LSAT Diary: How Michael Improved His LSAT Score

This installment of LSAT Diaries comes from LSAT Blog reader Michael, who went from a 148 to a 163 on the LSAT!

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Thanks to Michael for sharing his experience and advice, and please leave your questions for him below in the comments!

Michael's LSAT Diary:

148 to 163: Yes, It Is Possible

[Thank you Steve for allowing me to share my story. I hope this influences others to pursue the LSAT with success. May your worldly and highly recommended expertise assist others.]

I am part of the 1% of LSAT takers. No, not the 1% of test takers who score above a 175; I represent 1% of re-takers who increased their scores by more than 7 points. I am telling you this because yes, it is possible to learn the LSAT and ultimately succeed.

I was part of the 33%. In February 2011, I received a 148 – well below my expectations, especially after months of studying. Forced with two options, re-take the test or forget about law school, I realized the answer was simple: Do not give up. With self-study and Steve’s LSAT Blog, I realized my potential with a 163. I would like to share my volatile LSAT experience to ultimately show you this test is indeed manageable.

During my February 2011 LSAT experience, I relied on a popular group-tutoring company. The classrooms were filled with fifty or more students eager for a chance at LSAT stardom. After $1,500 and a 148, I understood the large groups were not conducive to proper studying. There was little to no chance for individual attention and the lessons seemed rehearsed. Larger study groups offer success to many LSAT writers, but I would recommend re-takers re-tool their study strategies.

In order to improve my score the second time, re-shaping my approach to the LSAT was fundamental. I am referring to a Blitzkrieg, “three-pronged” battle plan: strategy, psychology and physiology. Mentally, prepare yourself with new tools to ace the LSAT; psychologically, understand the hard work the next few months will require; and physiologically, complement your studying with healthy eating and exercise. Attain a “can-do” attitude and prepare to attack each aforementioned category in order to attain success.

The Law School Admission Council is ready to administer parallel flawed reasoning, “Principle/Application” inferences and causality. Perhaps frightening topics, but you will counterattack. To prepare myself mentally, my Logical Reasoning strategy was to learn the fundamentals, drill problems and then write timed sections.

Logical Reasoning continued to be my weakness as I continually received a combined twenty wrong. Self-study did not seem to appealing as I met constant failure with Logical Reasoning, particularly because it is half the test. Yet I continued and drilled with the mentality that, “I am capable” and “Yes, I will do this.” Your mood must complement your studies. Listen to motivating music; dead lift 500 pounds; and read Steve’s blog. After enough anxiety through constant drilling, I hit my breakthrough by focusing on my weaknesses. Gradually, my -20 became -10. Grind through your studies with steadfast optimism and I guarantee you will achieve your goal.

Analytical Reasoning, or Logic Games, is perceived to be the hardest part of the test, but is in fact the most manageable. Many Logic Games are repetitions with different variables as there are only a few game types: pure sequencing, linear and grouping alongside the rarer types. To master Logic Games, I wrote each game three times in order to understand the repetitions. Break down different game types and drill each.

Reading Comprehension complicates the LSAT because varying strategies exist. To mark or not to mark? Too much marking? After studying full-time for three months and much research, I cannot say there is a unifying strategy for RC. It is personal. Common tips include looking for certain indicators, but whether you mark the passage or not, learn to “map” the passage’s flow. Be wary of perception shifts, the author’s attitude and minute facts. The best advice I can offer for Reading Comprehension is to drill and discover the best strategy.

After numerous practice tests and nightmares, the October 2011 test day finally arrived. At the beginning of my studying, I felt the test was light years away, but it arrives quicker than you think. I can regurgitate the typical “prepare your plastic bag the night before; sleep for at least seven hours; and eat protein in the morning,” but the test is more than that. It is a competition against yourself in accordance with how far you are willing to go. By test day, there is not much else you can “do” to improve your score, as your studying is complete. Mentally prepare yourself for yourself.

