Passing the bar/succeeding in law school with a low lsat score

[TrickyHunter]

I got a 146 on the LSAT, and I am starting at a Canadian law school this September. All over the internet, I hear Americans saying that people with a score in the 140s "should not go to law school," "will not succeed in law school," and "will not pass the bar." Do any of these statements apply to Canadians (to the same degree)?  

I know that the LSAT has strong predictive validity, but that only accounts for a relatively small amount of variance in 1l grades. 

[CleanHands]

I mean, you know and cited the statistics on this point.

Anecdotally there were top performers with LSAT scores below the admission medians in my class, but for my school that would still be in the 160s, which is a world away from your score (percentile in the low 80s vs 26th).

Also anecdotally, I know a handful of classmates who really struggled to keep up with the rest of the class and those admitted through special categories (with stats that wouldn't be good enough for general admission) were overrepresented in that cohort.

A 146 is frankly a terrible score and I'm extremely biased about what I think that represents so I'm reticent about vocalizing it. But I will say this: success in law school and the bar course/exams is the least of what you need to be concerned about. You can get a JD (it's almost impossible to fail out as long as you write your exams and submit your assignments) and you can get called (also not a high bar--no pun intended) but you are still going to have an extremely rough time in this field if your cognitive abilities are not on par with your peers in the field and this is reflected in your output. This is something that people are often reluctant to state explicitly even though it's abundantly obvious.

Good luck, try not to worry about what anyone thinks or what the score represents, and I hope you prove me wrong about what a 146 LSAT means.

Edited August 6, 2021 by CleanHands

[TrickyHunter]

9 minutes ago, CleanHands said:

I mean, you know and cited the statistics on this point.

Anecdotally there were top performers with LSAT scores below the admission medians in my class, but for my school that would still be in the 160s, which is a world away from your score (percentile in the low 80s vs 26th).

Also anecdotally, I know a handful of classmates who really struggled to keep up with the rest of the class and those admitted through special categories (with stats that wouldn't be good enough for general admission) were overrepresented in that cohort.

A 146 is frankly a terrible score and I'm extremely biased about what I think that represents so I'm reticent about vocalizing it. But I will say this: success in law school and the bar course/exams is the least of what you need to be concerned about. You can get a JD (it's almost impossible to fail out as long as you write your exams and submit your assignments) and you can get called (also not a high bar--no pun intended) but you are still going to have an extremely rough time in this field if your cognitive abilities are not on par with your peers in the field and this is reflected in your output. This is something that people are often reluctant to state explicitly even though it's abundantly obvious.

Good luck, try not to worry about what anyone thinks or what the score represents, and I hope you prove me wrong about what a 146 LSAT means.

Blunt, but also somewhat reassuring in regards to JD completion and passing the bar. People say that the LSAT is a learnable test. I think that the fact some people spend thousands of hours preparing perhaps discounts the usefulness of an LSAT score as a general assessment of cognitive ability. Maybe a diagnostic score is the best possible predictor? However, you were still in the right to mention cognitive ability since this profession involves arguing with some of the country's most intelligent people. 

[LMP]

You likely know the answer to this question better than anyone else. 

No one but you can know why you did poorly on the LSAT. If the answer is because you simply don't do well on standardized tests or you didn't really study than I suppose it may not be a strong indicator of your success. 

If the reason you did poorly is because your reading comprehension and logical reasoning skills are bad, well, that may not bode well for you come law school and legal practice.

[Renerik]

5 hours ago, TrickyHunter said:

I think that the fact some people spend thousands of hours preparing perhaps discounts the usefulness of an LSAT score as a general assessment of cognitive ability.

I was listening to a psychometrician talk about their work on the LSAT in the early 2000s. It's not only about testing your cognitive ability, but seeing if you can put the work in to do better on certain sections (LG especially). I agree that it's learnable, because that's partially by design. What does that say about work ethic if someone doesn't put the work in to getting at least above the 50th percentile?

Edit: I think this goes too far in the other direction but Gladwell, a well respected journalist, speaks about LSAT validity in this podcast (https://www.pushkin.fm/episode/the-tortoise-and-the-hare/). Systematic problems pop up by rewarding test-takers for putting in lots of study time towards the LSAT, but being a lawyer isn't just about being the smartest in the room, but also being a good worker bee. Gladwell goes on to point out a few lawyers who are rockstars and were admitted with low LSAT scores, but they're exceptions. 

