LSAT ADDENDUM HELP!! Forum

[washingtondclaw]

Hey guys! So I've done some asking around and I think I have a pretty good case for an LSAT addendum (see below). I just need some help figuring out how to word it. I went to a top 20 UG, 3.8, decent softs, looking to crack the top 40 somewhere. Please help me out!!

" In the past, my standardized test scores have not been an accurate indicator of my academic performance. I believe that the most applicable indication of this pattern comes from a comparison of my SAT and ACT scores to my academic performance in college. Both my SAT and ACT scores, 1630 and 22, respectively, were well below the 25th percentile of all (my university) students in my entering class (see Exhibit C, Common Data Set 2007-08). Despite what my standardized test scores would suggest about my academic performance, I was able to graduate in the top 10% of my class (see Exhibit D, Eligibility Requirements for Phi Kappa Phi).

To increase the applicability of this precedent, the percentile average of my SAT and ACT scores (62.1%) is almost is almost identical to the percentile average of my two LSAT scores (63%). Furthermore, like the LSAT, I retook the SAT and saw no improvement in my score (see Exhibit SAT, “Summary of Scores). Therefore, given both my history of underperforming on standardized tests and the parallels between my performance on the LSAT and my college entrance exams, I believe that the evidence suggests that I will outperform what my LSAT suggests law school. For these reasons, I hope that the admissions committee – to any extent that it deems appropriate – might be able to consider my history of underperforming on standardized tests when evaluating my application. "

I know addendums are supposed to be really short, but can i expand here? Do you guys understand what I'm trying to do with the percentile thing? I actually think it's a pretty good piece of evidence given how close the percentiles are, but is it worth putting in there since it might be confusing?? I'm just trying to establish parallels between my SAT and ACT to increase the applicability of that precedent... Any wordsmithing or other suggestions on where I could cut down/what you think my strongest argument is would be appreciated!

[twenty]

Why even bother writing an addendum? A "top 40" school isn't going to care (and will likely admit you with a 150-whatever, as terrifying as that is), and a T20+ school will only admit you if you LSAT score is decent, which yours apparently isn't.

The LSAT, unlike the SAT and ACT, is very beatable. I suck at taking tests cold, but I went from PTing around 149 to PTing in the 177-180 range. You took the LSAT twice, which means you still have a final retake. Consider sitting this cycle out if you're not constantly getting 170 range by December.

[southeastlaw]

My friend twentypercent more is wildly incorrect. Everyone is not capable of scoring in the 170s on the LSAT or else it wouldn't be a very good standardized test, would it? There are many fine lawyers and successful law students who did not do well on the LSAT, and that could be for a number of reasons, one of which could be that someone is just a poor standardized test taker. Washingtondclaw is clearly not a dummy if he/she is able to get a 3.8 and graduate top 10% at a top 20 UG. If he/she can establish that standardized testing was not an accurate indicator of academic success, as it looks like he/she does, I'd say go for it. It cannot hurt, and it give the ad com. reason to believe, if only a little, that the LSAT may not be an accurate indicator of law school success.

[twenty]

My friend twentypercent more is wildly incorrect. Everyone is not capable of scoring in the 170s on the LSAT

Reread my post and notice that I never said anything of the sort. I said sit this cycle out if he's not PTing in the 170's.

There are many fine lawyers and successful law students who did not do well on the LSAT

And you know what they all have in common? They could have better post-graduation options, be it less debt from scholarships, or by going to a school more likely to place them in jobs.

It cannot hurt, and it give the ad com. reason to believe, if only a little, that the LSAT may not be an accurate indicator of law school success.

Since adcoms don't believe this anyway, this helps how?

[shntn]

I see what you're going for in this addendum, but I'd actually try to make it shorter, not longer. Just make the point that standardized tests aren't a good predictor of your success and leave it at that. Brevity is often the answer.

[bp shinners]

Don't send in this addendum. The discrepancy between your stats isn't enough for it to indicate you're a bad standardized test taker.

