@HannahRodrigue I was just thinking the same! I think it could really help when you might be running out of time and don't have time to scroll through the pre-writing portion.
yes, qualifications and concessions are always a sign of intellectually rigorous, clear, persuasive writing. I think that making a counter argument (usually from one of the perspectives) and defending your main argument against it is one of the main things that LSAC and law schools are going to want to see in your writing sample.
I think that would be a good idea. Personally, I've found that the most persuasive essays explain why the opposing viewpoints don't necessarily follow.
Is it ok that this author does not ever directly cite or acknowledge any perspectives? I know the earlier page on this says you can paraphrase, cite or say things like "opponents of this view....".
I just took a mock writing test on LSAC's lawhub. In the instructions section before the test, it says the following:
*In your essay, you should demonstrate your ability to:
- Clearly state a position on the issue and analyze the relationship between that position and one or more of the other perspectives.
Since it is explicitly mentioned in the LSAC's official instructions, I take this to mean that we are expected to work in at least one perspective. Beyond that, I doubt you are going to get extra points for each perspective you incorporate.
Also, for anyone wondering, the instructions also explicitly state that a strong response will address one or more counterarguments to your stated position.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
13 comments
It's interesting that neither of them use the highlighters... I am always putting the highlighters to use!
@HannahRodrigue I was just thinking the same! I think it could really help when you might be running out of time and don't have time to scroll through the pre-writing portion.
Are we allowed to include personal anecdotes?
@BenoitJurion yes! but id make sure they are especially relevant and that you aren't using them to prove a point and more so to illustrate a point
Found this much more helpful than the previous lesson. It was also good to not see someone use Grammarly
Can we submit one of our practices to get feedback on what to improve? Are we allowed to have Grammarly enabled when we take the actual LSAT writing?
You will want to disable Grammarly
Should we aim to include a counter argument?
yes, qualifications and concessions are always a sign of intellectually rigorous, clear, persuasive writing. I think that making a counter argument (usually from one of the perspectives) and defending your main argument against it is one of the main things that LSAC and law schools are going to want to see in your writing sample.
I think that would be a good idea. Personally, I've found that the most persuasive essays explain why the opposing viewpoints don't necessarily follow.
Is it ok that this author does not ever directly cite or acknowledge any perspectives? I know the earlier page on this says you can paraphrase, cite or say things like "opponents of this view....".
I would also like to know this
I just took a mock writing test on LSAC's lawhub. In the instructions section before the test, it says the following:
*In your essay, you should demonstrate your ability to:
- Clearly state a position on the issue and analyze the relationship between that position and one or more of the other perspectives.
Since it is explicitly mentioned in the LSAC's official instructions, I take this to mean that we are expected to work in at least one perspective. Beyond that, I doubt you are going to get extra points for each perspective you incorporate.
Also, for anyone wondering, the instructions also explicitly state that a strong response will address one or more counterarguments to your stated position.