Edited August 7, 2021 by Renerik

[Whist]

Remember that your GPA is usually weighed just as much as the LSAT, or a bit more at some schools. And since you got in, the admissions committee saw something in your file that makes them believe you're capable. That aside, the LSAT doesn't just test your logical/spatial reasoning and comprehension, it tests whether you can do that kind of thinking under pressure. Since one or two questions wrong/right can alter scores a lot, I don't place much faith in a 168 necessarily being a better student/lawyer than a 162, just as examples. But I would put stock in a 170 having an easier time in a legal career than a 150, if both those scores were earnest efforts.

I've more than once heard the phrase that your stats don't define you, which is true. There are different kinds of intelligence or cognitive skills. But only some are going to help when it comes to the legal field. You're the only one who knows why you didn't do well on the LSAT. There are valid reasons for some people to not do well that can be overcome. Yet if it's genuinely because you struggle with reasoning and reading comprehension, no one has the right to tell you what to do, but you may be looking at an uphill fight for your future career.

[Electricity]

How much work did you put into scoring a 146, and what study resources did you use? If you prepped for months, wrote all or most of the practice tests, and weren't able to crack 150, I think you'll probably face some serious challenges down the road. If, on the other hand, you basically rolled out of bed one day and wrote a 146 having barely studied, that might be a different story. 

[TrickyHunter]

I did not take the LSAT seriously. I was entitled and thought that I deserved to go to law school because I had a high GPA. My attitude was that a good LSAT score is one that got you into law school, which turned out to be a 146. Never in my life have I been concerned about my cognitive ability. Maybe I could do better if I took the LSAT again and seriously studied. Or perhaps I do have lacklustre cognitive abilities and never realized it (dunning-Kruger effect, eh?) 

Either way, the LSAT is designed to predict student success in law school, and I have the opportunity to attend law school and test its predictive validity on myself, which is the only sample that actually matters to me (N = 1) 
 
Also, my dad is a lawyer, and he has been my mentor on this entire journey. He thinks I can do it, but he has some biases for obvious reasons. 

Edited August 7, 2021 by TrickyHunter

[RIP-Joel]

 

11 minutes ago, TrickyHunter said:

I did not take the LSAT seriously. I was entitled and thought that I deserved to go to law school because I had a high GPA. My attitude was that a good LSAT score is one that got you into law school, which turned out to be a 146. Never in my life have I been concerned about my cognitive ability. Maybe I could do better if I took the LSAT again and seriously studied. Or perhaps I do have lacklustre cognitive abilities and never realized it (dunning-Kruger effect, eh?) 

Either way, the LSAT is designed to predict student success in law school, and I have the opportunity to attend law school and test its predictive validity on myself, which is the only sample that actually matters to me (N = 1) 
 
Also, my dad is a lawyer, and he has been my mentor on this entire journey. He thinks I can do it, but he has some biases for obvious reasons. 

I havent applied yet but I think what you just said about not caring about the LSAT shows a problem with your work ethic (which could impact your experience in law school) But that's another discussion. 

Now I'm not trying to act arrogant when I say this but a 146 is abnormally low. I remember on ls.ca on the ryerson acceptance thread for this year, there was a girl who had dyslexia and still managed a 152 without accommodations. If you do not have any health issues and you still scored a 146, I think that says something about your ability to analyze arguments and your logical reasoning.

However, what I just said could just be full of shit and a 146 is just a number that indicates zero about a person. 

[CleanHands]

2 hours ago, MA1199 said:

If you do not have any health issues and you still scored a 146, I think that says something about your ability to analyze arguments and your logical reasoning.

Yeah...

The OP took my post on the chin and I respect that, so I don't really want to dunk on them.

But I will say I think that the extent to which the LSAT is "learnable" and about effort more than aptitude is often overstated on these forums. And it's a line that a whole industry of LSAT prep book sellers and tutors have an interest in selling, so they push it hard and it gets repeated here. And then it's the grinders who successfully improve from terrible to respectable scores that talk about it most on forums because they are the people who have real answers and insight to offer on the subject, while people who repeatedly received poor scores don't talk about it because it's embarrassing and they don't know the answers, and people who effortlessly got high scores don't talk about it because it comes across as arrogant and they wouldn't know how to advise someone to improve because they didn't need to. So this all combines to create a false perception that the LSAT is all a matter of work over any sort of innate ability.

But those grinders are outliers, as demonstrated by stats that were posted on the old forum. It showed that the average improvement on a second attempt at an LSAT was something like 2 points. And anecdotally it's seemed very clear and consistent in my experience that the typical person who scored in the 170s put in far less work than the typical person who struggled to hit a standard "competitive" score by Canadian standards (low 150s/high 160s).

