Hi everyone,
I'll be applying next cycle to hopefully start law school in the fall of 2022. I was pretty happy when i received my score on my LSAT-flex, but now I'm a little concerned because I am constantly seeing posts online about how more people are taking the LSAT than ever before. It also seems like a higher percentage than normal of takers are earning high scores in the 170+ range. Do you think there is sufficient reason to worry about a high score not being worth what it might have been in previous cycles? How high do you think school medians will jump for next cycle? Interested to hear your responses.
High LSAT-Flex Scores Forum
-
ALCA1920
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:42 pm
Re: High LSAT-Flex Scores
It's hard to say where the medians are going to go next cycle. Everyone online was panicking last cycle because there was a 150% spike in 165+ scorers, yet except for three schools, none of the T20 medians went up. A lot of the t30 medians and certain t40 medians went up instead, so my guess is that those high scorers took the scholarship money at lower-ranked schools. It just so happens that I applied to NDLS a few months ago and I was confident that I'd get in with $$$, but I got waitlisted instead. Kinda shat on my holiday mood, but the rest of the cycle is moving along as expected. The flip side is that I got other T30 offers with $$$$, even when their medians went up, so I'm pretty happy about that. If these high scorers apply broadly across the T100, none of the medians should go up. If they all cluster in the same 10 schools, like they did in the 20-30 range this cycle, those schools' medians will go up.
As to the question of whether a high (re: 170+) score will not be worth as much, that's debatable. LSAC released a statement not long ago reassuring everyone that the format of the exam isn't meant to help anyone in particular, and that test takers are graded by the same rigorous standards as previous administrations. Unless you think LSAC's psychometricians are making serious flaws in their methodology because you're aware of their inner workings, trust that they know what they're doing. Yea, there was an increase in 165+ (especially 170+) scorers sometime during last cycle, but a 170 is still a 170 and a 165 is a 165 if you look at some of the applicants on LSData. I even got a prefer waitlist at Gtown while below both medians. So idk, the uptick in high scorers hasn't affected me too much aside form the notre dame decision.
As to the question of whether a high (re: 170+) score will not be worth as much, that's debatable. LSAC released a statement not long ago reassuring everyone that the format of the exam isn't meant to help anyone in particular, and that test takers are graded by the same rigorous standards as previous administrations. Unless you think LSAC's psychometricians are making serious flaws in their methodology because you're aware of their inner workings, trust that they know what they're doing. Yea, there was an increase in 165+ (especially 170+) scorers sometime during last cycle, but a 170 is still a 170 and a 165 is a 165 if you look at some of the applicants on LSData. I even got a prefer waitlist at Gtown while below both medians. So idk, the uptick in high scorers hasn't affected me too much aside form the notre dame decision.