To write this addendum, you need a score that's abysmally low and a GPA that's exceptionally high. What scoring a high-150/~1600 SAT and then getting that GPA tells me is that you're a decently smart person who works hard. It doesn't surprise me that you underperformed on the standardized test and then did well in school.

You really need me to look at your standardized test score and say, "No way in HELL that kid is doing well in college! I'm surprised he can read." before you can prove to me that it's not indicative of your performance. It can't just be a mild underperformance - it has to be a shocking underperformance. Especially when you're saying that a 157 isn't representational - that's a solid score, not something that indicates you freak out and freeze up.

[washingtondclaw]

Thanks all! BP and twentypercentmore, I have it from some authoritative sources that this addendum could be effective in my case so I'm strongly leaning towards writing it. I was just hoping to get some advice/second thoughts on the language of the addendum as I have it written and the "percentage argument".

[bp shinners]

I have it from some authoritative sources that this addendum could be effective in my case so I'm strongly leaning towards writing it.

Are these authoritative sources from the admissions offices of the schools to which you're applying? If so, definitely submit it.

In the past, my standardized test scores did not accurately predict my academic performance. I believe that the most applicable indication of this pattern comes from a comparison of my SAT and ACT scores to my academic performance in college.Both my SAT and ACT scores, 1630 and 22, respectively, were below the 25th percentile of all (my university) students in my entering class (see Exhibit C, Common Data Set 2007-08). Despite what my standardized test scores would suggest about my academic performance, I was able to graduate in the top 10% of my class (see Exhibit D, Eligibility Requirements for Phi Kappa Phi).

To increase the applicability of this precedentFurthermore, the percentile average of my SAT and ACT scores (62.1%) is almost is almostidentical to the percentile average of my two LSAT scores (63%). Furthermore, like I also retook the LSAT, I retook the SAT and saw no improvement in my score (see Exhibit SAT, “Summary of Scores). Therefore,Given both my history of underperforming on standardized tests and the parallels between my performance on the LSAT and my college entrance exams, I believe that the evidence suggests thatI will outperform whathow my LSAT suggests I will perform in law school. For these reasons, I hope that the admissions committee – to any extent that it deems appropriate – might be able to consider my history of underperforming on standardized tests when evaluating my application.

I would, however, still not suggest submitting this addendum. I know admissions officers who would look negatively at someone who sent in this essay. I do know, however, that I'm going to lose this battle, as I have it many times every year and it never goes my way.

[Big Dog]

I would, however, still not suggest submitting this addendum.

Agreed. My opinion might be different if you had a long, convincing trail of psychological testing that 'proved' that you suck at standardized testing.

[wert3813]

.

[alex.feuerman]

Hey guys! So I've done some asking around and I think I have a pretty good case for an LSAT addendum (see below). I just need some help figuring out how to word it. I went to a top 20 UG, 3.8, decent softs, looking to crack the top 40 somewhere. Please help me out!!

" In the past, my standardized test scores have not been an accurate indicator of my academic performance. I believe that the most applicable indication of this pattern comes from a comparison of my SAT and ACT scores to my academic performance in college. Both my SAT and ACT scores, 1630 and 22, respectively, were well below the 25th percentile of all (my university) students in my entering class (see Exhibit C, Common Data Set 2007-08). Despite what my standardized test scores would suggest about my academic performance, I was able to graduate in the top 10% of my class (see Exhibit D, Eligibility Requirements for Phi Kappa Phi).

To increase the applicability of this precedent, the percentile average of my SAT and ACT scores (62.1%) is almost is almost identical to the percentile average of my two LSAT scores (63%). Furthermore, like the LSAT, I retook the SAT and saw no improvement in my score (see Exhibit SAT, “Summary of Scores). Therefore, given both my history of underperforming on standardized tests and the parallels between my performance on the LSAT and my college entrance exams, I believe that the evidence suggests that I will outperform what my LSAT suggests law school. For these reasons, I hope that the admissions committee – to any extent that it deems appropriate – might be able to consider my history of underperforming on standardized tests when evaluating my application. "

I know addendums are supposed to be really short, but can i expand here? Do you guys understand what I'm trying to do with the percentile thing? I actually think it's a pretty good piece of evidence given how close the percentiles are, but is it worth putting in there since it might be confusing?? I'm just trying to establish parallels between my SAT and ACT to increase the applicability of that precedent... Any wordsmithing or other suggestions on where I could cut down/what you think my strongest argument is would be appreciated!

