3.75/166/help?

<p>There was a recent 12 page discussion on Law school discussion.org (LSD) with the topic:</p>

<p>"Topic: 166 is the worst LSAT score. Discuss". Over 100 kids replied to that thread. I read it and remember it as that score is pretty much what my own kid got. But one of the replies sort of sums up the feeling on this board. I'll quote the young lady who responded--</p>

<p>"What I didn't realize, and am realizing now, is that 166-ers, although sometimes admitted, are absolutely last minute additions..."</p>

<p>I think that kind of sums up what BDM and others who are following admittance trends have discovered.<br>
Sure it is possible for a few 166-ers to get a T-14 admittance- but it will probably be done after most other acceptances have been sent out- and only to fill those few remaining spots.
Again- there are exceptions- (ED kids with very good soft factors).<br>
But - I have to admit, I am real glad my kid has that extra point as that does seem to make a difference.
BTW- my kid isn't obsessed with getting into a T-14. I'm more familiar with the T-14 terminology than she is.</p>

<p>but if she is going to law school, and she's paying the big bucks, she may as well go to the best school she can get into. If she goes to Fordham or GW or Vanderbilt, my kid will be just fine. But it wouldn't hurt her to be a grad from Cornell- Georgetown or NW if she is given the opportunity.</p>

<p>Does anyone know what the average LSAT score is for undergraduate schools from a recent admissions cycle?</p>

<p>You're asking for the average LSAT score for all undergrads from Harvard, and then all undergrads from Princeton, and then all from MIT, etc?</p>

<p>Cal State Fullerton 148
Baruch - 149
Kennesaw State 149
City Univ. of NY 149
U New Mexico 149
Houston 149
Marist College 149
U Hawaii 150
Wright State 150
Franklin & Marshall 151
Ohio University 151
U Cincinnati 151
Marquette 151
St. John's 152
UConn 152
Michigan State 152
Arizona State 152
U Oklahoma 152
Indiana Bloomington 153
Ursinus College 153
University Maryland - Baltimore County 153
Baylor 153
Touro 153
American 154
Ohio State 154
U Oregon 154
U Florida 154
U Iowa 154
U Santa Cruz 154
VaTech 154
Rensselaer Polytech Ins 155
U Illinois 155
U Washington 155
UCSB 155
CU Boulder 155
UC Davis 155
BU 156
Calvin College 156
Rutgers College 156
UCSD 156
UCLA 156
Texas 156
George Washington 157
USC (Southern Cal) 157
NYU 158
Oberlin 158
UCLA 158
WUSTL 158
U Michigan 158
Brandeis 158
University of Saskatchewan - 159
BYU 159
Colby College 159
Emory 159
UC Berkeley 159
Vanderbilt 159
Johns Hopkins 160
William & Mary 160
UVA 160
Cornell 161
Georgetown 161
Washington & Lee 161
Notre Dame 161
U Chicago 162
Rice 162
Claremont McKenna 162
Brown 163
Columbia 163
Duke 163
UPenn 163
MIT 163
Dartmouth 164
Stanford 164
Pomona College 164
Williams 164
Yale 165
Harvard 166</p>

<p>Compiled from data reported at top-law-schools and lsd.</p>

<p>Wow, thanks for the info! My undergrad is one point above average (I am actually happy about that... thought it would be worse).</p>

<p>I don't see a few top schools in this list, namely Princeton. Does anyone have the rest of the data?</p>

<p>Princeton doesn't have a law school.</p>

<p>while princeton does not state the avg lsat score for its undergrads, they do list the number of students who have applied to various schools and the acceptances:</p>

<p>Pre-Law</a> Information Menu - Office of Career Services</p>

<p>I completely misread this thread - sorry. I know there are lots of people out there who assume Princton has a law school so I thought we had one.</p>

<p>Cartera,</p>

<p>Have you been hanging out on the meta thread today??</p>

<p>No, I had to stop even looking at that thread - I was saving too much time reading it. Is there something I should know about? I see from my last post that I can't even spell today.</p>

<p>Take a logic course. Take a logic course. Philosophy, logic, take course. Take a logic course. Take a logic course. Take a logic course. Take a logic course. Take a logic course. Take a logic course. </p>

