<p>The article says that was the mean GPA among law school applicants. Not the student body as a whole. </p>
<p>How many years ago did they change the LSAT scoring from the 200-800 scale? That’s what was used back when I applied to law school, sometime before the Flood.</p>
<p>Agree with Hanna. MIT’s median LSAT is the most variable. Fewer people apply to law school and the numbers can vary dramatically from year to year. </p>
<p>And, BTW, the way law schools measure grade inflation, Yale isn’t particularly grade-inflated. In fact, it’s no more so that UChicago, as the LSAC measures it.</p>
<p>My comment is that one year’s results is not statistically interesting. If they had 10 years of data, that might yield something of interest. One year is an anecdote. What if Princeton led Yale in 29 prior years? What if the results fluctuate more than the difference every 3 years?</p>
<p>Yes, two points is more than enough to make a real difference in your odds at these law schools when the points fall in the margin, as these do. There’s a huge gulf between 90th and 95th percentile. The same two points would reflect a much smaller change in percentile if we’re talking about a 174 vs. a 176.</p>
<p>FWIW, I started law school in the fall of 1981 (I took the test in late 1980) and the LSAT was on the 200-800 scale. Hubby entered law school in the fall of 1987 and it was on a different scale by then (it only went up to the high 40’s or 50); I think the change occurred in 1982. It’s now on an even different scale, but I don’t know when that occurred.</p>