I kind of automatically mark stuff up as I read now (underlining, circling, whatever; I do it in LR too, it helps me to process the text) but I would add that cutting back on that to focus on writing a few words by each paragraph (ie: low res summary) has helped a ton. It's easier to find things in the passage and it lays out the whole structure for you-- for me it's worth spending 3 min instead of 2. So maybe a combo of just reading through, but stopping at the end of each paragraph to leave yourself a little marker would be best of both worlds. I think if I just read the passage and left everything completely blank I would have a really tough time with the questions (especially if it's the 4th or 5th section and I'm tired), but that's just me!

I think the email said google hangout/Skype interview

Haha believe me, I have no problem blaming the LSAC for all of the things.

@ said:

So, yeah, there do seem to be important differences between the two sorts of "prep" whether or not one believes that one or another (or both) creates an unfair advantage.--A.c.S

Yep, that was more my point: both services provide an advantage that many applicants are unable to access :/

Lol me too! I think they are just skipping a step and using the interview to try to convince you to apply.

I’m in a very similar boat.... If you can think of a trusted friend/parent/mentor who could serve as an editor, then paying and having to disclose payment doesn’t seem worth it. But if you think some good editing could improve the statement a lot, and you don’t have many other options, then go from it. I also read the Dean Asha post, and it seems like her main issue wasn’t with people paying for counseling/test prep, but rather people lying about it. Also, I don’t think it’s logically consistent to argue that paying for essay editing is ‘unethical’ but paying for test prep is not. Just saying.

Hey for what it's worth I got a 177 on the LSAT and a 3.6 from a top liberal arts school and I was just rejected from Harvard as well. I thought my PS and softs were solid. I think their taking the GRE for the first time and also having a record number of applicants is really coming back to bite a lot of us. It's super, super frustrating but you are by no means alone :(

Yep out of where I've heard back from so far my top choices are NYU and Berkeley, especially since I'm interested in public interest. As a native Californian Berkeley holds some extra sway though, even if it's slightly lower in the rankings :)

Okay, thanks everyone! This is helpful.

Ok cool thanks!

@

Hey bumping this to see if you got any more clarity-- I'm basically going through the same process with Columbia and Berkeley. I liked Columbia a lot more than I thought I would, certainly more than NYU which surprised me (although I think a lot of that has to do with my not wanting to be in the center of a major city). I also am interested in public interest, have a scholarship to Berkeley and minimal aid from Columbia... and a boyfriend on the east coast.... So with all these parallels I'm interested to see what you decided! :)

Hey there-- Looks like you've been getting some good advice. I had a similar thing happen to me, was PTing in low 170s with the occasional higher score, took the September LSAT and scored a 167, which is solid but below what I had been expecting. I think what @ said about the second test being less stressful is true for most people (it was certainly true for me)-- it's nice that the novelty of the anxiety has worn off, if that makes sense haha.

I also agree that for me there was a section that really stuck out as needing improvement (reading comp) but when I was drilling LR and LG I noticed that the inferences I needed to make felt more automatic than they did leading up to September... This is a weird feeling that cannot really be measured (I was scoring about the same on PT's), but I could tell I was at a different level of understanding going into the second test because the right answers just 'felt' right. I used to be a SAT tutor, and until I had to walk my students through explanations, most of the time I knew the answers to the verbal questions because one 'looked right' or the wrong answers 'looked weird'. And then when I thought about it more I could walk it back and say "oh, it's because this independent clause is missing proper punctuation to connect it to the subordinate clause" or whatever. But that's the point you need to get to with the LSAT. Where you are drawing inferences so quickly it FEELS like you're not thinking about it. You've put in all the work up front, so during the test itself even if you're anxious or distracted your brain is sort of able to go into autopilot and recall what looks right and what feels wrong. Everybody has their own way of getting there, but I had also mostly run out of material for PTs and found that re-doing old tests I hadn't done in months was fine. Also would recommend speeding through sections as fast as you can and then seeing where you make errors. Hope that helps! Apologies for rambling!