Stop whining and retake the LSAT. Study more. Try harder.

[alex.feuerman]

Hey guys! So I've done some asking around and I think I have a pretty good case for an LSAT addendum (see below). I just need some help figuring out how to word it. I went to a top 20 UG, 3.8, decent softs, looking to crack the top 40 somewhere. Please help me out!!

" In the past, my standardized test scores have not been an accurate indicator of my academic performance. I believe that the most applicable indication of this pattern comes from a comparison of my SAT and ACT scores to my academic performance in college. Both my SAT and ACT scores, 1630 and 22, respectively, were well below the 25th percentile of all (my university) students in my entering class (see Exhibit C, Common Data Set 2007-08). Despite what my standardized test scores would suggest about my academic performance, I was able to graduate in the top 10% of my class (see Exhibit D, Eligibility Requirements for Phi Kappa Phi).

To increase the applicability of this precedent, the percentile average of my SAT and ACT scores (62.1%) is almost is almost identical to the percentile average of my two LSAT scores (63%). Furthermore, like the LSAT, I retook the SAT and saw no improvement in my score (see Exhibit SAT, “Summary of Scores). Therefore, given both my history of underperforming on standardized tests and the parallels between my performance on the LSAT and my college entrance exams, I believe that the evidence suggests that I will outperform what my LSAT suggests law school. For these reasons, I hope that the admissions committee – to any extent that it deems appropriate – might be able to consider my history of underperforming on standardized tests when evaluating my application. "

I know addendums are supposed to be really short, but can i expand here? Do you guys understand what I'm trying to do with the percentile thing? I actually think it's a pretty good piece of evidence given how close the percentiles are, but is it worth putting in there since it might be confusing?? I'm just trying to establish parallels between my SAT and ACT to increase the applicability of that precedent... Any wordsmithing or other suggestions on where I could cut down/what you think my strongest argument is would be appreciated!

Stop whining and retake the LSAT. Study more. Try harder.

What I'm saying is you're clearly a pretty smart person, so, it can be done, the LSAT is insanely learnable.

[vman21]

d[-.-]b

[jjrialva]

To increase the applicability of this precedent, the percentile average of my SAT and ACT scores (62.1%) is almost is almost identical to the percentile average of my two LSAT scores (63%).

I think this similarity might not add anything to your argument. (I could be completely wrong I don't have that much statistics knowledge) Two completely different pools of students took both tests. One is taken by every student who wants to go to college the other is taken probably by hard working students who survived undergrad. You didn't perform that poorly on the LSAT. You have actually gotten smarter since you entered college but now you have competed with others that form a pool that is at least somewhat more intelligent than the average pool that sits down for the SAT and thus you remain at 60s percentile. I don't think a teen who takes the SAT and scores at 62% percentile will get 157 on the LSAT. Also you placed top 10% where? because the pool where you were placed top 10% matters. You could have placed top 10% in a university that admits mostly people that score the average on the SAT.

Think things through in every part of your application. If I'm right on this and the adcom notices the misstake, for example, you might ended up looking worse than if you had not submitted an addendum in the first place.

[southeastlaw]

washingtondclaw said he/she was top 10% at a top 20 UG. Not sure I agree with sending this addendum, but I have to disagree with you on the percentage similaritiy argument. The fact is he/she still scored ~60% percentile of both all "college bound seniors" and all "law school bound people" -- the composition/smarts of those groups doesn't really make a difference. I think that is an interesting and strangely similar statistic, and if anything it might provide some evidence to help you. Ultimately washingtondclaw you have to make this call. I think if you take out the exhibit stuff it might help a little more than it could hurt, but naturally it all depends on yoru appetite for risk.

