Does Undergrad School Matter for Top 20 Law School?

Graduate School Law School
41

<p>well this seems to be part of the problem -- you don't realize the tone with which your posts are coming across. </p>

<p>you made a statement about how lsat scores and intelligence are correlated -- you claimed that anyone who took the lsat would appreciate this fact. someone who took it challenged the absolute nature of your statement. so you ask for their lsat score and then despite their claim to the contrary, you accuse them of being defensive about their score. </p>

<p>personally, i think your question got the answer it deserved -- "Why would it possibly matter what I got on the LSATs?" because it doesn't matter. its what is known as a "red herring." you jumping to a conclusion as to what that straightforward answer to an irrelevant question might mean was, in my opinion, rude.</p>

<p>your claim:
[quote]
I think the LSAT does correlate with intelligence and you would realize this if you have ever taken one.

[/quote]

was challenged by someone who had taken it. your claim had nothing to do with what someone had to score on the lsat to realize this.</p>

<p>are you now claiming that one has to have scored a certain amount (and thereby demonstrate a certain intelligence) to realize what you previously claimed was obvious to anyone who had taken the lsat? and if you are -- are you again going to claim surprise if someone finds that rude and offensive?</p>

<p>saying that something is "obvious" and that anyone who doesn't agree just doesn't understand because they don't know enough, just isn't a very persuasive or respectful way of presenting an argument.</p>

42

<p>q--
The LSAT is a timed test that correlates to IQ.</p>

<p>I recall the movie, 'cathc me if you can'. the protagonist, about 18 years old, hunkered down for two weeks and studied the for the bar exam, and passed. On further thought, this is not the LSAT - what we are talking about here - but it is a similar standardized test, I assume.</p>

<p>BTW, this was based on true events. the guy was some kind of genius. Did nt even need a college, undergrad or even a law school to practice law.</p>

43

<p>
[quote]
I recall the movie, 'cathc me if you can'. the protagonist, about 18 years old, hunkered down for two weeks and studied the for the bar exam, and passed. On further thought, this is not the LSAT - what we are talking about here - but it is a similar standardized test, I assume.

[/quote]
I'm not sure what your point is. Virtually all tests correlate to IQ in some respect, the question is the strength of the correlation. The LSAT likely correlates more with IQ than the bar, which is more of a knowledge test.</p>

44

<p>Though I really do hate to jump back into this thread, I have to ask those of you who are insisting that the LSAT (or the SAT, GRE, MCAT, SSAT, etc.) is in some way an IQ test to please share the studies and data on which you are basing your statements. All of the studies that I have ever seen show only a moderate correlation (correlation coefficient of between 0.35 and 0.5) between scores achieved on the LSAT and IQ. This includes studies published by LSAC itself. Now, I'm no statistics expert, but keeping in mind that correlation does not equal causation, I'm wondering whether there are conflicting studies out there showing a much stronger positive correlation between LSAT score and IQ (assuming that IQ can be kept constant by using, perhaps, only one form of IQ test, since IQ scores tend to vary depending upon the IQ testing method used). </p>

<p>Furthermore, annually the LSAC publishes studies that relate the success of law students in law school, as measured by their grades, to their LSAT scores. The results of these studies vary slightly from year to year, but show a moderate 0.4 - 0.5 positive correlation coefficient (approximately) between grades achieved in law school and LSAT score. When LSAT score is looked at in combination with UGPA, as calculated by LSAC, the correlation between the combined LSAT/UGPA rises slightly to a positive 0.5 - 0.55 (approximately) with law school performance. However, there is no presumption made about IQ in these studies. </p>

<p>In addition, please keep in mind that even among psychometrics scholars and the American Psychological Association (APA), there is little agreement on the factors that contribute to IQ nor how meaningful IQ is to a student's success or failure on standardized tests or in school. In fact, though, it is widely recognized that years of education, nutrition, wealth and genetics (and in one recent study, even the challenging nature of one's job), among other factors, all play a role in one's intelligence/IQ. </p>

<p>So, while it certainly seems to make sense to me that someone who does well on the LSAT is likely rather intelligent, since the LSAT is a test that one can and often does prepare for, I feel that it is difficult, if not impossible, to separate out the effects of studying versus native IQ-type intelligence (keeping in mind, too, that IQ is effected as much by nurture, it would seem, as it is by nature).</p>

