| Topic Name: |
Give It to Me Straight |
| Message Name: |
Rough Predictor |
| Date Posted: |
10/08/2002 |
| In Reply To: |
Here's my theory for predicting law school relative success.
From what I hear, the LSAT is a fairly accurate predictor of law school success. So if you go to a law school at which your LSAT is in the top quartile of incoming 1L's, then you would have a good chance at finishing in the top 25%, and you would have an even better chance of finishing in the top of your class if your LSAT score is way above the top range of incoming LSAT scores.
Maybe this is nothing new, but I've heard there's nothing to the "big fish in a little pond" law school strategy, in other words, don't go to a place simply because you think you'll finish in the top of your class there. But if the LSAT truly is an accurate predictor of law school success, then maybe going to a place simply b/c your score is superior to the competition is a good idea, if you're trying to graduate at the top of your class anyway.
Is it really worth it to struggle to bring up your LSAT, when in the end, you may get into a school almost out of your range, which will probably result in your getting creamed by the competition?
With the exception of a booming economy, isn't relative standing in your class more important than school name? Especially if you go to a regional school and wants to work locally? |
| Message: |
The LSAT is only a ROUGH predictor of how well you will do. There isn't some sort of wacky 1 to 1 correlation. What that means is that only big jumps (150, 160, 170, etc) in your score will predict your success (if at all)- the same big jumps that seperate the tiers. Trust me, you're much better off going to a 1st tier then a 2nd, and a top 5 vs a low 1st even. Of course, you're right about the regional thing. But know that if you have any intention of ever relocating that the name of your law school will always follow you around and open, or close, doors for you.
|
|
