(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
-
OldBlue
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:56 am
Post
by OldBlue » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:39 am
Someone posted this on that "other" forum.
I found it interesting and thought I'd relay it. It was EXACTLY on for me.
LSAT = (SAT*/21) + 101 (m.o.e +/-5)
*old 1600 based SAT
-
snap
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 3:12 pm
Post
by snap » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:41 am
Based on this formula I should've gotten a 167 or so. I was such a slacker in high school...
-
edgarderby
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:51 pm
Post
by edgarderby » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:42 am
wow.
hit it dead on for me.
-
Soulofheaven8
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:29 pm
Post
by Soulofheaven8 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:44 am
According to this formula I should've gotten a 176; that would have been nice.
-
wolverine37
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:27 pm
Post
by wolverine37 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:46 am
I wish I got that on my LSAT.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
Corsair
- Posts: 2168
- Joined: Mon Oct 19, 1981 12:25 am
Post
by Corsair » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:55 am
..
-
the rza
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:33 am
Post
by the rza » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:56 am
gave me a 160, got a 167
-
Da Stain
- Posts: 498
- Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:50 am
Post
by Da Stain » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:56 am
spot on. f'in creepy
Want to continue reading?
Register for access!
Did I mention it was FREE ?
Already a member? Login
-
chris0805
- Posts: 661
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:12 pm
Post
by chris0805 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:59 am
Pretty dead on for me... though I did drop seven points from my last three practice tests to the real thing... not sure that means anything at all though.
-
jlbarde
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 12:00 am
Post
by jlbarde » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:01 am
gave me a 171, I got a 168. woulda been nice, but I also took the SAT 5 times... and my first couple scores were much much worse
-
Dadric
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:25 am
Post
by Dadric » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:07 am
Took the ACT, not the SAT.
Wish there was a formula for that =/
-
cc0800
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:31 pm
Post
by cc0800 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:11 am
gave me 167, i got a 170
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
edgarderby
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:51 pm
Post
by edgarderby » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:11 am
1570-1600 35
1510-1560 34
1450-1500 33
1390-1440 32
1350-1380 31
1310-1340 30
1270-1300 29
1230-1260 28
1200-1220 27
1160-1190 26
1120-1150 25
1090-1110 24
1050-1080 23
1010-1040 22
970-1000 21
930-960 20
890-920 19
840-880 18
800-830 17
750-790 16
700-740 15
630-690 14
570-620 13
510-560 12
450-500 11
410-440 10
400 9
-
Origin
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:56 pm
Post
by Origin » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:14 am
Said I should have got a 168. I win.
-
TheRedDeath
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:00 am
Post
by TheRedDeath » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:16 am
Gave me a 167, actually got a 169. Not bad.
-
troutbeck
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:39 pm
Post
by troutbeck » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:16 am
got it exactly
very cool
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
edgarderby
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:51 pm
Post
by edgarderby » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:17 am
Kayos, that means:
YOU GOT LUCKY, SON!
But congrats anyway. Enjoy Yale when the time comes. haha
-
rms5005
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:02 pm
Post
by rms5005 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:24 am
wow thats pretty sick...said i shudda got a 165--got a 172 but only after getting a 160 the first time so 166 avg...pretty dead on
-
purplepansy
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:45 pm
Post
by purplepansy » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:42 am
Took the ACT, not the SAT.
Works for ACT too pretty much.
I just used a converter I found through google, found the range of SAT scores I would've had and it gave me mine perfectly if I chose the correct range.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
-
Dadric
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:25 am
Post
by Dadric » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:47 am
Using the range for my ACT score Edgar posted, it says I should have gotten a 166...lower than my cold diagnostic. Looks like I'm WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER on this one.
-
Hitachi
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 4:38 pm
Post
by Hitachi » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:07 am
Nice, 1660 on the SAT for Rossum
-
prettypithy
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:08 am
Post
by prettypithy » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:32 am
Am I the only one who doesn't get it? I'm perplexed. I got a 1350--someone tell me what my LSAT score should be!
-
awesomerossum
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:39 pm
Post
by awesomerossum » Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:42 am
Sorry, I use a different formula for calculating SAT-LSAT correlation. My old tutor said that one's starting point should be the verbal score with the last zero removed and a one added to the front.
I scored an 800 on the verbal. Technically, I should've started from a 180.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login