45

<p>In "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns," (Report of a Task Force established by the Board of Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association
Released August 7, 1995), the authors (a group of highly regarded psychometricians) refer to the LSAT as an "intelligence- related test," "not intended to measure intelligence itself, but some closely related construct..."</p>

<p>Here's the actual quote:</p>

<p>“Ever since Alfred Binet's great success in devising tests to distinguish mentally retarded children from those with behavior problems, psychometric instruments have played an important part in European and American life. Tests are used for many purposes, such as selection, diagnosis, and evaluation. Many of the most widely used tests are not intended to measure intelligence itself but some closely related construct: scholastic aptitude, school achievement, specific abilities, etc. Such tests are especially important for selection purposes. For preparatory school, it's the SSAT; for college, the SAT or ACT; for graduate school, the GRE; for medical school, the MOAT; for law school, the LSAT; for business school, the GMAT. Scores on intelligence-related tests matter, and the stakes can be high.”</p>

46

<p>Here's an interesting quote from Arthur Jensen (a U.C. Berkeley professor who's highly regarded by specialists in the psychometric field, and somewhat controversial outside that field"</p>

<p>AFrom "Bias in Mental Testing," 1980, p. 113.</p>

<p>"Although IQs are an interval scale, the practical, social, economic and career implications of different IQs most certainly do not represent equal intervals. Again, this is not a fault of the IQ scale, but is the result of personal and societal values and demands. The implications and consequences of, say, a 30-point IQ difference is more significant between IQs of 70 and 100 than between IQs of 130 and 160. The importance of a given difference depends not only on its magnitude, but on whether or not it crosses over any of the social, educational, and occupational thresholds of IQ. To be sure, these thresholds are statistical and represent only differing probabilities for individuals' falling on either side of the threshold. But the differential probabilities are not negligible. Such probabilistic thresholds of this type occur in different regions of the IQ scale, not by arbitrary convention or definition, but because of the structure of the educational and occupational systems of modern industrial societies and their correlated demands on the kind of cognitive ability measured by IQ tests.</p>

<p>"The four socially and personally most important most important threshold regions on the IQ scale are those that differentiate with high probability between persons who, because of their level of general mental ability, can or cannot attend a regular school (about IQ 50), can or cannot master the traditional subject matter of elementary school (about IQ 75), can or cannot succeed in the academic or college preparatory curriculum through high school (about IQ 105), can or cannot graduate from an accredited four-year college with grades that would qualify for admission to a professional or graduate school (about IQ 115). beyond this, the IQ level becomes relatively unimportant in terms of ordinary occupational aspirations and criteria of success. That is not to say that there are not real differences between the intellectual capabilities represented by IQs of 115 and 150 or even between IQs of 150 and 180. But IQ differences in this upper part of the scale have far less personal implications than the thresholds just described and are generally of lesser importance for success in the popular sense than are certain traits of personality and character."</p>

47

<p>
[quote]
Though I really do hate to jump back into this thread, I have to ask those of you who are insisting that the LSAT (or the SAT, GRE, MCAT, SSAT, etc.) is in some way an IQ test to please share the studies and data on which you are basing your statements. All of the studies that I have ever seen show only a moderate correlation (correlation coefficient of between 0.35 and 0.5) between scores achieved on the LSAT and IQ. This includes studies published by LSAC itself. Now, I'm no statistics expert, but keeping in mind that correlation does not equal causation, I'm wondering whether there are conflicting studies out there showing a much stronger positive correlation between LSAT score and IQ (assuming that IQ can be kept constant by using, perhaps, only one form of IQ test, since IQ scores tend to vary depending upon the IQ testing method used).

[/quote]
Source? Seriously, it doesn't make any sense that this would have a significantly different correlation than the SAT - as the tests are very similar. The only thing plausible thing I can see is the preparation variance between the SAT (low) and the LSAT (high).</p>

48

<p>How to estimate IQ based on SAT and GRE...this is for the pre 1997 SAT. also, you Can raise IQ score (but not IQ) by studying to score closer to your maximum potential.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/GREIQ.aspx%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/GREIQ.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/GREIQ.aspx%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/GREIQ.aspx&lt;/a> </p>

<p>Scrole to the bottom of this page and input 1 value to predict the rest...again with the caveat that you prepare the same for all tests. YES these tests are all IQ tests, are all similar and can be used to predict eachother. </p>

<p><a href="http://hem.bredband.net/b153434/Index.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://hem.bredband.net/b153434/Index.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>from the mensa web site:</p>

