LSAT/GPA ratio Forum

[kennethellenparcell]

There are a number of reasons why the LSAT is weighted more than the GPA by many law schools. Some include:

(1) It is awarded a greater weight than GPA in the US News Ranking formula.
(2) It is a standardized metric by which admissions officers can compare applicants.
(3) It is the single best numerical predictor of first year performance in law school.

Therefore, it is important that if you want to get into a good law school - you retake your LSAT until you get a score you feel accurately reflects your ability.

Right. And this absolutely makes sense. A 140 minute multiple choice exam that has nothing to do with law should be worth more than four years of undergraduate studies including, in addition to many multiple choice tests, essay exams, essays, research papers, lecture attendance, presentations, etc.

[Philosopher King]

Mods, please ban this troll alread. thx.

I'm not a troll. This has been proven several times.

[smaug_]

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

If you are a philosophy major you should know better than to use the word paradigm in this way.

[Philosopher King]

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

If you are a philosophy major you should know better than to use the word paradigm in this way.

I am using it in a way that I learned in a non-philosophy class.

[lovejopd]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

[snehpets]

As a philosophy major shouldn't you have the logical base to allow you to perform well on the LSAT?

Why is GPA any better of a measure? Because you should damn all of the talented and intelligent people who had bad semesters in college?

Did you honestly just refer to the LSAT as "evil and tyranny?" How is that any worse than judging people on 3-4 years of their life that are completely set and unchangeable? Not to mention that if you take the LSAT away, there really would be incentive for people to just go to worse schools to be a big fish in a small pond.

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

How do you get into college without taking the SAT or ACT?

[Philosopher King]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

My GPA is a 4.0 because my school doesn't have a grade higher than a good old "A." We do have a plus minus system but we don't have any A+ grade. In my opinion LSAC is stupid to use the 4.33 scale. Most students don't attend universities where an A+ grade is possible. LSAC can't justify doing this. I would have about a 4.1-4.2 if my university gave out A+ grades.

[rinkrat19]

Dude, just give up. This absurd tilting at windmills shtick is getting old.

[lovejopd]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

My GPA is a 4.0 because my school doesn't have a grade higher than a good old "A." We do have a plus minus system but we don't have any A+ grade. In my opinion LSAC is stupid to use the 4.33 scale. Most students don't attend universities where an A+ grade is possible. LSAC can't justify doing this. I would have about a 4.1-4.2 if my university gave out A+ grades.

Okay, study more to get at least +5 points more, and Ed to a good school even though your chance of getting scholarship is small!

[citykitty]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

My GPA is a 4.0 because my school doesn't have a grade higher than a good old "A." We do have a plus minus system but we don't have any A+ grade. In my opinion LSAC is stupid to use the 4.33 scale. Most students don't attend universities where an A+ grade is possible. LSAC can't justify doing this. I would have about a 4.1-4.2 if my university gave out A+ grades.

They can justify it in that schools with +s frequently are on a 7 point scale where a 92 is an A-, 82 is a B- etc. The extra points given by the pluses are offset by the minuses. Now I do feel bad for those people who go to a school that is on a 7 point scale but offer no pluses, just minuses. They are kind of screwed by the system. Still I don't see them carping here, just you.

[Socreights]

So maybe you have the skills to succeed in a graduate philosophy program. Law school isn't philosophy.

Law falls almost entirety under the disciplines of philosophy and political science. Laws are enacted through the political process and are based on philosophical questions of morality. I could expand on this but just think about it for a moment.

My more important point is that my philosophy curriculum taught me the skills the LSAT tests for. I have detailed this countless times using specific courses to demonstrate how I have proven I have good logical reasoning and reading comprehension skills and my 155 LSAT is not representative of this.

Just study more for the LSAT...Your degree in philosophy probably encourages you to think too much about the LR questions, which simply test your logical reasoning abilities [not your abilities to interpret Plato and Kant]...You might have been a great philosophy major, but Logic is the only class that's relevant to the development of the kinds of SKILLZ you need to perform well in law school (possibly a gross overstatement). While your classes that dealt with morality and justice might have provided you with considerations to draw from in the context of legal study, apparently, they didn't teach ya logic. If you can do logic well and quickly, you will ace the LSAT and do well in law school. If you can do it decently, but slowly, you'll do less well on the LSAT and probably less well in law school--unless you study enough to make up for the difference.

If you can't take the heat, get out the kitchen...

[Philosopher King]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

My GPA is a 4.0 because my school doesn't have a grade higher than a good old "A." We do have a plus minus system but we don't have any A+ grade. In my opinion LSAC is stupid to use the 4.33 scale. Most students don't attend universities where an A+ grade is possible. LSAC can't justify doing this. I would have about a 4.1-4.2 if my university gave out A+ grades.

They can justify it in that schools with +s frequently are on a 7 point scale where a 92 is an A-, 82 is a B- etc. The extra points given by the pluses are offset by the minuses. Now I do feel bad for those people who go to a school that is on a 7 point scale but offer no pluses, just minuses. They are kind of screwed by the system. Still I don't see them carping here, just you.

My school is on the +/- system but without an A+ grade. It is unjust how LSAC conducts its affairs.

[vpintz]

How do you get into college without taking the SAT or ACT?

Tbf, my original UG accepted people who didn't take the SAT or ACT, but they had to write like three extra essays and have two interviews or something like that. (I don't know for sure, because I obviously didn't go that route.)

Buuuut, because my original UG is a women's college, I'm assuming that's not how he pulled it off.

