Benefits of a cancel? Forum

[hopeboaltberkeley]

So I took the test on Saturday. Feel like I significantly underperformed on at least one section (though it *may* have been experimental, not 100% sure). Yet I have one more retake opportunity. I figured there was no point in cancelling since law schools seem to care exclusively about one's highest score these days anyway.

If very few schools average scores, and your cancelled test still counts as one of your 3, what is the benefit of cancelling?

[Ron Don Volante]

what are the benefits of putting a significant under-performance on your record?

[JackelJ]

Go over to the Dec waiters thread and see if the section was experimental or not. The OP over there listed the real sections at the top of the thread

[haus]

what are the benefits of putting a significant under-performance on your record?

Two things come to mind.

First many test takers over react to bad events on test day, so it is reasonably possible that a perceived significant underperformance was not as bad as the test taker feared.

Second, (assuming non-Feb exam) you get considerable feedback on how you actually performed which could be useful if you decide that you do wish to retake the exam.

[Ron Don Volante]

what are the benefits of putting a significant under-performance on your record?

Two things come to mind.

First many test takers over react to bad events on test day, so it is reasonably possible that a perceived significant underperformance was not as bad as the test taker feared.

Second, (assuming non-Feb exam) you get considerable feedback on how you actually performed which could be useful if you decide that you do wish to retake the exam.

Well sure but if you know you fucked up and you know where you fucked up, as seems to be the case here, I don't see any benefit to it.

[Rigo]

Go over to the Dec waiters thread and see if the section was experimental or not. The OP over there listed the real sections at the top of the thread

Yeah. Feel free to ask us if we remember any subject matter on the section you bombed. If we all do, then it wasn't experimental. If we don't, you're in luck.

[BP Robert]

I'd highly recommend, based on your username, that you contact Boalt directly to determine their policy. There's pretty significant variation (both de facto and de jure) between lawschools regarding averages/taking highest scores.

Best or luck,

Blueprint LSAT Prep

[Ron Don Volante]

both de facto and de jure

barf

[BigZuck]

I'd highly recommend, based on your username, that you contact Boalt directly to determine their policy. There's pretty significant variation (both de facto and de jure) between lawschools regarding averages/taking highest scores.

Best or luck,

Blueprint LSAT Prep

It would be nice if Blueprint employees didn't spread misinformation about the law school application process but maybe that's not their strong suit

lol. Just lol at believing anything an adcom has to say.

[hopeboaltberkeley]

what are the benefits of putting a significant under-performance on your record?

I understand this logic. No benefit obviously.

But if there's no cost -- no tangible downside to having a lower score on your record (apart from writing an addendum) as schools tend to take the highest score, why not take the gamble and see what you got anyway? I figure there's always the off-chance that I partially compensated for problems in one section with a better-than-average performance in another. It's not something I would bet the house on, but it has happened (rarely) in PT's.