Further, there are some people who legitimately are outliers and legitimately did work their ass off, write every prep test, read every prep book, take personalized tutoring sessions, etc to increase their score 30 points. But some people got the same score on a diagnostic or blind write. The grinders will say it doesn't matter that they had to work harder because they ended up in the same place and got admitted to the same school (assuming similar profiles otherwise). But if the LSAT means anything and has any application to the practice of law (and I think anyone who claims it does not is fooling themselves), it is going to be a hell of a lot harder and require a hell of a lot more work being a lawyer who has to make use of every imaginable resource before fully grasping a concept than it will be to be a lawyer who can read a statute, case or other source and immediately comprehend the nuances of it (if the former person wants their work products to match the quality of the latter's).

I'm not going to claim that the LSAT is a completely perfect assessment of reading comprehension and logical reasoning that is universally relevant to all applications of those cognitive skills. But it's a pretty good indicator relative to other potential metrics. And I think that the degree to which law school and the legal field are exceptionally rough on people who simply aren't that bright is something that is very important to talk about and is almost never talked about for a variety of reasons. People don't want to come across as arrogant and bigging themselves up and overstating the intellectual complexity of their work. Law school and learning the ropes in practice is humbling for most and this amplifies that desire not to come across that way. It's also politicized because when one implies some barrier to entry to the profession would be justified there are all sorts of diversity and inclusion concerns triggered by that. So it's just something people don't want to touch and they default to encourage anyone and everyone to go to law school and enter the profession if that's what they want. But I know people who have struggled a lot in law school and legal practice and not for a lack of effort and I don't think law schools did them a favour by admitting them.

OP might not fall in to that category; I don't really know them or their story. But I think their question is an important and interesting one because it's gotten us talking about this.

Edited August 7, 2021 by CleanHands

[TrickyHunter]

As a cognitive psychology major, this discussion is as interesting as it is depressing.

@CleanHands , I have a hypothetical for you. Say that in my first year I defy all the statistical odds that are stacked against me and I land in the top 10/20th percentile of my class (without having a stress induced hart attack from all work I have to do with my slow brain). In that case, would you be less concerned with my ability to thrive or even get by as a lawyer?
 
I am going to discuss this with my former thesis supervisor.

 

Also, in my masters I have taken “pseudo” law exams that are comparable to the exams that law students get. I was at the very top of the distribution in that class. If you have the time lol you can read my exam and that could possibly confirm or deny if I’m slow aha.

[CheeseToast]

Did you actually study and prep for the LSAT?

[123]

17 minutes ago, TrickyHunter said:

As a cognitive psychology major, this discussion is as interesting as it is depressing.

If you're already committed to going, this discussion might be interesting and depressing. But it's not going to be useful for you.  

If you're going, you're going. In that case, work hard in law school and hope for the best. I'm not sure what other constructive advice we can offer you beyond that. The only information we have is that you apparently did well in undergrad, and did terribly on the LSAT. Doing terribly on the LSAT doesn't bode particularly well for you in law school. And given that's pretty well all the information we have about you, the responses are going to be relatively negative. Does that mean you can't succeed in the legal profession? Not at all. The LSAT is not a perfect predictor of future success. And from the sounds of it, your score might not be indicative of your abilities, because you didn't try. But again, if you've already decided to go, I'm not sure how dwelling on your LSAT score helps you. I think you'll just have to shoot your shot. 

25 minutes ago, TrickyHunter said:

Also, in my masters I have taken “pseudo” law exams that are comparable to the exams that law students get. I was at the very top of the distribution in that class. If you have the time lol you can read my exam and that could possibly confirm or deny if I’m slow aha.

I don't know what this is. But your score on a law exam, pseudo or otherwise, before you've studied law and not curved against other law students isn't predictive of anything. 

[Lawllapalooza]

29 minutes ago, TrickyHunter said:

Also, in my masters I have taken “pseudo” law exams that are comparable to the exams that law students get. I was at the very top of the distribution in that class. If you have the time lol you can read my exam and that could possibly confirm or deny if I’m slow aha.

I feel like you asked a question about a trend (e.g. on average, do lower LSAT scores tend to be correlated with lower performance in law school and beyond) and now you are trying to defend yourself personally against the response. Unless my reading comprehension is horrible (which, admittedly, it truly may be), I don't think that anyone is accusing you of being unintelligent or lacking the ability to succeed. Hearing that someone performed poorly on the LSAT is a red flag when it's some of the only information presented, but it sounds like you have more than enough confidence that your score is not indicative of your intelligence, your ability to reason, etc. 

