Edit: I apparently didnt understand the difference between personal and diversity statements. I do now! This is a post about a potential personal statement. Edited the title.

Hey friends, personal post below. I'm Interested to hear if this would qualify as a good personal statement

I suffered from some difficult mental health problems that landed me in the hospital during my adoolesnce (depression, panic attacks, psychosis and hearing voices). I dropped out of university and lost a lot of my friends, it was a really rough period in my life. If it wasnt for my family and close friends who stuck with me as well as wonderful doctors and specialists I would never have made it.

I finally sought treatment, medication was huge but also I went Tree planting, which is this brutal job that is popular among students in Canada. For five seasons I worked outside 60+ hours a week, living in a tent and being feasted on by bugs with a small group of people who became some of my best friends. It was during these seasons and long days that my mental health improved the most.

I want to write a diversity statement called "how tree planting saved my life" or something, and tie my own mental health problems and my total 180 in terms of my own life (I'm getting great grades + good lsat score) could help me empathize with other people who arnt as lucky as me and didnt have the same access to supports. The criminal system is filled with people who feel through the cracks and it's important lawyers on both sides have the capacity to emphasize with the extraordinary difficulties people can face with their own mental health.

Is this an appropriate topic for a personal statement? Are there elements I should emphasize or things I shouldn't bring up? should I try and find something else?

Thanks

I scored 170 on my last preptest (75)!!! -1/-2 on each LR, -3 on LG, -4 on RC! (-10 for 170 sadly) Theres no purpose to this post, I'm just excited all this studying has paid off! 168 was my previous best a few days ago I ddint think a 170 would ever happen, I diagnosticed at 151. 10 weeks of full time studying at 7 sage brought me up like 15 points! Woot!

I have taken a few weeks to focus on admissions stuff, but the September LSAT didn't go well for me. I panicked on RC and the first LR, i have always had pretty severe test anxiety and it really hit me hard on test day. I did okay on the second LR and after the break i calmed down and the last two sections went fine. All in all I expect to be about ten points or more below a good practice test, which is obviously quite disappointing.

Overall though, its not a big deal. Writing in September was an important experience, and i'm looking forward to seeing my score so i can review and see what I can improve on. Pretty much thanks to reading and exploring these forums I have come to realize that writing more than once, although not ideal isn't a big deal either and what is important is showing long term improvement. I have been forcing myself to read an old economist front to back every day and the last few days i started prepping again, I did two timed RC sections and scored -3 on each, tied for best two scores on timed RC so far. I'm optimistic i can really do well in November, I feel way less anxiety and I will be more prepared. If anyone else bombed September just wanted to let people know there's other people out there in the same boat and looking forward to crushing November with whoever decides to write then! I remember after the test i found solace in reading other peoples horror stories and realizing i'm not alone in my bad test so i figured i would pay back now, right before scores are released. Goodluck!

Small question, I mostly just dont want to get an infraction. When the Proctor says "turn the page, read the instructions, and start working now" can you turn the page as soon as he starts saying turn the page, or perhaps after he completes that instruction, or do you need to wait until he says now? it's probably only 5 or 10 seconds per section, but hey, 30 seconds overall could amount to an entire mark! When do I turn the page?

Were you disappointed when you saw your score? Do students tend to over-predict or under-predict there scores walking out of the test?

To be fair most people on this forum who have written multiple times probably did so because they did poorly the first time so we might have a bit of a confirmation bias here. But is there any consensus that students generally overestimate / underestimate there score on average?

UBC says refrences are optional for the general category. How optional is this? UBC is a pretty strong Canadian school (LSAT median 165 GPA 3.7), but it does clearly say you dont need to send refrences, but would it hurt my chances? Unlike most US and Canadian schools, UBC is not part if any credential assembly service, everything must be sent to them manually which may explain why they have this policy. I didnt think I was applying here, but changed my mind and would prefer not to bother my references if possible

I freaked out during the September test, specifically during RC where i got -13 and scored around 10 points below my PT average. I was worried I would never be able to do this test. I stayed clam this time and answered every single question to the best of my ability, and now i feel like this huge weight has been lifted off my back. I may have missed a few here and there, but i am confident there were no disasters. It's been a grueling 6 months of studying for this test, I'm so happy i got through and am actually looking forward to seeing my score.

I want to encourage anyone who did badly yesterday to not give up. You are fully able to get this test. Yesterday, at the end of the writing sample, someone next to me put down her pencil and I could see the tears starting to form around her eyes, it obviously didn't go well and i remember exactly what that felt like. The writing sample feels like half an hour of torture, and all you want to do is open up your test book and try again, or leave, anything but write about soybeans or telescopes. I wanted to encourage her, because i was there before, and my experience goes to show that there is light at the end of the tunnel, and i firmly believe that's true for anyone who puts the work in.

I had so many bad tests and discouraging moments studying for LG and then RC, feeling like i couldn't even write down the rules of a game or understand the main point of an easy passage, but i just kept studying and doing blind reviews over and over again, and things finally started to click. I did about 95% of the available questions, leaving only a few preptests between 1-7 untouched, that's what it took for me to have a good day. Thanks you to everyone in this community for sharing there difficult moments, they helped me find the motivation when i felt there wasn't much left. For everyone that knows yesterday wasn't there last LSAT, keep putting the work in, you got this.

https://thehustle.co/Soy-farmers-trade-war-China-America/?user_source=up_social_fb&utm_source=facebook1&medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3CC6YkLmCpOF4BMhJK2XZUZJGaBcvcTv7caFt2PTuZc1m2hbFIVHxp9Ws

Team soybeans, we messed up.

