<p>Is there any correlation there at all? I am talking ballpark nothing exact.</p>
<p>I have no idea about accuracy, but I've heard LSAT=.048(SAT)+100, where SAT is out of 1600</p>
<p>Yes, there is very much a correlation. I've never seen a scientific study on the subject. From asking around and checking with friends, it seems to me like SAT/21 + 101 +/- 5 has worked pretty well. (This is very, very similar to what BK suggests above.) But this is just anecdotal.</p>
<p>That formula worked for me and I took the SAT in 1971 and the LSAT in 1980. Both tests were different "way back then," but the formula was still quite accurate.</p>
<p>My kids' friends use the verbal SAT score, drop the zero at the end, stick a one in front and say your predicted LSAT range is -3 to +3, admittedly a large range. </p>
<p>So, if you scored a 700 verbal SAT, your predicted LSAT is 167-173.</p>
<p>Hm. So that's approximately (SAT/2)/10 + 100. Very similar.</p>
<p>I haven't seen the LSAT in years, but I'm assuming from this discussion that there is no longer a math section? They used to be either 2 parts verbal/1 part math or vice versa. The math killed me - as it did in the SAT. If my verbal SAT score had been a predictor of my LSAT score, I could have gone to Yale.</p>
<p>LSAT is now 2 sections on arguments -- very short little things; 1 section on logic games, where you have a set of elements that have to obey certain rules as you try to fit them into a set of spaces; and one section on reading comprehension.</p>
<p>So, with some prep- if you score a 700+ on SAT verbal, you should have a shot at getting 170 on the LSAT? That score coupled with a high GPA from a highly selective undergrad institution will have you looking at what law schools? What else is important in preparing for possible law school admittance?</p>
<p>1.) Personally, I'd still use both sections. The logic games section probably correlates pretty well with the math portion of the SAT.
2.) Law school is dominantly a numbers game. A 170 with a high GPA (say, 3.9) stands a healthy chance at Columbia and NYU.</p>
<p>Hope their is a correlation. My predicted score should be over a 170 then. Does anyone know what are the best books for preparing for the LSAT. I can't afford a prep class but I need at least a 175 for law school so I need textbooks.</p>
<p>You ... need... a 175? There's no way a score in that range can possibly be guaranteed, no matter how good a testtaker you are.</p>
<p>Yeah, I need a 175. My parents don't want me to be a lawyer so I have no expected financial support. I am also an international student. I need to get financial aid. Also I would need loans. Schools that would give me the support I need fall under the Harvard-Columbia-Yale realm. To cut a long story short- I need a 175 so what books would you recommend?</p>
<p>First: I used Next</a> 10 Actual, Official LSAT Preptests. There's a newer version [url=<a href="http://www.amazon.com/More-Actual-Official-LSAT-PrepTests/dp/0979305039/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1210287367&sr=8-1%5Dhere.%5B/url">http://www.amazon.com/More-Actual-Official-LSAT-PrepTests/dp/0979305039/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1210287367&sr=8-1]here.[/url</a>]</p>
<p>Second: What? Plenty of schools will offer full-tuition or otherwise huge scholarships to candidates they really want. Harvard/Yale are the least likely to offer those (since they offer none). A high LSAT helps here, of course, but your logic is completely backwards. Michigan's Darrow, Columbia's Hamilton, and Penn's Levy are among other high-dollar-sum candidates.</p>
<p>Third, to reiterate: There are no books on the market that are going to guarantee anybody a 175. That's way too high a score to be immune to even a fairly mild test-day drop.</p>
<p>I didn't say I am certainly going to get a 175 or even above a 170. I am just setting that as my target score. Michigan darrow, columbia hamiltons and penn's levy require at least a 170+ and they are on my list. I just gave harvard as an example- I keep forgetting people worship harvard and see it as the ultimate- I was actually using it to refer to the whole top 20 law schools.
So what I meant was that I need a high LSAT to get aid at any school not necessarily the big names- I am not really choosy</p>
<p>Oh and thanks. About something concerning logic games. I remember taking a practice LSAT in my freshman year- i had nothing to do that summer- and I had a diagnostic test of 165 but I did really badly in the logic.</p>
<p>I don't know what your post says.</p>
<p>Sefago, If you didn't do as well on the games relative to the other sections, be thankful. Games are the easiest to improve on. Reading comp is the section where people make little progress.</p>
<p>I do well in reading because I read a lot of books and enjoy critical reading.logic sucked though. I felt it was like the analogy on the old SAts. I screwed up bigtime in the analogies of the SAT</p>
<p>Not to be blunt, but if you don't fare well at logic, maybe you should rethink your plans. The LSAT is mainly logic-related: Logical Reasoning & Logic Games for example. Law school requires logic. Plus the Bar Exam is (so I hear) much harder than the LSAT.</p>
<p>But I'm not too sure what you mean by "logic" either so maybe my advice should be ignored. Are you just referring to the Games section? Or the Reasoning section?</p>