| Topic Name: |
ban the LSAT |
| Message Name: |
Hmm... |
| Date Posted: |
01/04/2002 |
| In Reply To: |
I mean everything in a friendly way too - I apologize if I've said anything that has offended...
On one level, we are arguing past each other... I agree that the LSAT is way overweighted. But it is not "meaningless." If only from a practical standpoint, it gives the adcomms a practical tool for easily comparing applicants from different backgrounds.
The number of people that you are talking about -- people who went to top 25 schools (liberal arts schools, I take it, like Vassar, Wesleyan, Amherst, etc., some of which may have stopped requiring the SAT, etc.) that don't require SAT, and who also had 3.9s and also did poorly on the LSAT -- in absoulte and relative terms is so extremely small that it doesn't do much to support your argument.
Yeah, it sucks for that small number of people who are probably really smart -- they won't go top 5 - but they will probably go top tier ANYWAY and will be successful despite not going to a top 5 law school. |
| Message: |
I've heard of studies that tend to show that LSAT is a slightly better predictor of law school success than UGPA. Both are pretty bad, according to those studies.
In any case, my opinion is that the LSAT is far more indicative of my abilities than my GPA. Of course, that's easy for me to say with a 2.8/177! But the 2.8 was in a top mathematics program. I easily could have chosen psychology or sociology - easier majors at Duke - and gotten a 3.4 or so while doing MUCH less work.
In fact, the average UGPA for a math major at Duke is about a 3.0, while the average for a psych major is about a 3.3... and that doesn't even take into account the self-selection that takes place which results in generally smarter and more motivated students choosing math as opposed to other majors.
The LSAT isn't a great test, but at least it measures something that is defined... something that is the same for everyone. To compare a 3.4 in psych to a 3.4 in math at Duke is a joke... the latter is far, far superior. The difference is easily worth half a grade point, in my opinion.
On the other hand, my wife is getting shafted two ways... she was also a math major, and her numbers are 3.6/160. So not only is her 3.6 really much, much better than the normal 3.6, but she also isn't a great tester (although of course 160 is a pretty good score). So I definitely have sympathy for those who are frustrated by the importance of the LSAT.
|
|
