Just going out on a limb here... I presume that "strongly suggested" in the context of the application instructions means that you definitely should do it. The ask is to explain test history if submitting more than one LSAT administration (I have 3 - 166, 166, 171).

No marching bands (or anything of the sort) were practicing outside while I was taking the test. Nerves definitely played a factor though. Is this something that I should still write given that I don't have a ton to say? Or do I just write what I can about nerves being a factor?

Is anyone else feeling the tendency to try to write out a 'Why ___ Statement' for each school they apply to. I've written two unsolicited ones to essentially my TOP choices and I don't think my application is a shoe-in at either so I'm hoping this will be beneficial. I am also writing two other mandatory 'Why ___ Statements' (Michigan and Duke).

Weirdly now I feel 'guilty' for not writing unsolicited Why ___ statements to some of other schools lol.... Probs just stressing out at this point and I feel like any other Why ___'s would not be as convincing since truly they wouldn't be my top choices. Idk...

Anyone else feeling this?

Been waiting months to write this post.. The journey to this score was longer, more difficult and more much painful than I imagined when I picked up some Kaplan Prep book in mid-2019.

It's taken a couple of days to be able to physically process but I finally scored 171 on an official take!

Took a ~diagnostic (had been studying a little before) and scored a 166.. this was what I would later melodramatically refer to as the 'kiss of death' - it was a total fluke and in no way was this representative of my skills at that point in time...subsequent PTs would prove that I was actually closer to high the 150s to low 160s. In the next month I took around 10 PTs (with no BR and no drilling) and never once was able to hit at or above 166.

Months later, 'I saw the light' and signed up for 7Sage. After completing the CC and doing about a month of drilling LR/RC full sections from the early PTs and full proofing every LG from 1-35, my first PT was a 169. This was my first major victory, which inevitably was followed by what felt like a setback, a 159.

First official take was May and I got a... 166. At the time, my PTs were all over the place (169, 159, 171, 163, 165...) and 166 was actually my prep test average. At the time May was the only flex scheduled and it felt like this Covid thing would be over by now and we'd be back to full length tests so I never put too much stock into this one. I had taken a PT during the interregnum (after I wrote it but before I got my results) and had gotten a 172 (highest yet) which fueled me to push further still.

Going into August my PT average was just above 170. But something happened on LR of that section.. its been commented that the first questions in that LR section were unusually hard and that just got to me; i'm sure that it tanked that LR section and also probably the first part of my next section which was RC.. if it was a 5 section test then I'm confident than another LR would have been able to balance me out to a 168 but alas another 166. What was crushing was looking at an official take that was the same as my diagnostic; even though I knew by this time my diagnostic was inflated - I was frustrated and embarrassed that I "hadn't" made any progress (even though I know I had)...

Anyways, something happened after August and I just started to care so much less. By this point I had not had a PT below 168 since April... I felt assured that I would be able to get above a 166. But then, about a week before October I had two back-to-back PTs where I got a 167... these PT scores felt crushing, it felt like I was slipping at the very second I needed to be at my peak. In some ways this weirdly made me care less... 'caring less' weirdly ended up being the key to doing well on that exam.. anyways felt like I did okay on LR, RC and LG but my couple of low scores before the exam made me second guess... I was hoping for anything above a 168 and was registered for November as well hoping that I could at least increase my score and then to push forward and get out of my slump by the November exam.. but alas it wasn't necessary I got a 171!!!

And yet, I still feel like this post has not adequately captured the ups and downs that have comprised this journey. It wouldn't have been possible without 7Sage and J.Y.! Thank you to everyone who interacted me me on the forums (particularly on my posts where I was asking for help or, oftentimes, just complaining and looking for solace).

Okay, I've heard from a podcast or two that NYU allegedly does NOT like multiple LSAT takes and that in the past have asked for an addendum requesting applicants to describe why the average of there scores should not be considered. (and I know... i know... USNWR only requires reporting the highest, but again I've heard that this is something that NYU has asked for in the past)

I can't seem to find anything like this online now so do you think this has changed or what?

Hey everyone! Currently in the midst of doing this for UVA which requests that all applicants:

"list your significant extracurricular, extra-professional, community and/or other activities in the order of importance to you. Please provide a brief (1) description of each activity, and (2) specify your involvement, (3) length of involvement, (4) special projects, and (5) responsibilities."

I know a couple of other schools ask something similar so UVA isn't the only one that this applies to.