[Gail]

This highly depends on the law school and on one's GPA range. In general, however, the LSAT tends to be more valuable than GPA.
http://www.uiowa.edu/~030116/prelaw/lawschools09.htm

Right. And this absolutely makes sense. A 140 minute multiple choice exam that has nothing to do with law should be worth more than four years of undergraduate studies including, in addition to many multiple choice tests, essay exams, essays, research papers, lecture attendance, presentations, etc.

Lmao. And your anthropology degree has some relevance to a legal education? Please.

[Gail]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

My GPA is a 4.0 because my school doesn't have a grade higher than a good old "A." We do have a plus minus system but we don't have any A+ grade. In my opinion LSAC is stupid to use the 4.33 scale. Most students don't attend universities where an A+ grade is possible. LSAC can't justify doing this. I would have about a 4.1-4.2 if my university gave out A+ grades.

They can justify it in that schools with +s frequently are on a 7 point scale where a 92 is an A-, 82 is a B- etc. The extra points given by the pluses are offset by the minuses. Now I do feel bad for those people who go to a school that is on a 7 point scale but offer no pluses, just minuses. They are kind of screwed by the system. Still I don't see them carping here, just you.

Oh hai there!

[kalvano]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

My GPA is a 4.0 because my school doesn't have a grade higher than a good old "A." We do have a plus minus system but we don't have any A+ grade. In my opinion LSAC is stupid to use the 4.33 scale. Most students don't attend universities where an A+ grade is possible. LSAC can't justify doing this. I would have about a 4.1-4.2 if my university gave out A+ grades.

Here is why we need standardized tests for admittance to a law program. You scored a 4.0 in undergrad and are the stupidest fucking human being alive. All this time you spend on an random Internet message board is time you could be studying for the LSAT or drinking beer or cutting yourself or something useful. How anyone could still be going with this shtick is absolutely fucking mind-bottling. Every time I see you've posted, I find myself both repulsed and yet compelled to read to see what ridiculous, over-the-top, insanely stupid thing you've written this time.

Please find a way to raise your LSAT. Shit, at this point, I will even pay someone to take it for you so you can get into a decent law school. Because then you would get so fucking owned by the most idiotic, drooling moron in the class, and have something else to be all butthurt about, which I'm sure you would find a way to blame on some other circumstance instead of just realizing that law school is not for you. You suck at the Internet, you suck at life, and you for goddamn sure would suck at being a lawyer. Shut up. Go away.

[Philosopher King]

What's your GPA BTW?

I can feel your pain as my GPA is over 4.1...but you know nothing I can do with this other than having a decent LSAT score...

My GPA is a 4.0 because my school doesn't have a grade higher than a good old "A." We do have a plus minus system but we don't have any A+ grade. In my opinion LSAC is stupid to use the 4.33 scale. Most students don't attend universities where an A+ grade is possible. LSAC can't justify doing this. I would have about a 4.1-4.2 if my university gave out A+ grades.

Here is why we need standardized tests for admittance to a law program. You scored a 4.0 in undergrad and are the stupidest fucking human being alive. All this time you spend on an random Internet message board is time you could be studying for the LSAT or drinking beer or cutting yourself or something useful. How anyone could still be going with this shtick is absolutely fucking mind-bottling. Every time I see you've posted, I find myself both repulsed and yet compelled to read to see what ridiculous, over-the-top, insanely stupid thing you've written this time.

Please find a way to raise your LSAT. Shit, at this point, I will even pay someone to take it for you so you can get into a decent law school. Because then you would get so fucking owned by the most idiotic, drooling moron in the class, and have something else to be all butthurt about, which I'm sure you would find a way to blame on some other circumstance instead of just realizing that law school is not for you. You suck at the Internet, you suck at life, and you for goddamn sure would suck at being a lawyer. Shut up. Go away.

What did you score in your undergrad? If you knew me before I attended college you would have probably said that I would never make it in college. College was not for me. Very few of the students that graduate from my high school go to college. You are an ignorant bigot with an irrational hatred for me. You go away.

[hoos89]

/

[bernaldiaz]

"Don't you love it when people in school are like, "I'm a bad test taker"? You mean, you're stupid. Oh, you struggle with that part where we find out what you know? Oh. No, no, I can totally relate."

-Daniel Tosh

[nsbane]

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

Hi Philosopher King,

There are schools who feel JUST the way you do! They think the LSAT really isn't that important. So they will let you in with a 155. You could go to those ABA accredited schools tomorrow if you wanted to. So I don't understand what you are upset about.

[Philosopher King]

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

Hi Philosopher King,

There are schools who feel JUST the way you do! They think the LSAT really isn't that important. So they will let you in with a 155. You could go to those ABA accredited schools tomorrow if you wanted to. So I don't understand what you are upset about.

What are these schools?

[moneybagsphd]

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

Hi Philosopher King,

There are schools who feel JUST the way you do! They think the LSAT really isn't that important. So they will let you in with a 155. You could go to those ABA accredited schools tomorrow if you wanted to. So I don't understand what you are upset about.

What are these schools?

http://www.cooley.edu/
You'll love it.

[hoos89]

/

[Philosopher King]

they're #2 in the country!

That's not true. This is a bad school. People are trying to mock me and I won't have any of it.

[nsbane]

Go to

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com

and put in your GPA and LSAT. you will see schools show up that will accept you, even if you have a 155 lsat. So you see, there are law schools out there who share your values, and understand the LSAT is insignificant compared to GPA.