GPA/LSAT what's wrong with me? Forum

[blondeone]

151, 153 and a 3.67. How did I manage that? I still got in 8 schools, but probably explains the 5 waitlists! did anyone else manage a good GPA and terrible LSAT? I blame it on time, i'm a slow reader.

[lawschoollll]

151, 153 and a 3.67. How did I manage that? I still got in 8 schools, but probably explains the 5 waitlists! did anyone else manage a good GPA and terrible LSAT? I blame it on time, i'm a slow reader.

I think the correlation between UGPA and LSAT scores is pretty close to non-existent.

[lostjake]

major?

[rockstar4488]

Nothing kind can come from this thread.

[Threepeat]

151, 153 and a 3.67. How did I manage that?

Probably close to the same reasons you decided to start this thread.

[yourstruly87]

That's great that you still got accepted to 8 schools, which schools were they if u dont mind me asking?
I'm in a similar situation

[d34d9823]

151, 153 and a 3.67. How did I manage that? I still got in 8 schools, but probably explains the 5 waitlists! did anyone else manage a good GPA and terrible LSAT? I blame it on time, i'm a slow reader.

I think the correlation between UGPA and LSAT scores is pretty close to non-existent.

That's not really true. If you look at LSN, there's a definite linear trend. OP's scores are definitely well within the scatter range though.

[lawschoollll]

151, 153 and a 3.67. How did I manage that? I still got in 8 schools, but probably explains the 5 waitlists! did anyone else manage a good GPA and terrible LSAT? I blame it on time, i'm a slow reader.

I think the correlation between UGPA and LSAT scores is pretty close to non-existent.

That's not really true. If you look at LSN, there's a definite linear trend. OP's scores are definitely well within the scatter range though.

Maybe this is right if you look at the graph for a particular school, since applicants tend to conform, at least somewhat, to that linearity you're talking about. In other words, if you're looking at HYS, you probably won't see a ton of 3.9/160s or 2.7/177s, because they don't have a realistic chance of admission. But it doesn't mean they're not out there elsewhere. The fact is, schools and majors and individual professors/classes all grade so differently, and students give such a wide range of UG effort, that a 3.0 can easily, easily outscore a 4.0 on the LSAT, and it happens with regularity.

[holydonkey]

151, 153 and a 3.67. How did I manage that?

Insert joke about blondes and logical reasoning here

[d34d9823]

151, 153 and a 3.67. How did I manage that? I still got in 8 schools, but probably explains the 5 waitlists! did anyone else manage a good GPA and terrible LSAT? I blame it on time, i'm a slow reader.

I think the correlation between UGPA and LSAT scores is pretty close to non-existent.

That's not really true. If you look at LSN, there's a definite linear trend. OP's scores are definitely well within the scatter range though.

Maybe this is right if you look at the graph for a particular school, since applicants tend to conform, at least somewhat, to that linearity you're talking about. In other words, if you're looking at HYS, you probably won't see a ton of 3.9/160s or 2.7/177s, because they don't have a realistic chance of admission. But it doesn't mean they're not out there elsewhere. The fact is, schools and majors and individual professors/classes all grade so differently, and students give such a wide range of UG effort, that a 3.0 can easily, easily outscore a 4.0 on the LSAT, and it happens with regularity.

Agreed, but if you overlay all the graphs, there will still be a strong trend, I'd guess R2 of like 0.4. Specifically, there are almost no people with 3.0/180 (which is funny, because my brother has a 2.8 and is getting 177s on his PTs right now). The fact that 3.0s can outscore 4.0s doesn't mean there's no correlation there. In fact, a 4.0/160 and a 3.0/170 would both be well within the dense scatter of the graph.

[lawschoollll]

[quote="lawschoollll
I think the correlation between UGPA and LSAT scores is pretty close to non-existent.

That's not really true. If you look at LSN, there's a definite linear trend. OP's scores are definitely well within the scatter range though.

Maybe this is right if you look at the graph for a particular school, since applicants tend to conform, at least somewhat, to that linearity you're talking about. In other words, if you're looking at HYS, you probably won't see a ton of 3.9/160s or 2.7/177s, because they don't have a realistic chance of admission. But it doesn't mean they're not out there elsewhere. The fact is, schools and majors and individual professors/classes all grade so differently, and students give such a wide range of UG effort, that a 3.0 can easily, easily outscore a 4.0 on the LSAT, and it happens with regularity.

Agreed, but if you overlay all the graphs, there will still be a strong trend, I'd guess R2 of like 0.4. Specifically, there are almost no people with 3.0/180 (which is funny, because my brother has a 2.8 and is getting 177s on his PTs right now). The fact that 3.0s can outscore 4.0s doesn't mean there's no correlation there. In fact, a 4.0/160 and a 3.0/170 would both be well within the dense scatter of the graph.[/quote]

If this is true, then I would argue that the correlation is so weak as to be essentially meaningless. Even an R2 of .4 is not that strong, and I doubt it's that high. But I don't know, I could easily be wrong.

[jh60405]

A 160 is the 90th percentile and a 180 is the 99th. They are both relatively rare. Wouldn't a better way of looking at this be to consider correlation at scores that occur more often?

Also, a GPA of 3.67 might not be that high considering the grade inflation of your school and major. Likewise, a 153 isn't actually that low. In fact a 153 is above the median. Its hard for me to imagine that the median LSAT for a 3.67 gpa is any higher than a 157, so really you're not so far off.

[d34d9823]

If this is true, then I would argue that the correlation is so weak as to be essentially meaningless. Even an R2 of .4 is not that strong, and I doubt it's that high. But I don't know, I could easily be wrong.

Haha me neither, and without access to the compiled data, there's no analytical recourse and we can sit here exchanging opinions all day. Also, LSN is likely highly self selected. There is a definite shape I'm seeing though, it's not just random scatter, which is what makes me think that there is a correlation. The shape I'm seeing for Georgetown is roughly bounded by the line from 3.9/154 to 4.1/180 and the line from 3.9/154 to 2.65/172.

[SBimmer]

A 160 is the 90th percentile and a 180 is the 99th. They are both relatively rare. Wouldn't a better way of looking at this be to consider correlation at scores that occur more often?

Also, a GPA of 3.67 might not be that high considering the grade inflation of your school and major. Likewise, a 153 isn't actually that low. In fact a 153 is above the median. Its hard for me to imagine that the median LSAT for a 3.67 gpa is any higher than a 157, so really you're not so far off.

I could be wrong, but I thought 160 was around 82nd percentile.

[Threepeat]

A 160 is the 90th percentile and a 180 is the 99th. They are both relatively rare. Wouldn't a better way of looking at this be to consider correlation at scores that occur more often?

Also, a GPA of 3.67 might not be that high considering the grade inflation of your school and major. Likewise, a 153 isn't actually that low. In fact a 153 is above the median. Its hard for me to imagine that the median LSAT for a 3.67 gpa is any higher than a 157, so really you're not so far off.

I could be wrong, but I thought 160 was around 82nd percentile.

You are correct.