Top Law Schools

Hi all,

What's the word on LSAT discrepancy addenda? Spivey posted in his thread that 11 points will warrant one. I jumped 10 points, and also moved from 88th percentile to 99th. Should I write something up? I was sick and sleep deprived during my first take and really should have canceled. Drawing attention to the discrepancy and sounding like I'm making an excuse makes me reconsider. Thanks!

Post removed.

Hildegard15 wrote:

maracuya wrote:Hi all,

What's the word on LSAT discrepancy addenda? Spivey posted in his thread that 11 points will warrant one. I jumped 10 points, and also moved from 88th percentile to 99th. Should I write something up? I was sick and sleep deprived during my first take and really should have canceled. Drawing attention to the discrepancy and sounding like I'm making an excuse makes me reconsider. Thanks!

I had a 12 point jump and I wrote one. I just saw too many interviews with admissions officers saying if you have a big jump, you should include one. But I know a lot of people disagree with me. I didn't have a convincing reason to explain the difference either.

Thanks, Hilde. Yeah, I think I'll submit one. I'd rather explain the difference myself than have them make any assumptions, even though the explanation is sort of meh.

maracuya wrote:Hi all,

What's the word on LSAT discrepancy addenda? Spivey posted in his thread that 11 points will warrant one. I jumped 10 points, and also moved from 88th percentile to 99th. Should I write something up? I was sick and sleep deprived during my first take and really should have canceled. Drawing attention to the discrepancy and sounding like I'm making an excuse makes me reconsider. Thanks!

If I were you, I'd strongly recommend writing an LSAT addendum to a safety school saying you tried to retake the test drunk, just to see how it worked and voila.

But really, an addendum doesn't seem necessary, but couldn't hurt, so long as you keep it short and sweet. Chances are they don't care why you did poorly on a previous test, since they're rankings wh***s more than the applicants are - it shouldn't take more than a paragraph to explain adequately.

The official Spivey Consulting Group policy is that if you go up more than 12 points you should always claim you were drunk on the first test.

But in all honesty, if you have a good reason like sick or family matters, write one. Just keep in mind just about everyone says some form of "I was sick on the first test" so say it, say you worked hard all along and absolutely knew you would do better and that you covet X school so you wanted to put your best foot forward (see now you have a little yield protection data point) and please don't blather on.

MikeSpivey wrote:The official Spivey Consulting Group policy is that if you go up more than 12 points you should always claim you were drunk on the first test.

But in all honesty, if you have a good reason like sick or family matters, write one. Just keep in mind just about everyone says some form of "I was sick on the first test" so say it, say you worked hard all along and absolutely knew you would do better and that you covet X school so you wanted to put your best foot forward (see now you have a little yield protection data point) and please don't blather on.

I recommend that you state that you have learned from your earlier bad experience to select 'B' when guessing at an answer vice 'D' I am sure most adcoms will appreciate the growth that this demonstrates

Please keep it at ~2 sentences (taking this recommendation from Spivey's own thread). Spivey worded it perfectly.

Post removed.

Hildegard15 wrote:Why do many admissions websites explicitly ask you to write one for a jump of more than 6 points if they don't actually want to read it? Genuinely curious here.

Schools want people to believe that they evaluate applications holistically so that lots of people will apply.

Schools advise you to write an addendum for a big score jump. You scored 10 more points than your first take which constitutes a big score jump. You should write one that is short and honest. It's that simple. I don't get it why some people here are so dedicated in dissuading people from doing what is advised by the school.

MikeSpivey wrote:The official Spivey Consulting Group policy is that if you go up more than 12 points you should always claim you were drunk on the first test.

But in all honesty, if you have a good reason like sick or family matters, write one. Just keep in mind just about everyone says some form of "I was sick on the first test" so say it, say you worked hard all along and absolutely knew you would do better and that you covet X school so you wanted to put your best foot forward (see now you have a little yield protection data point) and please don't blather on.

Thanks, Mike. Though I was sick (truly!), I also had just moved to a new city and started my first full-time job a few weeks before my first test. I drafted a brief addendum that addresses this and that I was unprepared for the effects the transition/stress would have on me and my performance on the test. I think it sounds pretty good, but is there any reason something like this would raise a red flag for adcoms? Everyone is affected by transition periods and brand new experiences, but could the admissions committees worry that this LSAT experience bodes poorly for my ability to initially adapt to law school? If so, I'll just write that I was sick.

ihenry wrote:Schools advise you to write an addendum for a big score jump. You scored 10 more points than your first take which constitutes a big score jump. You should write one that is short and honest. It's that simple. I don't get it why some people here are so dedicated in dissuading people from doing what is advised by the school.

