Top Law Schools

What do you guys think?


When I originally took the LSAT I studied using a prep course. I followed the course rigorously and spent majority of my time trying to complete the homework assignments (80% of my time). By the time the course had ended I took the LSAT without taking any real structured exams. When I received my score back I realized I had to work hard and I thought it would be a great opportunity to self-study. The prep course was beneficial to a certain extent but it did not enhance my overall skills. Instead, it limited my skills to what I assumed would be necessary for the exam.
I soon realized that the prep course approach was not effective for me instead it hindered my ability to improve my score and really understand the structure of the exam. The second time I approached the exam I altered the way I studied. I created a customized plan that reflected my strength and weakness. My plan consisted of taking 3 LSAT Exams a week, and spending the rest of the four days reviewing the exams. This approach allowed me to highlight what I needed to focus on. For every question that I missed I would recycle it and I visit the question later on. Also, if I missed any questions on a logic game I would print out 5 copies and play the game until I mastered the logic.
I believe the new score is more representative of my abilities and ask that these circumstances be taken into consideration when evaluating my multiple LSAT scores.

Don't use this. They don't want details in how many times you did each logic game. Cut this by half.

thank you for the feedback.



When I originally took the LSAT I studied using a prep course. I followed the course rigorously and spent majority of my time trying to complete the homework assignments (80% of my time). By the time the course had ended I took the LSAT without taking any real structured exams. When I received my score back I realized I had to work hard and I thought it would be a great opportunity to self-study. The prep course was beneficial to a certain extent but it did not enhance my overall skills. Instead, it limited my skills to what I assumed would be necessary for the exam. I soon realized that the prep course approach was not effective for me instead it hindered my ability to improve my score and really understand the structure of the exam. The second time

I approached the exam I altered the way I studied. I created a customized plan that reflected my strength and weakness. My plan consisted of taking 3 LSAT Exams a week, and spending the rest of the four days reviewing the exams. This approach allowed me to highlight what I needed to focus on.

I believe the new score is more representative of my abilities and ask that these circumstances be taken into consideration when evaluating my multiple LSAT scores.

Still think it's too long. It's no secret that just about anyone can learn how to take the LSAT if they've got the time and motivation. I think you can get away with saying the first time you took it you didn't practice as much as you needed to (especially with no PTs), and the second time you actually practiced taking the exam, which is why you were able to score higher the second time around.

See? Easy.

I still think it's too long, but I also think that since the school is officially requesting it you have some room for explanation. That explanation shouldn't be overly detailed, but I do think it can be longer than the normally recommended 2-sentence LSAT addendum that most people submit unrequested.

Still way too long and detailed. I had taken a prep course that didn't fully prepare me for the exam. Having realized I hadn't reached my potential, I dedicated more time to studying, and believe my second LSAT is more representative of my ability.

Thnak you I will revise it so it is short and sweet!

"I was not feeling well during the first test. I always try my best, but apparently was just not up to it."

The results were not up to my standards, so I buckled down, worked hard, and got the score I wanted