3 ms·

Yeah, I had a passing comment in that grain as well. At one point the head of the NCBE (Moeser) is pointing out that the average of the 25th percentile of LSAT

Yeah, I had a passing comment in that grain as well. At one point the head of the NCBE (Moeser) is pointing out that the average of the 25th percentile of LSAT scores was decreasing at the school of her biggest critic. To me, that screams data mining. The average score of the 25th percentile is a very strange statistic. Why not use something more conventional like the median of the entire population? Then you could honestly say: the majority of people at this school are getting worse. The use of an obscure statistic makes it seem they went hunting for a statistic to spin a story upon.

Cacti 11y ago
That's not data mining, that's a clear and expected result from lowering your admissions standards. If the problem was the test, than everyone would have done worse.
Jtsummers 11y ago
The bottom quarter isn't really a strange statistic. If the LSAT is a reasonable predictor (can't comment) of law school and bar exam success, then any school with reduced LSAT scores should expect increased failure further down the line. The school in question had a significant drop (9 points) for the average score of their lowest quarter. So a corresponding drop on the bar exam, in Moeser's analysis, is a natural consequence.
graeme 11y ago
The medians are dropping too. The reason for the 25th percentile stat is that law schools are forced to report three numbers for LSAT scores: 25th, 50th and 75th percentile. So reporting the 25th is a way of showing what happened to the whole bottom quartile of a class. They're the group most likely to fail the bar exam. Here are the stats for Brooklyn, the school mentioned in the article: http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ The median score dropped 7 points in four years. The bottom score dropped 9 points in four years The top 75th score only dropped 6 points in four years. Those are massive drops for such a short time. I'm an LSAT instructor, and there is a vast difference between a 162 and a 153.
phonon 11y ago
No...25, 50th, and 75th percentiles all went down significantly there. http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ She picked 25 because that's roughly the population of the students who failed (i.e., the weak students at the school are much weaker than they used to be, so they are now failing.)
rhino369 11y ago
One reason might be that according to statisticians the LSAT is only very correlated to bar passage rate until you get LSAT score of 150+, which is about the 50%th. Essentially, getting smarter stops helping you pass the bar after you get to about average. This makes sense because the bar is a minimum competency test. So a school having the class drop from 170 to 160 shouldn't have much of an effect on the passage rate. But if they start letting in a large number low LSAT scores (below the 150 threshold) you'll really decrease the passage rate. Even if the median is still the same.
- graeme 11y ago
  Interesting. Do you have data on 150+ being a significant threshold for bar passage? I work in the field, it would be good to have a hard number to present to students. Anecdotally, I notice a big difference in those who can't break 150 vs. other students.

Cacti 11y ago

That's not data mining, that's a clear and expected result from lowering your admissions standards. If the problem was the test, than everyone would have done worse.

Jtsummers 11y ago

The bottom quarter isn't really a strange statistic. If the LSAT is a reasonable predictor (can't comment) of law school and bar exam success, then any school with reduced LSAT scores should expect increased failure further down the line. The school in question had a significant drop (9 points) for the average score of their lowest quarter. So a corresponding drop on the bar exam, in Moeser's analysis, is a natural consequence.

graeme 11y ago

The medians are dropping too. The reason for the 25th percentile stat is that law schools are forced to report three numbers for LSAT scores: 25th, 50th and 75th percentile. So reporting the 25th is a way of showing what happened to the whole bottom quartile of a class. They're the group most likely to fail the bar exam. Here are the stats for Brooklyn, the school mentioned in the article: http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ The median score dropped 7 points in four years. The bottom score dropped 9 points in four years The top 75th score only dropped 6 points in four years. Those are massive drops for such a short time. I'm an LSAT instructor, and there is a vast difference between a 162 and a 153.

phonon 11y ago

No...25, 50th, and 75th percentiles all went down significantly there. http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/ She picked 25 because that's roughly the population of the students who failed (i.e., the weak students at the school are much weaker than they used to be, so they are now failing.)

rhino369 11y ago

One reason might be that according to statisticians the LSAT is only very correlated to bar passage rate until you get LSAT score of 150+, which is about the 50%th. Essentially, getting smarter stops helping you pass the bar after you get to about average. This makes sense because the bar is a minimum competency test. So a school having the class drop from 170 to 160 shouldn't have much of an effect on the passage rate. But if they start letting in a large number low LSAT scores (below the 150 threshold) you'll really decrease the passage rate. Even if the median is still the same.

graeme 11y ago
Interesting. Do you have data on 150+ being a significant threshold for bar passage? I work in the field, it would be good to have a hard number to present to students. Anecdotally, I notice a big difference in those who can't break 150 vs. other students.