What school?

Yes, if a specific school asks for an LSAT addendum in particular circumstances, and if you fall within those circumstances, then you should provide an addendum.

But I believe that most schools do not ask for an addendum. For those schools, I am very skeptical of the value of an addendum that provides a mundane explanation for a score increase. And, based on what I've seen on TLS, at least 90% of the time people offer explanations that support the notion that they will have difficulty coping with the stresses of law school. Stuff like this: I didn't study the first time/I was tired/I was busy at work. I don't see how those explanations can be anything but counterproductive.

rpupkin wrote:

ihenry wrote:Schools advise you to write an addendum for a big score jump. You scored 10 more points than your first take which constitutes a big score jump. You should write one that is short and honest. It's that simple. I don't get it why some people here are so dedicated in dissuading people from doing what is advised by the school.

What school?

Yes, if a specific school asks for an LSAT addendum in particular circumstances, and if you fall within those circumstances, then you should provide an addendum.

But I believe that most schools do not ask for an addendum. For those schools, I am very skeptical of the value of an addendum that provides a mundane explanation for a score increase. And, based on what I've seen on TLS, at least 90% of the time people offer explanations that support the notion that they will have difficulty coping with the stresses of law school. Stuff like this: I didn't study the first time/I was tired/I was busy at work. I don't see how those explanations can be anything but counterproductive.

What does this have to do with coping with stress after admitted?Didn't read your post carefully sorry. Yeah don't write an addendum that could shed negative lights on you, although for most common reasons, they probably won't.

I get what you say: the "mundane" explanation is most likely the reason people sign up for the test for the second time and adcomms know it. I just saw, from first hand and second hand info ITT, that schools advise an addendum to explain large discrepancy. If this is what they say, applicants should write one no problem. But even if a particular school doesn't ask, I don't see why a short and honest addendum can be counterproductive.

rpupkin wrote: What school?

I went through the admissions FAQs, blog posts, and general information pages of every T14 today and all but Northwestern, Cornell, and Georgetown mandated or strongly suggested submitting an addendum when there is a large score discrepancy. In some cases, the number of points that warrants an addendum was noted, but not always.

ihenry wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

ihenry wrote:Schools advise you to write an addendum for a big score jump. You scored 10 more points than your first take which constitutes a big score jump. You should write one that is short and honest. It's that simple. I don't get it why some people here are so dedicated in dissuading people from doing what is advised by the school.

What school?

Yes, if a specific school asks for an LSAT addendum in particular circumstances, and if you fall within those circumstances, then you should provide an addendum.

But I believe that most schools do not ask for an addendum. For those schools, I am very skeptical of the value of an addendum that provides a mundane explanation for a score increase. And, based on what I've seen on TLS, at least 90% of the time people offer explanations that support the notion that they will have difficulty coping with the stresses of law school. Stuff like this: I didn't study the first time/I was tired/I was busy at work. I don't see how those explanations can be anything but counterproductive.

What does this have to do with coping with stress after admitted?

What do undergraduate grades have to do with law school grades? What does a personal statement—which of course covers something that occurred before the applicant was admitted—have to do with law school? The entire law school application—LSAT scores, grades, letters of recommendation, personal statements, and addenda—all involve things that happened before the applicant was admitted, and all are considered relevant to how someone will perform in law school.

Look, as others have pointed out, this debate is pretty silly because the vast majority of law schools admit almost all of their students based on a combination of GPA and highest LSAT score. Most of the time, an addendum (or lack of an addendum) isn't going to matter one way or the other. It's at most a soft factor. But on the off chance that an adcomm actually reads (and cares about) the addendum, you don't want to give them a reason to think that you struggle to cope with the everyday stresses of life.

maracuya wrote:

rpupkin wrote: What school?

I went through the admissions FAQs, blog posts, and general information pages of every T14 today and all but Northwestern, Cornell, and Georgetown mandated or strongly suggested submitting an addendum when there is a large score discrepancy. In some cases, the number of points that warrants an addendum was noted, but not always.

If the school mandates it, then submit it. But if school merely suggests it, I would only submit an addendum if you have a truly compelling explanation for the score increase. If you don't have a compelling explanation but want to submit one anyway, then follow Spivey's advice and keep the thing really short.

rpupkin wrote:

ihenry wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

ihenry wrote:Schools advise you to write an addendum for a big score jump. You scored 10 more points than your first take which constitutes a big score jump. You should write one that is short and honest. It's that simple. I don't get it why some people here are so dedicated in dissuading people from doing what is advised by the school.