I know it's a bad idea to argue with LSAT answers, but I find it's the best way to improve - I want to really understand exactly why my thinking is wrong. I can't seem to find out an adiqute explination for why D is wrong for this question, would love some input, I have scoured the forums but cant seem to find anyone discussing this line of attack. Thanks in advance if you take the time to look this up!

The arguement is:

chem fert caused farmers to switch from alfalfa

Alfalfa caused good soil.

C: We must Abandon chem fert in order to get good soil back.

necessicary assumption?

Evaluating this argument, it seems like the obvious consideration is that farmers could use both chems while renewing the soil. Why would we need to abandon chems? The answer needs to say that. And that sounds like what E is saying.

But when you consider this further, theres litterally nothing in the argument that says the only way to improve soil is GM method. it's easy to imagine another way to renew soil, maybe soil rotation or something. Maybe they could grow soybeans, which cause very little soil degradation when compared to other cash crops, like corn, which doesnt stand up to soybeans in both financial benefits and environmental considerations. The point is that there's really no reason to think GM is necessicary to improving soil health at all. When we consider the many potential, possibly infinite ways to improve soil health, having a single one be incomparable with chems seems to do little to improve are argument at all.

another assumption which would make the conclusion follow would be if soil improvement cannot happen as long as these chems are present in the soil. the very presence of these chemicals in the soil insures the soil cannot improve. A perfect answer could be.

"no matter what methods the farmers persue, their can be no soil improvement as long as chemical fert in question are present in the soil"

Theres no answer that says this, but D says

"chemical fert have a destructive effect on soil".

destructive is a strong word, and this holds in every case- regardless of what you do to improve the soil health, as long as their is chemicals in the soil, these chems will have a destructive effect which could conceivably limit improvement.

E is right and D is wrong. What am I failing to consider here? Thanks again if you took the time to address my question!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-2-question-20/

Best choice I made today. Now I'm just hoping they turn my writing prompt into a RC passage for the november test.

Thanks 7 sage! I wish i could start celebrating but i have another exam tomorrow lol.

Goodluck everyone!

These are one type of question I often struggle a bit with, so I figured I would write out a bunch of common answer choice labels and define them in my own words, and was hoping others could weigh in on my definitions and possibly offer corrections, or general advice for these questions. Otherwise hopefully these definitions will help you clarify when examining the answer choices.

I find the most common labels are:

Analogy

Generalization

Example

Evidence

Premise

Sub conclusion

Principle

Support (offered as)

Premise

Main Conclusion

Destinction

Some of these are obvious, but others seem to be worth definition.

Analogy: A comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification. Example: Finding an extra point on the lsat is like finding a needle in a haystack. An analogy actually functions quite similarly to a principle - while a principle makes a broad claim and applies it to a specific case, and analogy takes one specific case and applies it to another.

Generalization - A claim, drawn from a piece of evidence about a broader population. When survey results are used to make statements about the general population, that is a generalization.

Example: I asked 50 people along the beach if they liked icecream,and they all said yes. [I guess everyone on the beach likes icecream.]

Evidence: When were talking about evidence were talking about something objective. Evidence is a fact or something observable that, in and of itself, says nothing about what should or ought to be. Sometimes you might think evidence implies something, for example, the claim [gun violence has risen 25% every year for the past 6 years] might indicate gun violence is a serious problem, but that's you applying the meaning.

Premise: a premise is a claim which is subjective. [Gun violence is a problem] is a subjective statement when it's used to support the conclusion: Thus, /we should invest more money in our police force/ Premises are directed towards and support conclusions.

Sub Conlusion: These get pretty easy to identify eventually. I just look at rather evidence is directed at it. A subconlusion is a joint which connects premises and often packages them together into something easier and more compact that can then be tied into the main conclusion. If your unsure which conclusion, just look at which conclusion is directing into the other. Example: Everyone on the beach likes icecream. They also like frenzies and popsicles. [This shows that everyone on the beach likes lots of cold snacks.] Thus, we should open an icecream store on the beach.

If we cut the icecream store part from this argument, the statement about cold snacks would be the MC. But because it offers support for a final statement, that statement becomes the main conclusion.

Support: Something in the argument that makes something else stronger. This is really broad, and can have a ton of applications. Essentially, everything in an argument exempt the main conclusion is a support for something else. Generalizations, analogies, examples, principals, and premises are all supporting portions of an argument. When you encounter the word support in an answer choice, you need to focus on the direction of the support. Is it actually supporting the thing the answer claims it is? Dont worry about support indicating a specific type of statement. Dont be like, "This isnt really a support, it's a principal". Everything except the MC and possibly redundant statements or context is support of some kind. Focus on the direction.

Principle: is ‘a fundamental idea or general rule that is used as a basis for a particular theory or system of belief’. On role of statement questiond, principles are often offered without further support in an argument. They are a claim about the way things should be, perhaps based on the basis that their truth is self evident. The can also be argued for, or be a conclusion. Example: We should not hold punish John for getting someone badly injured while speeding down the highway, because he was doing so to save three people who were badly injured who he was driving to the hospital. Doing so saved their lives and saved their families from massive grief, and of course, [One should always act in a way which maxamixes net happiness].

Many of these catagorise subsume or overlap with others. When approaching the answer choices, I find it reduces stress to remind myself of this. A statement could be a sub-conlusion, a principal, and support. I made this list mostly for myself but figured I'd post on here. Hopefully others found it helpful, if anyone has any criticisms / input please let me know.