I had a Wall Street job I quit to study for the LSAT. Sounds crazy, right? Not really, because when you want something desperately you need to follow your dreams and do whatever necessary. I quit my job to study eight hours a day, forty hours a week for a test I previously “bombed.” My father and grandfather are attorneys, so I suppose it is genetic. Who knows? What I do know and guarantee is if you work hard with a strong mentality, you will succeed. I promise.

Photo by bobaubuchon

PrepTest 64 (October 2011 LSAT) Logical Reasoning Explanations

For those of you who took the October 2011 LSAT (which is now PrepTest 64), I've written complete explanations for that exam's Logical Reasoning sections, and they're available for instant PDF download.

(In order to benefit from these explanations, you must separately get the Logical Reasoning questions contained within LSAT PrepTest 64. The above-linked download does not include the actual LSAT Logical Reasoning questions from this exam.)

If you haven't yet gotten a copy of PrepTest 64, you can download the full exam as a PDF. It comes with the accompanying Logical Reasoning explanations for free.

Logic and Games

* More LSAT Test Day Tips than you could ever possibly want. [LSAT Blog]

* Please remember to have your Test Day photo ready, and make sure it fulfills all LSAC requirements. [LSAT Blog; UD Review]

* Must-read article on why law schools don't teach practical skills. [NYTimes]

* Here's one NYTimes-referenced article about the taboos surrounding a particular 4-letter word (PDF). [Cardozo Law Review]

* Should some students be bribed to quit law school? [Slate; Above The Law]

* The pepper-spraying cop at UC Davis has been hard at work throughout history. [Washington Post]

* Everything you ever wanted to know about money. [xkcd]

New LSAT Logic Games Categorization

The following categorization covers Logic Games in LSAT PrepTests 52-64 (September 2007 LSAT - October 2011 LSAT).

(In my LSAT study schedules, I recommend saving most of the newer PrepTests for full-length timed practice. In order to avoid "corrupting" those exams, I suggest you avoid looking at this classification for any PrepTest that you plan to take under timed conditions until you've completed that test.)

In this blog post, I first group each Logic Game by its classification. At the end of all that, I also classify all Logic Games but place them in order by PrepTest # and date.

You can also find LSAT Logic Games categorizations for LSAT PrepTests 19-38 and and LSAT PrepTests 39-51 (and June 2007).

I encourage my students to simply think about the categories in the broadest possible sense. After all, the game itself will tell you (indirectly) which subcategory it fits, so you won't have to consciously think about its specific subcategories.

Many test-takers freak out when they can't figure out what "type" of game they face on test day. This means it's best to rely on the game, rather than any classification system, to tell you what to do. This is especially true for "Hybrid" or "Combination" games.

I've divided "Grouping" games into :

Grouping: In-and-Out = some variables are chosen, others are not.
Grouping: Splitting = variables are divided into two different groups.
Grouping: Matching = variables of one type are associated with variables of another type.

I've placed an asterisk (*) next to some games that are especially difficult. Of course, difficulty is subjective, so please leave comments!

Pure Sequencing
PrepTest 52, Game 1
PrepTest 52, Game 4
PrepTest 53, Game 2
PrepTest 54, Game 3
PrepTest 55, Game 3
PrepTest 60, Game 2
PrepTest 61, Game 2


Basic Linear
PrepTest 54, Game 4
PrepTest 55, Game 2
PrepTest 56, Game 1
PrepTest 57, Game 1
PrepTest 57, Game 2
PrepTest 58, Game 1
PrepTest 59, Game 2
PrepTest 59, Game 4
PrepTest 60, Game 3
PrepTest 61, Game 4
PrepTest 62, Game 1
PrepTest 62, Game 4
PrepTest 63, Game 2
PrepTest 63, Game 3
PrepTest 64, Game 1
PrepTest 64, Game 4