What school?

Yes, if a specific school asks for an LSAT addendum in particular circumstances, and if you fall within those circumstances, then you should provide an addendum.

But I believe that most schools do not ask for an addendum. For those schools, I am very skeptical of the value of an addendum that provides a mundane explanation for a score increase. And, based on what I've seen on TLS, at least 90% of the time people offer explanations that support the notion that they will have difficulty coping with the stresses of law school. Stuff like this: I didn't study the first time/I was tired/I was busy at work. I don't see how those explanations can be anything but counterproductive.

What does this have to do with coping with stress after admitted?

What do undergraduate grades have to do with law school grades? What does a personal statement—which of course covers something that occurred before the applicant was admitted—have to do with law school? The entire law school application—LSAT scores, grades, letters of recommendation, personal statements, and addenda—all involve things that happened before the applicant was admitted, and all are considered relevant to how someone will perform in law school.

Look, as others have pointed out, this debate is pretty silly because the vast majority of law schools admit almost all of their students based on a combination of GPA and highest LSAT score. Most of the time, an addendum (or lack of an addendum) isn't going to matter one way or the other. It's at most a soft factor. But on the off chance that an adcomm actually reads (and cares about) the addendum, you don't want to give them a reason to think that you struggle to cope with the everyday stresses of life.

I have made a prompt correction. And the fact that people didn't score well on the first test may already have indicated they missed something at the first time. An addendum at least shows you read their instructions, realize your mistakes and take your application seriously.

I agree with you that either way they may not have an impact though.

Hildegard15 wrote:Why do many admissions websites explicitly ask you to write one for a jump of more than 6 points if they don't actually want to read it? Genuinely curious here.

I have no idea. Maybe because that is outside the standard error of measurement for the LSAT? Maybe 1 person wrote one and everyone else latched on (this happens in all professions).

Obviously I can't speak for all schools -- but MOST schools hate being spammed. They have to read about 6,000-10,000 pages of personal statements alone at the top end. They would roll their eyes if someone said "let me explain my 163 went to 169....I was sick...etc etc"

maracuya wrote:

MikeSpivey wrote:The official Spivey Consulting Group policy is that if you go up more than 12 points you should always claim you were drunk on the first test.

But in all honesty, if you have a good reason like sick or family matters, write one. Just keep in mind just about everyone says some form of "I was sick on the first test" so say it, say you worked hard all along and absolutely knew you would do better and that you covet X school so you wanted to put your best foot forward (see now you have a little yield protection data point) and please don't blather on.

Thanks, Mike. Though I was sick (truly!), I also had just moved to a new city and started my first full-time job a few weeks before my first test. I drafted a brief addendum that addresses this and that I was unprepared for the effects the transition/stress would have on me and my performance on the test. I think it sounds pretty good, but is there any reason something like this would raise a red flag for adcoms? Everyone is affected by transition periods and brand new experiences, but could the admissions committees worry that this LSAT experience bodes poorly for my ability to initially adapt to law school? If so, I'll just write that I was sick.

None of that would raise a read flag. You'd be utterly amazed how quickly they read these explanations (another reasons a brief one is all you need). What some people (like I was) are looking for is a "blame everyone else" type statement in which case you have a negative feel for the applicant.

MikeSpivey wrote:

maracuya wrote:

MikeSpivey wrote:The official Spivey Consulting Group policy is that if you go up more than 12 points you should always claim you were drunk on the first test.

But in all honesty, if you have a good reason like sick or family matters, write one. Just keep in mind just about everyone says some form of "I was sick on the first test" so say it, say you worked hard all along and absolutely knew you would do better and that you covet X school so you wanted to put your best foot forward (see now you have a little yield protection data point) and please don't blather on.

Thanks, Mike. Though I was sick (truly!), I also had just moved to a new city and started my first full-time job a few weeks before my first test. I drafted a brief addendum that addresses this and that I was unprepared for the effects the transition/stress would have on me and my performance on the test. I think it sounds pretty good, but is there any reason something like this would raise a red flag for adcoms? Everyone is affected by transition periods and brand new experiences, but could the admissions committees worry that this LSAT experience bodes poorly for my ability to initially adapt to law school? If so, I'll just write that I was sick.

None of that would raise a read flag. You'd be utterly amazed how quickly they read these explanations (another reasons a brief one is all you need). What some people (like I was) are looking for is a "blame everyone else" type statement in which case you have a negative feel for the applicant.

That makes perfect sense. Thank you so much for addressing my particular issue, Mike.