Hey there-- I'm in a similar boat and wrote a GPA addendum, but it's a risk you get to decide for yourself. Just wanted to also say that the school has access to the LSAC academic summary report, which sort of shows where you stack up to other people from your school in terms of GPA and LSAT score. I thought that was cool and definitely helps in my case to be able to point to it and say "look I'm average or above average at my school, don't penalize me for this". But that may mean you don't need to write an addendum! haha

Yoooo I got a 162 on my diagnostic in April and scored a 177 in December! You got this! ALSO, I took the LSAT in September and scored worse than I had hoped, but the new 7sage RC material is awesome and helped me go from -6 to -0 on that section which obviously made a big difference!

Just one opinion, but I would go for it! You're going to have to mention it in an addendum anyway, so it's not like schools wouldn't know about it if you elected to write about something else. If it was truly a life-changing experience for you and you've been able to harness something negative to achieve success I think that's very inspiring! Also, I don't know what kind of law you're thinking about going into, but being able to empathize with people in criminal situations should be an important criteria for all lawyers-- so you could even think of it as a sort of advantage.

Might be worth it to email Irvine and tell them if you are accepted you will 100% put down your deposit there and it’s your first choice (you can always change your mind if a waitlist comes through). I grew up near UCI and everyone in the area is super impressed with the law school— I think you would still have great employment options if you succeed there.

Sounds like you are getting pretty burned out...

People don't say this often on 7sage but I think it can be really helpful to give yourself permission to take a week or two off from studying. Think of it like a vacation from work-- it doesn't mean you're quitting, just that you're giving yourself time to relax and come back refreshed and more committed. I didn't study for a month after the September test, and when I took it again in December my score rose significantly. I actually think the break helped me a lot. The studying you put in doesn't immediately go away-- sometimes stepping back and allowing the concepts to sink in can be the best move!

I connected with current/former lawyers through my undergrad alumni database and they were all super nice and excited to help a fellow alum! If your undergrad institution has a presence in Houston I would try that out!

I think someone may have already said this, but Colombia is a really popular choice among people who went to undergrad schools that are considered 'good schools' but accordingly have pretty low levels of grade inflation. So, for example, I went to Williams College, which is a top liberal arts school, and the GPA average is like a 3.3 I think. I can think of at least three or four friends from Williams who chose Colombia for law school. I think Colombia is more willing than other places to take a 'gamble' on applicants like this who have lower GPA's, especially if they have high LSAT scores. Personally I think it's really smart, because I know I could've gotten a higher GPA at a less challenging undergrad, but it wouldn't make me more prepared for law school. Props to them, I wish more schools had that attitude!

@

Oooooooh interesting, I'd never considered the "super test" but sounds like that could be really helpful. Thanks to you both!

I talked to a rep for Berkeley at a law school fair last week and she made it sound like if you were already registered for a December LSAT and not applying early decision, then the committee would just hold off on looking at your application until the December score came in. Schools can see if you're planning on taking the test again, and it makes sense that they would want to boost the selectivity of their numbers, so I wouldn't be surprised if this was a pretty common approach.

If you haven't already watched the LR curriculum videos, I would do that and really focus on JY's reasoning when he eliminates a wrong answer. Being able to quickly understand why an answer is wrong or being able to identify a right answer without necessarily reading through all the answer choices was huge for me--- LR is the only section where I never feel pressured for time.

Yeah pretty much everyone I've talked to with a public interest background has said NYU > Columbia for that field but just because a lot of students seem to go into big law from their doesn't mean they don't have strong programs. Don't know much about Michigan though, sorry!

@ Yesssss thank you!! :smiley:

For what its worth, my score went up 10 points from September to December and I'm not writing one. I agree with @ that it would be more compelling if there was some concrete reason for underperforming the first time (for me there wasn't really). Maybe it'd be different if you started with an abysmal score, but since you said they're both good, then meh.