Advanced Linear (aka Combination of Linear and Grouping: Matching)
PrepTest 52, Game 3
PrepTest 53, Game 3
PrepTest 53, Game 4
PrepTest 54, Game 2 *
PrepTest 55, Game 4 *
PrepTest 56, Game 4
PrepTest 58, Game 3 *
PrepTest 59, Game 1
PrepTest 60, Game 1
PrepTest 60, Game 4
PrepTest 62, Game 3


Grouping: In-Out
PrepTest 54, Game 1
PrepTest 58, Game 2
PrepTest 58, Game 4
PrepTest 59, Game 3


Grouping: Splitting
PrepTest 61, Game 1
PrepTest 63, Game 1


Grouping: Matching
PrepTest 52, Game 2
PrepTest 53, Game 1
PrepTest 55, Game 1
PrepTest 56, Game 2 *
PrepTest 57, Game 4
PrepTest 62, Game 2
PrepTest 64, Game 3 *


Linear / Grouping: In-Out
PrepTest 61, Game 3
PrepTest 63, Game 4


Grouping: Splitting / Grouping: In-and-Out
PrepTest 56, Game 3


Grouping: In-and-Out / Grouping: Matching
PrepTest 57, Game 3 *
PrepTest 64, Game 2


***

PrepTest 52 (September 2007 LSAT)
Game 1 - Pure Sequencing
Game 2 - Grouping: Matching
Game 3 - Advanced Linear
Game 4 - Pure Sequencing

PrepTest 53 (December 2007 LSAT)
Game 1 - Grouping: Matching
Game 2 - Pure Sequencing
Game 3 - Advanced Linear
Game 4 - Advanced Linear

PrepTest 54 (June 2008 LSAT)
Game 1 - Grouping: In-and-Out
Game 2 - Advanced Linear *
Game 3 - Pure Sequencing
Game 4 - Basic Linear

PrepTest 55 (October 2008 LSAT)
Game 1 - Grouping: Matching
Game 2 - Basic Linear
Game 3 - Pure Sequencing
Game 4 - Advanced Linear *

PrepTest 56 (December 2008 LSAT)
Game 1 - Basic Linear
Game 2 - Grouping: Matching *
Game 3 - Grouping: Splitting / Grouping: In-and-Out
Game 4 - Advanced Linear

PrepTest 57 (June 2009 LSAT)
Game 1 - Basic Linear
Game 2 - Basic Linear
Game 3 - Grouping: In-and-Out / Grouping: Matching *
Game 4 - Grouping: Matching

PrepTest 58 (September 2009 LSAT)
Game 1 - Basic Linear
Game 2 - Grouping: In-and-Out
Game 3 - Advanced Linear *
Game 4 - Grouping: In-and-Out

PrepTest 59 (December 2009 LSAT)
Game 1 - Advanced Linear
Game 2 - Basic Linear
Game 3 - Grouping: In-Out
Game 4 - Basic Linear

PrepTest 60 (June 2010 LSAT)
Game 1 - Advanced Linear
Game 2 - Pure Sequencing
Game 3 - Basic Linear *
Game 4 - Advanced Linear

PrepTest 61 (October 2010 LSAT)
Game 1 - Grouping: Splitting
Game 2 - Pure Sequencing
Game 3 - Linear / Grouping: In-Out
Game 4 - Basic Linear

PrepTest 62 (December 2010 LSAT)
Game 1 - Basic Linear
Game 2 - Grouping: Matching *
Game 3 - Advanced Linear
Game 4 - Basic Linear

PrepTest 63 (June 2011 LSAT)
Game 1 - Grouping: Splitting
Game 2 - Basic Linear
Game 3 - Basic Linear
Game 4 - Linear / Grouping: In-Out *

PrepTest 64 (October 2011 LSAT)
Game 1 - Basic Linear
Game 2 - Grouping: In-Out / Grouping: Matching
Game 3 - Grouping: Matching *
Game 4 - Basic Linear

Photo by cabinet

Writing Your Law School Personal Statement

The below excerpt about what you should attempt to communicate in your law school personal statement is from A Comprehensive Guide to the Law School Personal Statement.

