@ said:
I agree with @. We can't comment on a diversity statement when we don't know what diversity topic you'll use.
It would be on childhood poverty and taking care of someone who is mentally ill from that age.
I understand the diversity course gives socioeconomic + early respond ability which I have both. However, I am a white, straight male and have been told by pretty much everyone that I am not diverse and would have nothing to in that department. TLS for instance is universally negative, and to be honest most adcomms have given lukewarm responses at best. Is it better if I don't do it even if I think it would add to the diversity, or is it really just race/sexuality?
connorjmallon263
I have taken the LSAT 4 times. I have gone 158 -> 160 -> 164 -> 163, all of which were terrible disappointments for me. Especially the last one from this November, which has completely shattered my confidence that I can do well on the LSAT.
Because of personal financial reasons, it is extremely hard to justify attending law school outside of the T14. My gpa is 3.77, so with a 164, even th T20 is largely out of the question. Let alone any scholarship.
I have managed to get logic games to -0/-1 largely thanks to 7sage, but I have just constantly struggled with LR. I can do BR, I can prepare, I can elinjnage wrong answer choices, but I cannot improve it no matter how hard I try. Everytime I go back to see what I did wrong on a question, the reasoning JY uses doesn't seem like something I can replicate and always seems to be unique to that specific question. It seems entirely contingent on sone manner of intuition that can't be explained in a way I can repeate another LR.
I don't know if a fifth take will do it for me. I am starying to believe I am simply too unintelligent to score 170+ on this exam and that building up these skills requires a core level of intuition you simply can't train. The logic games follow the same patterns. RC can be fairly repeatable. But LR seems totally alien and the explanation is completely different every single time. Even when I see the correct answer, especially for difficult question, I fail to understand the explanation for the correct and why the wrong answer isn't correct.
Employment prospects for law schools outside the T14 and at least the T20 are quite miserable. If I can't attend those institution, I greatly struggle with why I should attend at all. Perhaps the trades woukd better suit me.
#help
I do not understand how you can so readily substitute fashion and cultural trends. I do not see any evidence in the stimulus and that led me to dismissing E when I was stuck between it and E. I do not know a reliable way LSAC expects me to make this differentiation but then simultaneously obsess over every semantic difference in word usage on other questions.
I do not believe this was a question that I could right. Even the reason you use to dismiss is just as easily applied to E - both of them talk about ALL manufactired products, in fact E goes further than A by discussing ALL of manufacturing. The reasoning you use to dismiss A I simply fail to see how you cannot apply it equally, and honestly even more so, to A.
I do not know any strategy and cannot find any throughout the syllabus that would have allowed me to reliably answer this question.
As you can see a very large number of people selected A. I am not the only person who got this reasoning and it is very likely most people would have gotten this wrong.