[jjrialva]

I spoke with someone that has background in all this and he told me that to really know if there is significance in the similarity between the LSAT and SAT score it does matter to know which undergrad institution you went to. For example, Let say you were in the top 10% of your class in a poorly ranked college that takes students that score in the lower quartile of the SAT, suddenly, it is not impressive that you are among the top 10% in a class that its members scored in at 25 percentile or lower in the SAT. However, if you were among the top %10 your Princeton class well that is impressive.

Still I wouldn't recommend writing the addendum because its not solid. Even if you went to a top private or public institution they will know this from your transcript and they will know your rank.

ALSO they want people that can pass the BAR exam. Saying you are a poor test taker doesn't help on this one. I think its better left for more extreme cases.

[vanwinkle]

Reasons why an LSAT addendum is unwise/unhelpful:

1) The LSAT is learnable. You can prepare for it and improve your score through dedicated study. Schools know this.

2) If you do poorly, you can retake it, hopefully after doing more preparation (see #1 above). Schools know this.

3) The LSAT is seen as not just a predictor of not law school performance but also potential bar passage. Law school adcomms worry about bar passage because it affects their USNWR rankings. If you're writing and explicitly telling them that study prep is pointless in your case and you can't do well on standardized tests no matter what, why should they think you can prep for the bar?

4) The LSAT median also directly affects USNWR rankings. Because of this, many schools filter apps by LSAT score before anybody starts reading the apps. Your LSAT score (63rd percentile equals a 155) is below the 25th percentile of all the "top 40" schools you're hoping to get into, which means you'll probably be placed into a "may reject" or "likely reject" pile before they read a single word you write.

5) Adcomms have a lot of reading to do, and the more complicated you make things, the less they're going to like you. Including a short LSAT addendum is bad enough; if you start adding on multiple "Exhibits" for them to read through, they're going to get annoyed at you, and that's not what you want their first response to be.

If you're going to do this, despite so many people warning you not to, I'd recommend doing something like this:

Based on my prior standardized test results and academic experience, I believe that my LSAT score does not accurately indicate my potential academic performance in law school.

Prior to enrolling in [College Name Here], I took the SAT twice, scoring a [1630] and [other score], as well as the ACT, scoring a [22]. These scores placed me roughly in the 62nd percentile of all test takers, and below the 25th percentile of students in my entering class at [College]. Despite such low standardized test scores, I excelled academically in my time at [College], ultimately graduating in the top 10% of my class and receiving [proper name of Phi Kappa Phi award].

Like the SAT, I retook the LSAT with no improvement, and finished both times in approximately the 63rd percentile. However, I believe that my academic record shows that my potential to outperform expectations based on standardized test scores, and that my stellar GPA and academic performance is a better indicator of my true potential in law school.

[vanwinkle]

OP, are you a URM?

[washingtondclaw]

Not URM. Also some ppl. seem to have missed the top 20 UG fact. vanwinkle, I like your edits a lot. Thanks.

[paratactical]

Not URM. Also some ppl. seem to have missed the top 20 UG fact. vanwinkle, I like your edits a lot. Thanks.

Also not the lock for the T-14 you have claimed to be elsewhere.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&t=196517

[vanwinkle]

Not URM. Also some ppl. seem to have missed the top 20 UG fact. vanwinkle, I like your edits a lot. Thanks.

Also not the lock for the T-14 you have claimed to be elsewhere.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&t=196517

OP's question is probably genuine. After all, they asked it before: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6#p5500676

OP's alts are banned. OP, don't alt anymore. One account per user.

[bp shinners]

Not URM. Also some ppl. seem to have missed the top 20 UG fact. vanwinkle, I like your edits a lot. Thanks.

Just to make sure - I didn't miss that fact. I still don't think you should write this.

[uvabro]

if only we could write work related addendums as to why we're bad at our jobs, but it shouldn't impact our employment. why not just try to do better? schools can see the discrepancy as is. the sat is also a totally different test in that it's only crystallized knowledge.