***

The reader should be impressed by you (as a candidate, person, and writer)

The ideal response of an admissions officer reading your essay would be a broad smile, possibly accompanied with a “Wow,” or a nod that indicates a appreciation and respect for the applicant. Though getting the reader to like you is the primary goal, you don’t want to be likable in a cute, self-deprecating, or non-serious way. You want the reader to like you, and be impressed by you.

Most applicants realize that a goal of the personal statement is to impress, but they are usually incorrect about how that goal should be accomplished. People think that the way to impress is to load up the essay with impressive content. For example, “After returning from scaling Kilimanjaro in record time, I founded 3 clubs at my school to benefit underserved children, which now command a total budget of $250,000.” This strategy— which I call the “resume blast”—fails badly because readers do not like being blasted by your accomplishments, no matter how great they are! Admissions officers, just like anyone else, do not enjoy listening to, or reading, bragging.

You should impress your reader with your essay, itself. Imagine your essay like an acting audition. If an actor came into an audition and started talking about what a good actor he was, the director and producer would be annoyed. They would say, “If you’re so great, show me!” That is what you need to do in your personal statement. A compelling, sincere, well-structured, well-executed, and flawlessly edited personal statement is extremely impressive. It shows several talents and abilities, self-reflection, poise, confidence and thoughtfulness.

This is not to say that your essay has no room for (some of) your accomplishments. It does! You should include impressive content in your essay; you should just use a very light touch. Remember, being impressive is the SECOND most important goal of the essay, and the first goal, being liked, should not be sacrificed for it.



The reader should remember you and your essay

Admissions officers read thousands of essays, piles of essays. Writing an essay that stands out, that is compelling and memorable is no easy job, but if you can accomplish it, the rewards are substantial.

There are two things that contribute to an essay’s memorability: the content and the style.

In terms of content, speaking “from the heart” is, by definition moving and memorable. Honesty is riveting, especially when it includes a discussion of overcoming obstacles. Every person has a unique life story; unique challenges which they have overcome, and a unique way that they decided to apply to law school. Honest, specific, personal statements are vivid and memorable. Compare: “I was playing video games 10-12 hours a day, living in my uncle’s basement, when I decided it was time to get off the couch. I went walking around my town and found myself in front of the courthouse. ‘It’s public’, I thought to myself, and stepped in” with, “I have a passion for watching court.” Which do you think the admissions officer will remember later in the day? Which will she forget immediately?

Style is also key. Writing with spice and zing, with tension and climax are great ways to make your essay compelling and memorable.



The reader should understand why you are applying to Law School

After reading your personal statement, your admissions officer should understand why you are applying to law school. This may be the most controversial piece of advice I offer. Not all admissions consultants believe that the issue of why you are applying to law school must be addressed. I disagree. I think to write a personal statement on a topic, such as your life-long, enriching love of sailing, and not make an explicit connection to law school or being a lawyer is bizarre, and inherently less powerful than an essay that also explains your desire to go into law. (I.e., “My grandfather taught me to sail when I was a child. When we were on one of our multi-day voyages in my teen years, he explained to me the concept of international waters. I was stunned and fascinated by the idea that there were areas of earth where no laws applied. I couldn’t really believe it. So I started reading.”)

You can look at it like this: If you have made an emotional connection with the reader, gotten her to like you, then she also will be open to helping you achieve your goals. But you still have to explain to them why admitting you will help you! In this sense, you can think of your personal statement as a cross between a submitting a grant proposal and asking for a personal favor. You want the reader to agree with you. To say, “Yes, this person belongs in law school,” or “Yes, this person should be a lawyer.” If your admissions officer thinks that, and likes you, then she can admit you and make it happen!

Don’t get me wrong! You should not write a dry, formulaic essays on “The Three Reasons I Want to Be a Lawyer: Contracts are fascinating to me, litigation is exciting, and I love Latin terms.” Your personal statement should be a story— a compelling narrative. It should just be a narrative that addresses the issue of why you want to go to law school!

