Top Law Schools

I've been out of Undergrad for almost a year. Is it less impressive if its known an applicant studied for eight months rather than three?
I'm taking the Dec 2 test. I've been studying on and off since earlier this year. In fact, the next three months will significantly make up the bulk of my study. I almost want to communicate on my applications that I haven't been studying for a year to obtain the score that will ultimately be reported. Am I right at all thinking this way?

m16532 wrote:I've been out of Undergrad for almost a year. Is it less impressive if its known an applicant studied for eight months rather than three?
I'm taking the Dec 2 test. I've been studying on and off since earlier this year. In fact, the next three months will significantly make up the bulk of my study. I almost want to communicate on my applications that I haven't been studying for a year to obtain the score that will ultimately be reported. Am I right at all thinking this way?

No one will ever care.

TheSpanishMain wrote:

m16532 wrote:I've been out of Undergrad for almost a year. Is it less impressive if its known an applicant studied for eight months rather than three?
I'm taking the Dec 2 test. I've been studying on and off since earlier this year. In fact, the next three months will significantly make up the bulk of my study. I almost want to communicate on my applications that I haven't been studying for a year to obtain the score that will ultimately be reported. Am I right at all thinking this way?

No one will ever care.

Good to know. I assume the fact that you're able to get a good score is all that matters. If only there was no time limit on test day!

TheSpanishMain wrote:

m16532 wrote:I've been out of Undergrad for almost a year. Is it less impressive if its known an applicant studied for eight months rather than three?
I'm taking the Dec 2 test. I've been studying on and off since earlier this year. In fact, the next three months will significantly make up the bulk of my study. I almost want to communicate on my applications that I haven't been studying for a year to obtain the score that will ultimately be reported. Am I right at all thinking this way?

No one will ever care.

Right?! Hell, I don't even care; I just want m'damn score!

I strongly recommend writing an LSAT addendum detailing how long you prepared and your methods of preparation irrespective of the nature of your preparation and its results; I'm confident that schools will eat that shit right up

How would they even find out, unless you told them?

.

It does not matter.

Although the responses ITT are what I expected, I do see where OP is coming from. Most people on this site (myself included) believe that the LSAT is learnable with enough time and effort, but for some it takes considerably less effort than others. If I were in admissions I would be slightly more impressed with someone that scored a 173 with minimal studying as compared to someone who got the same score, but studied for 2 years straight.

MercW07 wrote:Although the responses ITT are what I expected, I do see where OP is coming from. Most people on this site (myself included) believe that the LSAT is learnable with enough time and effort, but for some it takes considerably less effort than others. If I were in admissions I would be slightly more impressed with someone that scored a 173 with minimal studying as compared to someone who got the same score, but studied for 2 years straight.

But again, how would you know?

cavalier1138 wrote:

MercW07 wrote:Although the responses ITT are what I expected, I do see where OP is coming from. Most people on this site (myself included) believe that the LSAT is learnable with enough time and effort, but for some it takes considerably less effort than others. If I were in admissions I would be slightly more impressed with someone that scored a 173 with minimal studying as compared to someone who got the same score, but studied for 2 years straight.

But again, how would you know?

Exactly. I guess they could ask about it in an interview? But even then there would be no way of knowing if the answer given was truthful.

Also NOBODY CARES.

They have zero idea or ever think along those lines.

MercW07 wrote:Although the responses ITT are what I expected, I do see where OP is coming from. Most people on this site (myself included) believe that the LSAT is learnable with enough time and effort, but for some it takes considerably less effort than others. If I were in admissions I would be slightly more impressed with someone that scored a 173 with minimal studying as compared to someone who got the same score, but studied for 2 years straight.

1. It doesn't matter. Nobody knows or cares.

2. I wouldn't. The LSAT tests perseverance and work ethic as much is does "intelligence." A 173 is a 173.

MikeSpivey wrote:They have zero idea or ever think along those lines.

When I interviewed with WUSTL they asked me point blank how I studied. I think they were just making small talk though. I just told them the truth.

rowdy wrote:

MikeSpivey wrote:They have zero idea or ever think along those lines.

When I interviewed with WUSTL they asked me point blank how I studied. I think they were just making small talk though. I just told them the truth.

You were admitted to WUSTL right? That generally isn't even an interview. It's a sales call under the guise of an interview. But I promise you I've never met anyone in admissions who cares about how long someone did or didn't study for the LSAT.

MikeSpivey wrote:

rowdy wrote:

MikeSpivey wrote:They have zero idea or ever think along those lines.

When I interviewed with WUSTL they asked me point blank how I studied. I think they were just making small talk though. I just told them the truth.

You were admitted to WUSTL right? That generally isn't even an interview. It's a sales call under the guise of an interview. But I promise you I've never met anyone in admissions who cares about how long someone did or didn't study for the LSAT.

I'm applying this cycle. In hindsight that meeting makes more sense as a sales call. Again, I think the admissions person was just making small talk.

If they start worrying about this type of thing, they'll have to start worrying about how much money plays into the ability to buy testing materials and take time off from obligations to study