Top Law Schools

Wondering if there are any who did average or maybe even quite bad on the LSAT, but ended up doing very well in law school?

Never.

I suppose "bad" and "very well" are relative terms, but yep, it can happen.

In my circle of friends there is an inverse relationship between LSAT and grades. I was right at the 25th percentile for my school and am roughly top 15%, friend of mine below the 25th LSAT percentile was at the top of our class after 1L and transferred, 3rd friend was above the 75th and is roughly median.

Almost everyone at a fourth tier school did poorly on the LSAT and yet someone ends up being first in their class at each fourth tier school every year. So, yes of course it's possible.

But you are aware this isn't the question you should be asking yourself, right? The question isn't will I do well in law school but rather will I attend a law school that offers a decent chance at employment. If you can't get into such a school now, study and retake.

cinephile wrote:Almost everyone at a fourth tier school did poorly on the LSAT and yet someone ends up being first in their class at each fourth tier school every year. So, yes of course it's possible.

I was going to say this. Barring unusual circumstances, because numbers are so important in admissions, most people end up going to school with people who had scores within a very small range of a few points. So even when you're talking 25th %ile v. 75th %ile, there isn't a vast difference in scores. More interesting would be to compare a 163 with a 175, but they're probably not at the same school. Bascially, at a given school, everyone's LSAT predicts a similar level of performance, but since they're all at the same school being graded against each other, some will do well and some won't.

(That, and there are limits to the LSAT's predictive powers, but it's hard to measure them.)

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

cinephile wrote:Almost everyone at a fourth tier school did poorly on the LSAT and yet someone ends up being first in their class at each fourth tier school every year. So, yes of course it's possible.

I was going to say this. Barring unusual circumstances, because numbers are so important in admissions, most people end up going to school with people who had scores within a very small range of a few points. So even when you're talking 25th %ile v. 75th %ile, there isn't a vast difference in scores. More interesting would be to compare a 163 with a 175, but they're probably not at the same school. Bascially, at a given school, everyone's LSAT predicts a similar level of performance, but since they're all at the same school being graded against each other, some will do well and some won't.

(That, and there are limits to the LSAT's predictive powers, but it's hard to measure them.)

Yeah, that's about right. I was totally psyched out as a 1L since my LSAT was like 1 point above the 25%ile at my school, I could have used this pep talk. There's a certain comfort in law school grades being an unpredictable combination of studying longer, studying smarter, and dumb luck. But not that much comfort when you're paying sticker.

fluffybunny wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

cinephile wrote:Almost everyone at a fourth tier school did poorly on the LSAT and yet someone ends up being first in their class at each fourth tier school every year. So, yes of course it's possible.

I was going to say this. Barring unusual circumstances, because numbers are so important in admissions, most people end up going to school with people who had scores within a very small range of a few points. So even when you're talking 25th %ile v. 75th %ile, there isn't a vast difference in scores. More interesting would be to compare a 163 with a 175, but they're probably not at the same school. Bascially, at a given school, everyone's LSAT predicts a similar level of performance, but since they're all at the same school being graded against each other, some will do well and some won't.

(That, and there are limits to the LSAT's predictive powers, but it's hard to measure them.)

Yeah, that's about right. I was totally psyched out as a 1L since my LSAT was like 1 point above the 25%ile at my school, I could have used this pep talk. There's a certain comfort in law school grades being an unpredictable combination of studying longer, studying smarter, and dumb luck. But not that much comfort when you're paying sticker.

who thinks about the lsat once s/he's in?

mephistopheles wrote:
who thinks about the lsat once s/he's in?

People who are either insecure or gloating about their own scores, but you're totally right that it's a pointless exercise.

I got a 152 and 157 on the LSAT. Squeaked my way into a T50 school. Got a 3.78 in Fall 1L. LSAT has nothing to do with law school.

UNCLawCandidate wrote:LSAT has nothing to do with law school.

let's not jump to conclusions.

Someone in my section snuck in off the waitlist and managed to snag an A+

All this discussion proves is something we all already know. UGPA/LSAT is not always a predictor of how well one will accomplish law school, and how well one accomplishes law school is not always a predictor of how well one will do in their first job. There is however a direct correlation between high UGPA/LSAT and admission to a top law school. There is also a direct correlation bewteen attendance at top law schools and top job opportunities.