Edited August 7, 2021 by Lawllapalooza
grammar

[TrickyHunter]

39 minutes ago, Lawllapalooza said:

I feel like you asked a question about a trend (e.g. on average, do lower LSAT scores tend to be correlated with lower performance in law school and beyond) and now you are trying to defend yourself personally against the response. Unless my reading comprehension is horrible (which, admittedly, it truly may be), I don't think that anyone is accusing you of being unintelligent or lacking the ability to succeed. Hearing that someone performed poorly on the LSAT is a red flag when it's some of the only information presented, but it sounds like you have more than enough confidence that your score is not indicative of your intelligence, your ability to reason, etc. 

Yes what I ultimately want to know is if I can personally succeed. However, the discussion of general trends is relevant to the readers of this forum in the future.

Thank you everyone for your responses.

 

I would love to hear from some low scorers who are now in law school or have graduated. Although there probably aren’t many as low as me who got accepted lol.

[Psychometronic]

Come back after midterm grades come out and tell us how you did. Chances are, you’ll probably be average. 

[BlockedQuebecois]

Probabilistically, you’re more likely than not to be a below average law student. 50% of students are below average, and you have an atrocious LSAT score that you know is correlated with poor 1L performance. 

But the only way to know if you can personally succeed is to go to law school.

There’s an interesting discussion to be had about whether students who are likely to be below average students should go to law school (and that discussion will vary based on what school they go to), but it doesn’t seem like that’s what you’re hoping to get out of this conversation. 

[Avatar Aang]

Look, OP, I will be straight with you. I find your attitude off-putting. I know people who worked very hard on the LSAT, could not do well, and either had to go abroad for law school or crush their law school dreams altogether. People try for years to get into law school. If you come from a BIPOC, first generation, etc. background, then you likely do not have lawyers in the family to guide you, and other personal issues to deal with as you prepare for the rigorous law school admissions process. Meanwhile, there is you saying that you didn't even bother to try at all on the LSAT as you felt a sense of entitlement, have a lawyer parent that is guiding you in this process, and you still got into a Canadian law school. Moreover, you are expecting to perform in the top 10-20% of the class once you get there. 

Stop touting about your privilege and consider yourself fortunate that you even got into a Canadian law school with your shitty attitude towards the LSAT. No one here is going to stroke your ego by saying that you can succeed in law school with a shitty LSAT score. All you can really do is work hard once you get there and hope things pan out. Get this LSAT thing out of your mind because you've passed this stage and move on already.

 

[TrickyHunter]

1 minute ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Probabilistically, you’re more likely than not to be a below average law student. 50% of students are below average, and you have an atrocious LSAT score that you know is correlated with poor 1L performance. 

But the only way to know if you can personally succeed is to go to law school.

There’s an interesting discussion to be had about whether students who are likely to be below average students should go to law school (and that discussion will vary based on what school they go to), but it doesn’t seem like that’s what you’re hoping to get out of this conversation. 

Yeah part of my original question was whether people who score low in general should go to law school. Then I changed the focus to me specifically. I just don’t wanna make the worst mistake of my life.

2 minutes ago, Avatar Aang said:

Look, OP, I will be straight with you. I find your attitude off-putting. I know people who worked very hard on the LSAT, could not do well, and either had to go abroad for law school or crush their law school dreams altogether. People try for years to get into law school. If you come from a BIPOC, first generation, etc. background, then you likely do not have lawyers in the family to guide you, and other personal issues to deal with as you prepare for the rigorous law school admissions process. Meanwhile, there is you saying that you didn't even bother to try at all on the LSAT as you felt a sense of entitlement, have a lawyer parent that is guiding you in this process, and you still got into a Canadian law school. Moreover, you are expecting to perform in the top 10-20% of the class once you get there. 

Stop touting about your privilege and consider yourself fortunate that you even got into a Canadian law school with your shitty attitude towards the LSAT. No one here is going to stroke your ego by saying that you can succeed in law school with a shitty LSAT score. All you can really do is work hard once you get there and hope things pan out. Get this LSAT thing out of your mind because you've passed this stage and move on already.

 

People are ripping me apart and I’m taking it all in stride? I just wanted to know if I was making a horrible mistake.

im not surprised with the negativity of responses and your attitude given the general nature of this forum. All the best.

[123]

1 hour ago, TrickyHunter said:

Say that in my first year I defy all the statistical odds that are stacked against me and I land in the top 10/20th percentile of my class (without having a stress induced hart attack from all work I have to do with my slow brain). In that case, would you be less concerned with my ability to thrive or even get by as a lawyer?

