Evidence of Columbia's liency on multiple LSATs Forum

[BillsFan9907]

Officially Columbia's policy seems to say one thing, while the respected users on here are pretty adamant that it's your best LSAT score that counts. Where is the evidence for this view? Is it just tons of anecdotal info over the years collected on here and from LSN?

[usernotfound]

Officially Columbia's policy seems to say one thing, while the respected users on here are pretty adamant that it's your best LSAT score that counts. Where is the evidence for this view? Is it just tons of anecdotal info over the years collected on here and from LSN?

It's not just Columbia, it's pretty much every law school with possibly the expectation of Yale. Law schools are only required to submit highest scores to U.S. World News and Reports, which gives them all the incentive to only care about top score, as their rankings by USWNAR is VERY important to them.

[BillsFan9907]

So pretty much the logic is something like this - despite what they may say, they have everything to gain from admitting someone who got something in the 160s then 170s, above median, and there is no rational reason for them not to do it.

[Ti Malice]

Elterrible's statistical analysis showed that some schools do in fact penalize retakers a bit (don't remember about Columbia -- use the search function and find his blog). However, under no circumstances are you better off with score N than you would be with score N+1 after an additional sitting.

[BillsFan9907]

Seeing a lot of references to him/her, but the username doesn't appear to exist.

[drawstring]

Seeing a lot of references to him/her, but the username doesn't appear to exist.

elterrible78

[Balthy]

http://admissionsbythenumbers.blogspot.com/

here's his blog

[esse est percipi]

"Even though the ABA requires that we report the highest LSAT score, the Committee considers the entire LSAT testing history when evaluating applications for admission." -Columbia Law FAQ page

They're not going to average, but of course multiple LSATS will figure into the equation (it's just a matter of to what extent). Keep in mind that averaged LSATS have higher predictive power than the highest score. So to the extent that schools value the predictive power of your score, they will definitely care about multiple attempts.

[Howl]

"Even though the ABA requires that we report the highest LSAT score, the Committee considers the entire LSAT testing history when evaluating applications for admission." -Columbia Law FAQ page

They're not going to average, but of course multiple LSATS will figure into the equation (it's just a matter of to what extent). Keep in mind that averaged LSATS have higher predictive power than the highest score. So to the extent that schools value the predictive power of your score, they will definitely care about multiple attempts.

This might be slightly off-topic, but I wonder if high gpa/glowing recs can ameliorate the predictive power of multiple lsats? For example, if you have a high uGPA and some glowing recs from profs who are convinced that you'll shine academically, do you think they'll be more inclined to see the higher lsat score as indicative of true law school performance?

[RhymesLikeDimes]

I would guess it only matters for borderline candidates, or people who saw gigantic bumps ( like 146, 152, 171). If you are going from 166 to 172, they don't care. You are obviously smart enough to make it at Columbia.

[RhymesLikeDimes]

This might be slightly off-topic, but I wonder if high gpa/glowing recs can ameliorate the predictive power of multiple lsats? For example, if you have a high uGPA and some glowing recs from profs who are convinced that you'll shine academically, do you think they'll be more inclined to see the higher lsat score as indicative of true law school performance?

It depends on the jump, and how high that 2nd score is (152 -> 167, then no. 164 -> 172, then you have a great shot). If you were hoping to sneak in with a sub-25th LSAT, your GPA and Recs probably won't do much to help you (though the GPA is much more important).

[esse est percipi]

"Even though the ABA requires that we report the highest LSAT score, the Committee considers the entire LSAT testing history when evaluating applications for admission." -Columbia Law FAQ page

They're not going to average, but of course multiple LSATS will figure into the equation (it's just a matter of to what extent). Keep in mind that averaged LSATS have higher predictive power than the highest score. So to the extent that schools value the predictive power of your score, they will definitely care about multiple attempts.

This might be slightly off-topic, but I wonder if high gpa/glowing recs can ameliorate the predictive power of multiple lsats? For example, if you have a high uGPA and some glowing recs from profs who are convinced that you'll shine academically, do you think they'll be more inclined to see the higher lsat score as indicative of true law school performance?

Definitely. But GPA and letters of recommendation are predictors of law school success as well. Something like really great volunteer work (that probably has little correlative value to law school grades) probably wouldn't cut it.

Another thing I've wondered about is whether schools still value large jumps in the LSAT because they represents a kind of diligence and perseverance in the applicants (regardless of the predictive power). It probably says a lot about someone if they can increase their LSAT from a 150 to a 173. I take it that this might be the rationale for why some schools say they don't care *at all* about multiple LSATs.