<p>Membership in Mensa is open to persons who have attained a score within the upper two percent of the general population on an approved intelligence test that has been properly administered and supervised. There is no other qualification or disqualification for membership eligibility. </p>

<p>Some intelligence tests don't use IQ scores at all. Mensa has set a percentile as cutoff to avoid this confusion. Candidates for membership in Mensa must achieve a score at or above the 98th percentile on a standard test of intelligence (a score that is greater than or equal to that achieved by 98 percent of the general population taking the test). </p>

<p>Generally, there are two ways to prove that you qualify for Mensa: either take the Mensa test, or submit a qualifying test score from another test. There are a large number of intelligence tests that are "approved". </p>

<p>Approved list:
<a href="http://www.us.mensa.org/Content/AML/...yingScores.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.us.mensa.org/Content/AML/...yingScores.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>ACT Composite</p>

<p>prior to 9/89
effective 9/89</p>

<p>29
N/A</p>

<p>GMAT</p>

<p>(Percentile rank of
verbal + quantitative)**</p>

<p>95</p>

<p>GRE prior to 5/94 (math + verbal) 1250
from 5/94 to 9/01
(math + verbal + analytic) 1875</p>

<p>effective 10/01</p>

<p>N/A</p>

<p>Henmon-Nelson</p>

<p>132
LSAT*** prior to 1982 662
effective 1982 (total percentile rank) 95
Miller Analogies Test (MAT) prior to 10/04 (raw score) 66
after 10/04
(total group percentile score)</p>

<p>98</p>

<p>PSAT (taken in junior year) prior to 5/93 180
effective 5/93</p>

<p>N/A</p>

<p>PSAT (taken in senior year)
prior to 5/93
effective 5/93</p>

<p>195
N/A
SAT or CEEB prior to 9/30/74 1300
from 9/30/74 to 1/1/94 1250</p>

<p>after 1/1/94 N/A</p>

49

<p>tom - you're saying that based on my freakishly high score on the Miller Analogy Test in 1976 that I could just join MENSA? I find that very amusing.</p>

50

<p>Greybeard, that article was very interesting. I enjoyed it thoroughly. Thank you for posting it.</p>

51

<p>cartera,
I'm not saying it, Mensa is. This information was taken from their web site. So, in light of that, what's so funny?</p>

<p><a href="http://www.us.mensa.org/Content/AML/NavigationMenu/Join/SubmitTestScores/QualifyingTestScores/QualifyingScores.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.us.mensa.org/Content/AML/NavigationMenu/Join/SubmitTestScores/QualifyingTestScores/QualifyingScores.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

52

<p>tom - I wasn't really attributing it to you. I find it amusing because I have never looked into what qualified folks for Mensa, but I thought it was more rigorous. I have just never thought of performance on these tests as meaning much with regard to intellegence. I looked at them as achievement tests. I think smart people have a better chance of doing well, but I think there are plenty of smart people who don't do well. When I took the MAT, I chose it because it didn't have math sections. I joke that I suffer from some form of dyscalculia, and I have avoided math from birth. The difference between my verbal and math scores on the SAT was the length of a football field. Most of my friends took the GRE, but I smelled the math on that from a mile away. Analogies were a piece of cake to me. I understood how analogies worked well enough to figure out the math related ones, but I would have failed miserably had I done the calculations. Had law schools used the MAT score, I could have gone to Yale. I don't remember my exact LSAT score, so that says something. If my results vary so much from test to test, I'd rather not have my IQ riding on them.</p>

53

<p>sorry if i overreacted. did it occur to you that if you're smart enough to kick ass on the test that ou are smart enough for mensa?</p>

54

<p>Yeah. I was wondering the same thing.</p>

55

<p>Pretty much anyone can join Mensa, since the requirements are fairly low, and you can take as many tests, and as many different kinds, as you want.</p>

56

<p>Pretty much anyone? I'd say someone in the top 10th could probably join Mensa if they wanted to for the reason you gave. That is not "pretty much anyone".</p>

57

<p>a friend of mine he went to rutgers undergrad and right now he's starting at Upenn law school he also got admitted to notre dame gw fordham georgetown ru law and hmm i believe that was about it.</p>

58

<p>Pretty much anyone on this board (internet-savvy college graduates planning on graduate school).</p>

59

<p>You have a higher opinion of this board than I. :)</p>