You'll be evaluated for summer and articling positions based primarily upon your law school grades and/or resume, not your LSAT. But, as per the above, I would assume you're not going to be in the top 10 - 20%. By definition, most people aren't.

 

Edited August 7, 2021 by realpseudonym

[123]

11 minutes ago, Avatar Aang said:

Meanwhile, there is you saying that you didn't even bother to try at all on the LSAT as you felt a sense of entitlement, have a lawyer parent that is guiding you in this process, and you still got into a Canadian law school. Moreover, you are expecting to perform in the top 10-20% of the class once you get there. 

Stop touting about your privilege and consider yourself fortunate that you even got into a Canadian law school with your shitty attitude towards the LSAT. No one here is going to stroke your ego by saying that you can succeed in law school with a shitty LSAT score.

I read the fact that OP felt a sense of entitlement as an admission of a past mistake, not a touting of their current privilege. 

Based upon their subsequent post, this seems like someone legitimately asking for unbiased advice. 

[Diplock]

This is a fun thread. I'm on my phone, where I can't write comfortably in paragraphs, but I'll be back. As a preview, I like people who invite criticism and then accept any worthwhile content they get in reply. And I don't take the OP as leaning on privilege. Leaning on what's obviously a stellar GPA maybe, and simultaneously acknowledging privilege, but that's not the same thing. The GPA is earned. I did know someone personally who went to Ottawa with a near-perfect GPA and a LSAT in the 140s. I'm gonna check LinkedIn and see what she's up to. I'll report back. 

[GreyDude]

2 hours ago, TrickyHunter said:

Yeah part of my original question was whether people who score low in general should go to law school. Then I changed the focus to me specifically. I just don’t wanna make the worst mistake of my life.

OP, I have not (yet!) been admitted to a law school, so mine is not the opinion you're seeking.

But I'm a bit of a busybody, so here it is anyway. You have been admitted to a law school, which is what you hoped for (or so it seems, but see below). I think you should give it a fair shot, since the only way to really know if Law School is a mistake in your case is to give it a try and evaluate. I suggest you complete 1L and see how it goes, since, unless you're a much-older mature student or leaving a solidly established, well-paying career to go to school (in which cases there could be opportunity costs to consider), a year trying out something that you think you might love, even if you turn out to be wrong, is not time wasted, and certainly not a mistake.

In other words, later in life you are more likely to regret a major opportunity not seized, than one you did seize, but which didn't work out as you had hoped. 

That said, I want to add a trickier question: do you really want to go to law school? You seem to have a sort of "buyer's remorse" about accepting the offer to attend, which you're attaching to the LSAT. Or at least, you clearly have a lot of self-doubt (again, connected to the LSAT) and are seeking validation. If that's true (and what do I really know? I'm just some busybody), I think it's worthwhile just owning it and still giving it your all in 1L. Work hard, do as well as you can, and evaluate at the end. Either way, I think you'll be happier if you take the shot, than if you don't. And clearly, the school that accepted you thinks you can do it, or they would have made the offer to someone else. 

Edited August 7, 2021 by GreyDude
reorganized my comments. removed the excess cowbell.

[Parker]

OP, I agree with most of the posters here that a low LSAT score that low means you'll struggle in the areas the LSAT is testing and will likely have to work harder than others to receive the same level of success as them. I find the discussion really interesting and give you props for how you've taken the responses so far. 

One thing no one has really talked about yet is that an admissions committee admitted you, even with your LSAT score being the bottom 26th percentile. They clearly think you can succeed or at the very least that you have a better chance of succeeding then plenty of other applicants (that in all likelihood had a higher LSAT than you). I personally put a decent amount of faith into admissions committees - they do their best to judge all applicants and pick the best ones with little to no bias. I don't think you're making a big mistake going to law school if you want to be a lawyer. I don't think you'll be the best in your class (top 10-20%, few people are) or necessarily be a rock star in the field, and I think you should walk into law school knowing you'll have to work hard to make up for possibly having lower cognitive abilities than your peers, but I don't think it's a mistake. 

 

[ZukoJD]

This hits pretty close to home as someone who studied hard for the LSAT for about 5 months only to score in the high 150s. I didn’t exhaust all resources under the sun but I do feel like I gave just about all I had for that score. 
 

I really feel like an average guy intelligence wise and this has caused me quite a bit of anxiety regarding how I will fare as a law student/lawyer. I would be curious to hear from people who were in a similar situation to me. 
 

Anyhow, I’m just going to try my best once I get there and see how things go. I would advise you to do the same OP because you’ll never know for sure unless you at least try it. 
 

Maybe I’ll report back here in the future on how things went.