As previously stated, "bad" LSATs that gain admission to "bad" law schools will always yield people who do "well" in law school.

Arrow, who wrote one of the guides to succeeding in law school, got a 159 and was top of his section at loyola law school, and transferred to Boalt.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/loyola-study-advice.html

I heard the LSAT is the best predictor of success if law school

dingbat wrote:Someone in my section snuck in off the waitlist and managed to snag an A+

I've seen this happen as well. Frankly, a lot of people didn't give a fuck in undergrad.

I am probably in the 5th percentile for LSAT at my school (I got a 159 and the 25th at my school is a 164). I just got my first semester grades back and got straight A's, which probably puts me in the top 2 or 3 % of my class. LSAT does not mean anything - it's all about how hard you are willing to work. Don't let the LSAT psych you out. People on this site are ridiculous with all their rankings bullshit and LSAT talk - do the best you can, go to the school that you want to go to, and work your tail off. The rest will fall into place.

africaforlife wrote:I am probably in the 5th percentile for LSAT at my school (I got a 159 and the 25th at my school is a 164). I just got my first semester grades back and got straight A's, which probably puts me in the top 2 or 3 % of my class. LSAT does not mean anything - it's all about how hard you are willing to work. Don't let the LSAT psych you out. People on this site are ridiculous with all their rankings bullshit and LSAT talk - do the best you can, go to the school that you want to go to, and work your tail off. The rest will fall into place.

LOL

but no 157 is going to get a kid into harvard either... just saying that in the end, the LSAT is only one indicator. There are plenty of people who may not do that well on some standardized test like the LSAT, but when given the opportunity to dive into something more substantive and to their liking, they can excel. To be fair, I frequently scored in the mid to high 160's on practice exams and dropped the ball on the day of the test, but I still got in where I wanted to go and did well. Other people can too. The negativity on this site can be awful. Inform people, sure, but don't belittle them or their choices/abilities.

cinephile wrote:Almost everyone at a fourth tier school did poorly on the LSAT and yet someone ends up being first in their class at each fourth tier school every year. So, yes of course it's possible.

My question was poorly conceived. Yeah, that makes sense.

The better question might have been do poor LSAT scorers relative to their peers at the same school ever rise to the top of the class (assuming the scores aren't so bunched together tightly that poor and excellent scorers differ by only a small, possibly meaningless, margin)?

E.g. A bottom 5% LSAT scorer at UCLA getting top 5% of class.

jwinaz wrote:

cinephile wrote:Almost everyone at a fourth tier school did poorly on the LSAT and yet someone ends up being first in their class at each fourth tier school every year. So, yes of course it's possible.

My question was poorly conceived. Yeah, that makes sense.

The better question might have been do poor LSAT scorers relative to their peers at the same school ever rise to the top of the class (assuming the scores aren't so bunched together tightly that poor and excellent scorers differ by only a small, possibly meaningless, margin)?

E.g. A bottom 5% LSAT scorer at UCLA getting top 5% of class.

It happens some URM's happen to do this its just one indicator and not a perfect correlation. I look at it like the lsat and ugpa have about a .48 correlation to ur 1L gpa. Meaning that half of it is completely dependent on other factors. So you just have to be good at those other factors.

Another analogy Emitt Smith ran a 4.8 40 yard dash. Top 5 running back of all time. Forty yard dash predicts how well an nil athlete will do. However, there are other significant variables that can't be determined heart, toughness, agility. I kinda look at it as the same thing.

There is an unusually high number of 0Ls ITT talking out of their asses.

157 on the LSAT (twice!), went to a school ranked in the 50s where my score was below median. Finished first semester first in my class (with a 4.0) and finished 1L in the top 2%. Applied to C, N and P to transfer and was accepted at all three. Summered at a V15, where i got an offer. Will be graduating this spring from my transfer school (P) with honors.

The LSAT is the best metric for predicting law school success. That does not make it an infallible or incontrovertible metric for success.