying to specifically say that you can address a history of low test scores in your LSAT addendum. Why not mention both ACT and SAT scores?

They're not gonna care.

Maybe not, but it's worth a try.

happyshapy wrote:

rad law wrote:

flgator10 wrote:

happyshapy wrote:What affect will it have?

I took the both the ACT and the SAT and my scores were seriously divergent, I got a 29 on the ACT and a 1080 on the SAT (1660 out of 2400 if you count the experimental writing section at the time).

I was only going to put the ACT score on my apps because I figured they wanted to see good scores throughout college and high school, they generally ask for one or the other. But now I'm thinking I can use my low SAT score as evidence I don't test well on standardized tests. My practice LSATS are around 163-165, but the added anxiety of the real thing could make it drop a few points. Since my 1080 SAT was obviously a poor indicator of how I did in college (3.9 UGPA, MCL and several awards and other honors), does anyone have any suggestions for which one or both I should put on? Or if you think it will sound like I'm making up excuses for a poor LSAT score if I write an addendum?

I don't think it will sound like you are making up excuses. I know some of the schools I am applying to specifically say that you can address a history of low test scores in your LSAT addendum. Why not mention both ACT and SAT scores?

They're not gonna care.

I mean I guess not for HYS, but I wasn't even thinking of applying to those or any t14.

No one will care. Seriously.

They will care that you suck at standardized testing when they are thinking about whether or not you will pass the BAR exam after graduating from their law school.

whymeohgodno wrote:They will care that you suck at standardized testing when they are thinking about whether or not you will pass the BAR exam after graduating from their law school.

I feel like that's a little different. Isn't the bar more fact based, i.e. studying would improve how you do, the LSAT isn't supposed to be like that. I ace exams, every single one I took in college, I don't think the bar would be any different

happyshapy wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:They will care that you suck at standardized testing when they are thinking about whether or not you will pass the BAR exam after graduating from their law school.

I feel like that's a little different. Isn't the bar more fact based, i.e. studying would improve how you do, the LSAT isn't supposed to be like that. I ace exams, every single one I took in college, I don't think the bar would be any different

Exactly. The bar tests knowledge. It is a learnable test. LSAT is completely different.

happyshapy wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:They will care that you suck at standardized testing when they are thinking about whether or not you will pass the BAR exam after graduating from their law school.

I feel like that's a little different. Isn't the bar more fact based, i.e. studying would improve how you do, the LSAT isn't supposed to be like that. I ace exams, every single one I took in college, I don't think the bar would be any different

The SAT is pretty fact based while I will grant that the LSAT isn't. If you attach your SAT score to show a history of poor standardized testing, you are showing you suck at all types of standardized tests ranging from fact based ones to skill oriented ones. I don't see how this can ever reflect on you positively.

happyshapy wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:They will care that you suck at standardized testing when they are thinking about whether or not you will pass the BAR exam after graduating from their law school.

I feel like that's a little different. Isn't the bar more fact based, i.e. studying would improve how you do, the LSAT isn't supposed to be like that. I ace exams, every single one I took in college, I don't think the bar would be any different

Studying very much improves how well you can do on the LSAT. This is partly why no one cares. The other part of why no one cares is that schools don't want their LSAT medians to drop. Actually the latter is probably the main reason.

I've taken all these tests you guys are talking about, and I think they're all crap.

The only tests I've really enjoyed were those weird IQ tests they gave us in kindergarten and the fourth grade. They had a variety of spatial transformation problems - they'd cut a slice out of a sphere, and then ask you which of several options was the mirror image. Anyone else take those?

ahduth wrote:I've taken all these tests you guys are talking about, and I think they're all crap.

The only tests I've really enjoyed were those weird IQ tests they gave us in kindergarten and the fourth grade. They had a variety of spatial transformation problems - they'd cut a slice out of a sphere, and then ask you which of several options was the mirror image. Anyone else take those?

Those were fun. I'm not sure how accurate they were though (am I really gifted for my ability to recognize patterns?).

west wrote:

ahduth wrote:I've taken all these tests you guys are talking about, and I think they're all crap.

The only tests I've really enjoyed were those weird IQ tests they gave us in kindergarten and the fourth grade. They had a variety of spatial transformation problems - they'd cut a slice out of a sphere, and then ask you which of several options was the mirror image. Anyone else take those?

Those were fun. I'm not sure how accurate they were though (am I really gifted for my ability to recognize patterns?).

Well... probably. They're one of the rawest ways to test your mind's ability in terms of throughput and capacity. If you have "room" in your head (attention span/space) to freeze the image of that sphere, then freeze the second image in your head and finally run a visual diagnostic on the two in a discrete and effective manner, you're doing okay. If you can do it over and over in a timed fashion without very many errors, you're probably doing better than okay.

It just seems like a very uncluttered way of analyzing that type of thing. I'd prefer it to the logic games section on the LSAT, because it can't be trained. The fact that there are meta-patterns to the logic games, which allow you to accurately predict outcomes independent of the specific content of the game, is a weakness in my view. At least from the standpoint of simply examining someone's intelligence.