User Avatar
koatsky837
Joined
Apr 2025
Subscription
Free

Admissions profile

LSAT
Not provided
CAS GPA
Not provided
1L START YEAR
Not provided

Discussions

PrepTests ·
PT107.S4.Q12
User Avatar
koatsky837
Wednesday, Feb 24 2021

I would say yes, they should generally be avoided. The correct answer choice needs to be supported by the stimulus. I think of this as needing to be supportable/provable. It's nearly impossible to support a position, or prove that something is the best, worst, superior to, more harsh, less fun etc. unless it's explicitly stated.

The answer choice begins "Driver education is not a harsh enough punishment for anyone convicted of a serious driving related offense..." It's more or less impossible to quantify what would be "harsh enough," which is why I scrutinized that answer choice and then eliminated it.

I think the supportable/provable concept can work in more general way too. For example, saying an outcome may happen, or could happen is easier to support than saying it will happen, or must happen, unless of course it's explicitly stated in the stimulus that an outcome will/must happen.

0
User Avatar

Friday, Jan 15 2021

koatsky837

Help - Resume Content Organization

I am hoping to submit apps sometime in the next week. I haven't spent a minute thinking about my resume until now because it's relatively inconsequential when compared to other factors. Also, I'm a few years out of college and have switched jobs so I already have one drafted. The problem I am running into with my "law school resume" is that I have what I believe to be relevant experiences from undergrad and I'm not sure how to include them such that it is 1) easy to follow and 2) recent work experience and older college community involvement both shine. Can someone look at my resume and critique my organization (and provide any other general feedback/criticism that you may have)?

Thanks!

1

Confirm action

Are you sure?