Is it ok to write an LSAT addendum to top law schools about how it's not predictive of our ability?

barring the fact that our GPA and other package is great?

I would write how it's not predictive of your ability. I hear people writing this alot. Especially since your GPA and other stuff is good.

I think addendum explaining low LSATs are rarely useful.

A few factors to consider:
- how far below the range are you?
- do you have a history with standardized testing (e.g., scoring poorly on the ACT/SAT)
- can you make it pithy, fact-based and non-whiny?

yeah, see that's where it could be taken both ways: as a negative, and they might have a negative impression of you

but if everything else is golden, then maybe it's not necessary?

I probably should have clarified more, if standardized testing is a problem for you, then many schools encourage addendums that show such things. However, if this is just a one time problem with you, then I agree with the previous posters that you shouldn't write one.

I wouldn't go there.. Remember to the LS's the LSAT is the most predicitive tool they have. I would think highlighting your pros would be a much better use of valuable space.

Most of what I've heard/read from admissions officers seems to advise against submission of an LSAT addendum unless you were deftly ill, had major administrative issues during the test, etc. If your test wasn't taken under extenuating or unusual circumstances, then the only thing you're doing by submitting an addendum is focusing even more attention on an already weak part of your application. I think a strong PS, strong LORs, and a high GPA speak for themselves in an application. Don't waste the adcom's time talking about why you're better than your LSAT score in an addendum, show them why with the rest of your application.

NO NO NO!!!

An adcomm came to my school a few weeks ago and specifically mentioned that we NOT write a PS or addendum about how the LSAT won't predict how we'll do in law school. She told us that she finds these types of PS's insulting.

Like someone already said, the LSAT is the best tool they have to predict law school success. So I would recommend against saying something false.

Not only is it the best tool they have, but it is a tool that tests the actual skills it takes to succeed in law school as and a practitioner. What it takes to get a good undergrad GPA is a very different set of skills. There are a lot of very crummy lawyers that had good undergrad GPAs.

If you want to tell them anything valuable, explain why you are a better critical thinker than your LSAT score indicates.

I think you need to realize that by bashing the LSAT you are also bashing the schools that use it as THE biggest piece of who to accept. You might as well just write an addendum about how GPA is useless too and they should just give you a shot cause you are going to work real hard, yay!

I really want to go to your school but the LSAT sucks, and so do you for using it as a measuring stick, yay!

See what I mean?

It general terms, what are some possibilities relating to ^^

It's predictive of how well your school will do on the US News rankings.

If you do, use the word "indicative" instead... predictive sounds like a prophecy or something lol