<p>
</p>
<p>Let’s assume that WashU’s 1450 SAT represents that for enrolled (vs. admitted) students. Even if this were the case, why do you think there should be a (near) perfect correlation between WashU’s SAT and LSAT scores? The 1450 SAT is for the “average” WashU student. Who’s to say that the WashU students who take the LSAT are “average?” Given that WashU attracts mainly aspiring pre-med students, couldn’t it be possible that the law students at WashU are “below average?” That the higher SAT scorers at WashU tend to be pre-med? Or interested in PhD’s in the (especially biological) sciences, since WashU is more known for and stronger in the sciences than the humanities? Or future MBA’s because WashU offers an undergraduate business program? Therefore, perhaps prelaw is an afterthought at WashU. So it is entirely possible that “WashU students with ~1450 SAT average would get only an average of 158 on LSAT.” </p>
<p>But why do you keep distracting everyone with talk about WashU’s LSAT score? Is it because you have yet to provide a single shred of evidence that NU has improved its 161 LSAT score? Or more importantly, that NU has improved its LSAT score relative to that of Brown/Columbia/Dartmouth/Penn? Until you give me some reason to think that NU’s LSAT score has equalled or surpassed that of Brown/Columbia/Dartmouth/Penn, I will continue to “cling” to the available information that I do have.</p>