Photo by subcess

Preparing for the December 2011 LSAT Experimental Section

In my LSAT study schedules, I recommend that you include extra sections in your practice exams. Why would I recommend such a cruel and difficult task?

Because LSAC uses test-takers as lab rats (like many organizations that administer standardized exams - think back to the SAT). LSAC includes an unscored experimental section on the LSAT and doesn't tell you which one it is. If you knew which one it was, you'd probably take a nap to recuperate between the sections you care about - the scored ones.

To LSAC's credit, this practice increases the validity of the scored sections of future LSATs. The experimental section allows LSAC to pre-test questions with several thousand applicants, helping LSAC determine which questions deserve to make it into future scored sections.

On the other hand, not knowing which section is the experimental can make it difficult to decide whether or not to cancel your score. If you bomb the experimental section, it may affect your performance on the other sections. Additionally, being forced to "donate" 35 minutes of free research for LSAC after paying to take the LSAT hardly seems fair.

Regardless, because you'll see a 5-section exam on test day, rather than the 4 you're used to seeing in your LSAT PrepTests, it's essential to prepare.

I decided to write this post after blog reader Katie wrote to me with the following question:

I have been taking 4 section timed tests for a while now but am starting to take 5 and 6 section timed tests as you suggest. I have two questions:

1. I assume that the type of "extra" section(s) I include should vary from test to test. For example, on one day, I would add a logic games section and the next day either a reading comprehension or a logical reasoning section. Is this what you would recommend?

2. What is the best way to score these tests? Which section do I omit? I took a test last night and did an extra logical reasoning section. The scoring for the test I took the extra section from was very different from the full test I was taking - does this make sense? I want to make sure I'm getting an accurate read of my performance.

Varying extra sections
There are two main approaches I'd recommend:

-You can rotate the type of "extra" section(s) that you use.
-You can make the extra section(s) the one that you like the least.

For most people, a combination of the two is probably ideal. Figure out which type of section you dread the most, and include it more often than the others.


Which section to omit
This makes perfect sense, Katie. To get the most accurate score reading, omit the section(s) that are not from the original exam. Different exams have different scales.


Some more tips on preparing for the experimental section:

Where to place the unscored section.
In the past, I recommended that you place the experimental sections in the first 3 sections out of the 5 that you complete for your practice exams. That's where the experimental had traditionally fallen on test day. Until recently, test-takers reported that it had always been one of the first 3 sections.

However, on the October 2011 LSAT, many test-takers reported having the experimental as their 4th section on Test Day - for this reason, I recommend that you also include it as the 4th or 5th section in at least a few practice exams, just in case.

It's unfortunate that you may have to take the unscored section when you're less fatigued, but just remember everyone else is affected in the same way.


Mix up sections.
As I said earlier, on test day, you won't know which section is the experimental. For this reason, you may want to lay out the sections from each PrepTest beforehand. Take two from the "scored" exam and one "unscored" experimental, and mix them together.

This way, you won't know which ones are scored and which ones aren't, and you'll be forced to put the same effort into each.

Photo by happysteve

Logic and Games

* Fordham Law School won't let its health centers prescribe birth control, but two student groups are passing out the contraband off-campus. [Above The Law]

* Penn State Law's offering application fee waivers, perhaps in the hopes it'll make you overlook a certain recent scandal. [The Daily Beast]

* The good people who brought you the Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian sex tapes threaten to sue the HTC smartphone company over trademark infringement. [Mashable]

* UFC seeks to overturn a ban on live fights in NYC, claiming the ban infringes on 1st Amendment right for athletes to express themselves before fans. [WSJ Law Blog]

* The guy who created JuicyCampus is promoting himself as an opponent of cyberbullying. [Inside Higher Ed]

* Think your college dorm is bad? These students had to move to a boat. [NYTimes]

Sufficient Assumption Questions and the Negation Test

In this LSAT Blog post, I discuss two common Logical Reasoning question types: Necessary Assumption and Sufficient Assumption.