Anyways, curious as to what the optimal strategy here is in terms of quantity vs. quality - probably like a lot of people I joined a TON of organizations but probably only had a serious and sustained involvement in 3-4. On my resume I've limited the number of organizations that I list to just those that I would be confident talking about if anyone were to ask me about it - I mean after all no one is really going to believe that I had a meaningful involvement in 12 different clubs/organizations.. do you think the same principle applies to this type of statement: List and explain everything you did in the handful of clubs and organizations that actually meant something to you or exhaustively list everything you were engaged in and emphasize those organizations that were most important?

Also, been out of school for 3 years now and have not been involved in any extra-professional activities - how bad is that? Not super worried about it but kind of feel like I probably should have been doing SOMETHING lol.

I've heard conflicting advice on including those 'extra' sections (Academic Interests / Travel / Random Facts) intro your law school resume. Does anyone have some thoughts on this?

Right now I have my resume drafted as to include all three (because I have space and because I just wanted to put everything on the page and then remove as necessary).

LR used to be my strongest section but because LG and RC have improved so much LR now seems to be what is holding me back from the mid-170s and looking for some advice.

My hypothesis is that it is because I have not taken that many actual PTs (14 in total over the course of 7 months of full time studying with a lot of those in the past couple of months. (That being said, I have seen a TON of LR material: EVERY SINGLE LR question from PT 6-36; 72-81 (used as individual sections) and then my 14 PTs on top of that).

Overall I think this was a really good strategy because it gave me a good foundation in the basics but what I seem to struggle with is that there always seems to be a new cookie cutter or trick or flaw that I wasn't quite familiar with such that I could not get it right under timed conditions. When I do a new section; my average for an LR section is -2.5 but the variance is what worries me; sometimes I'll go -1, other times I'll go -4.

Whenever I don't understand a question under timed conditions, I print it out, rip apart the logic of the stimulus, write out why each AC is incorrect and why the correct AC is in fact correct and if it is a new logical form that I am unfamiliar with I have a whiteboard next to my desk that I right down the logical form on so that I am looking at it all day; I also put particularly interesting questions into playlists and study the logic of the question from time-to-time. All to say, I think I am doing all of the right things but progress in decreasing the variance has been slower than what I would have hoped.

Any feedback or advice from others who might have had this problem before?

(Side note - I have also worked on timing strategies as well and think I have something that works for me so I don't know if that is the problem either)

Anyone else feel like the difficulty on the earlier LR sections has an ENORMOUS variance? PT6 LR1, for example, went -0, with time to spare; PT6 LR2 on the other hand was hands down one of the hardest LRs I've seen!! (in my opinion).. somehow walked out of there with a -4, which I'm super proud of given the perceived difficulty of that section.

Anyone else feel this way???

Writing this for myself but hopefully someone else finds solace in this as well..

Got my results back this morning and was quite disappointed in the results. Scored a 166, which is the same score I received on the official take in May.

I’m so much better at this test than I was in May (PT average at the time was 166). I have improved, but frankly it sucks that this isn’t reflected in my official score. My PT average is exactly170 right now and I haven’t scored below a 168 in more than 5 months on a PT. My BR is consistently 176+ (and trending upwards) and if I can better my process even more, there are probably a couple of additional points I can add to my timed results.

Something happened in LR where I was just off my game and because that was the first section I could feel myself more distracted in RC. Based on the PowerScore prediction, I had the hardest compilation of sections and that might have affected my confidence too.

Either way, I’m ready for October. November too, if need be.

“So what, now what?”

Has anyone who took their LSAT writing results on September 3rd or later gotten their writing sample accepted? Worried at this point that my session has been flagged which is entirely possible because I had my backpack in the corner of my room which apparently triggers their system.

Hoping it goes through before the 18th so I can get my results back for August...

I think ad-hominem is often colloquially defined as a direct character attack: Jim says the earth is flat but Jim is an idiot therefore Jim must be incorrect. This is probably the most common iteration of ad-hominem.

But contrary to popular notions of an ad-hominem, LSAC defines ad-hominem as anything that distracts from the argument at hand and redirects the aim toward the maker of the argument. To this end, I've also seen ad-hominem take the form of:

Attacking the interest/motivations of the argument maker: Jim says the earth is flat but Jim runs a flat-earth film festival every year so Jim has an interest in getting more flat-earthers to show up to his event. Therefore, Jim must be incorrect.

Attacking the past actions of the argument maker: Jim says smoking is harmful for your health but Jim smokes 2 packs of cigarettes per day therefore there is reason to question Jim's beliefs.

Hypocrisy: Jim believes that reality is only an illusion yet Jim has worked strenuous a 9-5 job for 30 years to provide for his family. Clearly Jim's beliefs to not match his actions therefore those beliefs are questionable.

Apologies if this is pedantic but almost got a question wrong because of this and I thought I'd flush this out on a post.

Are there any other types of ad-hominem that you are aware of? Trying to make a list.