<p>Have you taken a course in logic yet?</p>

<p>Take a logic course.</p>

<p>Maybe you have taken a logic course and I'm missing it in your post, but I cannot understand how it was not mentioned in this thread. It is pretty much a guaranteed increased score, it is almost the only thing I have ever seen that is universal, I have never seen one thing more recommended for prospective law students. Four doors down from me is a friend of mine that went to law school and burned out and works as a private admissions counselor, and his wife is a lawyer. Logic course. I never thought it was a "secret" or something, but is the only thing that comes close to 100% success rate in increasing LSAT scores in some form or another. I don't care if you have to take it at a community college, if you're worried about the score you need to take it.</p>

<p>Sorry, but I strongly disagree with the advice about taking a logic course. The skills required to perform strongly on LR/RC come more from reading and writing than they do from a course in logic. As for the LG, forget about it. A formal logic course is going to help you learn some pretty technical stuff, but it doesn't overlap a great deal with LG on the LSAT. Truth be told, most of the logical relationships that one has to juggle on the LG are simple enough that one could become comfortable with them after some self-study. Don't waste some of your college credits on a logic course.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Sorry

[/quote]

Don't apologize for an opinion, unless it somehow results in bodily injury to someone else.

[quote]
but I strongly disagree with the advice about taking a logic course. The skills required to perform strongly on LR/RC come more from reading and writing than they do from a course in logic. As for the LG, forget about it. A formal logic course is going to help you learn some pretty technical stuff, but it doesn't overlap a great deal with LG on the LSAT. Truth be told, most of the logical relationships that one has to juggle on the LG are simple enough that one could become comfortable with them after some self-study. Don't waste some of your college credits on a logic course.

[/quote]

Pretty technical stuff? An introducty logic course in a philosophy department is not formal mathematical logic. The AR section of the LSAT is logic, though. Of course the LSAT is a dumbed down version, but if you're not doing much for your LSAT scores through constant test-prep (essentially having stalled at a score) and AR is your weakest area there's nothing that's going to do more for that than a course in logic. Plenty of community colleges offer it if the OP doesn't want to spend a semester of "real" school on it. Most normal introductory courses in logic barely explore symbolic formalization, an introductory course in logic is about analysis and identification of verbal arguments and evaluation--exactly what the AR section of the LSAT is, and it's something that applies to LR as well as AR (it's also heavy on reading, which should allow someone to continue improving their reading comprehension, basically hitting the trifecta).</p>

<p>The only principle I learned in formal logic that was necessary for the LSAT was the contrapositive.</p>

<p>The usage of terminology here is kind of sketchy, because formal logic was/is mathematical logic (set theory is more popular in math, formal logic is still big in cs), and that's considered to be the same as symbolic logic--but the application of it can vary wildly, so I'm not really sure how to talk about the subject without using words someone would confuse with something else. From most course descriptions I've seen at various schools an introductory logic course in philosophy is argument evaluation, not symbolic logic or propositional/predicate calculus.</p>

<p>In my case, it was propositional/predicate logic; not sure what you mean by "calculus."</p>

<p>It's called propositional/predicate calculus or logic, whichever is fine. Calculus is sometimes a term that is used... or maybe it's just used by one person, as I only ever studied this topic under one person, and he was a little crazy...</p>

<p>I would imagine because of the use of symbols, but now I am wondering if everything I know is wrong! My world is turning upside down!</p>

<p>Propositional/predicate calculus is the same as propositional/predicate logic, but with the axioms explicitly stated such that one can derive inference rules like "If A or B, A implies C, and B implies C, then C."</p>

<p>In any case, I imagine that any logic class, informal or formal, will be helpful for the LSAT. Even if studying formal logic is not directly applicable to LSAT questions, it is indirectly applicable in that it trains the mind to reason well.</p>

<p>Strong deductive reasoning developed in formal logic will help especially on the logic games section. Similarly, strong analysis of argumentation developed in informal logic will help with analyzing verbal arguments in general.</p>

<p>For those people who said a 3.75 from Northwestern might help, my opinion is that it almost certainly will not. Northwestern doesn't exactly have a reputation for grade deflation, and honestly it's nothing special among the admits of the T14 law schools, which are dominated by schools like the Ivies, Stanford, etc. If that 3.75 were from MIT or Caltech, then maybe you'd get some consideration.</p>