How accurate a predictor is LSAT? Forum

[scribelaw]

Worse than .4 You have to square that and it gives 16% jsut so everyone knows. It really is a crapshoot but the only thing they have to go on. Regressional analysis also puts ugpa at 4% predictive quality for a great total of 20% on quantitative numbers. I took economics.

Or you watched -- and posted -- this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7_xHsce ... tube_gdata

[Mattalones]

this thread turned into a discussion on basically the title of this thread:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=108748

[TTT-LS]

.

[09042014]

Meh, I don't see a lot of evidence of correlation among my class at Northwestern. Mostly, nobody has any knowledge of or interest in other people's LSAT scores. To the extent I know about anyone's, it is mostly a result of conversations about LSN/LSD/TLS during 1L orientation. And among the people whose scores I know, there is basically no correlation at all. Some people with sick LSAT scores and below median grades, others above. Some people with lower LSAT scores and good grades, others not.

The real lesson for OP is not to worry about this too much. It is evident that you're anxious about how you'll do in law school, and that's understandable. Looking for evidence that low(er) LSAT scorers can do well, though, isn't going to be useful in any other than a placebo, though.

You have to consider range restriction. People at Northwestern mostly have extremely similar LSAT scores. Over 50% are between 166 and 172. The LSAT isn't very exact. They claim an error margin for +/- 3 points. Also the people with lower LSAT's are likely to have higher GPA's because that is how admissions works at most schools. The difference between a 170 and 175 is fairly insignificant.

But if you put 150's in competition with 170's I'm guessing the correlation would be a lot higher than .4.