3 ms·

Anyone at an Ivy League law school might have more lucrative opportunities than teaching LSAT classes.

• graeme 14y ago
  You'd be surprised ;) On an hourly basis, you can earn more teaching the LSAT than as an Ivy League law grad. Mind you, I don't work 80 hour weeks, so I don't make as much on an absolute basis, but the work is more interesting, and I've branched out into LSAT books and an online LSAT course. But mainly, I wanted to point out that the instructor is unreasonably arrogant. By comparison with his reference group, he's far from exceptional. By implication, the Mensa cut-off is also far from 'genius'. Top 2% is 1 in 50.
  • Pinatubo 14y ago
    To be fair, that's 1 in 50 from a group that was relatively accomplished in an academic setting before the test. But I agree that it doesn't qualify as "genius."
    • graeme 14y ago
      I may not have been clear, my posts mix LSAT percentiles and IQ percentiles. The Mensa cut-off is top 2% of the general public. 98th percentile on an IQ test. For the LSAT, they accept 163 as meeting that cut-off. Relative to other LSAT takers however, a 163 is 92nd percentile. So the top 8% of LSAT takers are qualified to enter mensa, or roughly 1 in 12.
      • knite 14y ago
        I took the LSAT in 2009. I scored 166, which was in the 93rd percentile. Mensa lists their cut-off as the 95th percentile, so your 163/92 figure is inaccurate, at least for recent years.
• rayiner 14y ago
  Being an LSAT instructor is surprisingly remunerative. One of the big test prep companies pays $50/hour, which is about the same as what a first year associate makes at a big law firm (when you account for the fact the the associate probably puts in 3000 hours a year).