The negation test is a common strategy you can effectively use for Necessary Assumption questions. However, many test-takers like the technique so much, they try to use it for sufficient assumption questions also, often leading to disastrous consequences.

Due to the difference between Necessary Assumption and Sufficient Assumption questions, you shouldn't use it for sufficient assumption questions.

The reason is that a necessary assumption always needs to be the case in order for an argument to work (the conclusion follow), but a sufficient assumption is just that - sufficient to make the argument work (the conclusion follow), but not all sufficient assumptions are required in order for the argument to work (for the conclusion to follow).

In other words, the correct answer to sufficient assumption questions is often something that does not actually need to be true, but if it is true, will fully justify the conclusion.

(Note that many answers to sufficient assumption questions are broader than the argument.)

***

I'll illustrate this with two examples:

The first is a very general and simple example , but the second is an example from an actual LSAT PrepTest.


General example:

Take this statement:

"When your dog encountered my cat in the yard, your dog attacked my cat."

It would be sufficient to prove this statement if we learned, as new information, that when any dog encounters any cat, the dog will attack the cat.

However, this doesn't *need* to be the case in order to prove the statement above. Perhaps some dogs have no problem with cats, but this particular dog was getting back at the cat for being a total jerk.



Example from an actual LSAT PrepTest:

Please see PrepTest 35 (Oct 2001), Section 1, Question 22 (p226 in Next 10).

We can diagram the stimulus as:

Evidence: C -> NOT T -> NOT P
Evidence: P -> T -> NOT C
---
Conclusion: P -> NOT H

While H -> C is sufficient to guarantee the conclusion, it's not required in order to do so. Even if H didn't require C, information from the evidence could still, in combination with a sufficient assumption, guarantee that P required NOT H.

What if we learned that T required NOT H, or that H required NOT T? In combination with the statement that P -> T, the conclusion would still follow from the evidence (even if H didn't require C).

(It's possible that LSAC would disregard the T -> NOT C statement when considering how to make the evidence + sufficient assumption lead to the conclusion - stimuli often contain information that serves as filler and is irrelevant in guaranteeing the conclusion.)


Photo by jjpacres

LSAT Timer: Analog Watch Recommendation

LSAC's Test Day FAQ mentions that LSAC doesn't allow digital watches or timers on the exam. Whether or not this makes sense, it means you can use an analog watch or just go without.

Most test-takers feel more comfortable having some kind of watch.

Using a regular watch means:

1. you need to turn the minute hand back to 12 before each section

OR

2. you need to do math to determine how much time you have left in a given section

Neither option is ideal.

#1 isn't a great option because you'll typically have only 3 to 30 seconds between sections (excluding the break, of course). This time is best spent recuperating, clearing your mind, and preparing yourself for the next section - NOT fiddling with a tiny watch dial.

#2 isn't a great option because it would force you to add/subtract whenever you want to know how much time you have remaining. This energy and time are best spent answering questions.

So where does this leave you?

There is a watch out there that satisfies LSAC's security requirements without either of the disadvantages I outlined above.

Here is a watch that has a rotating bezel, so you can easily see how much time you have left.

(The bezel is the thing with the markings that go around the watch's face.)

Before each section, just turn the "0" part of the bezel to wherever the minute hand is. When the minute hand hits 30 on the bezel, you have 5 minutes left. At this point, it might be a good idea to bubble in your answers if you haven't already. When the minute hand hits 35 on the bezel, your proctor will likely announce that time's up (if he/she hasn't already).

Whichever watch you use, make sure you're comfortable using it during at least a few timed practice exams.

LSAT Logic Prep: Jay Z's Blueprint vs. Occupy All Streets

In this LSAT Blog post, I cover Jay Z's approach to charitable giving in two different situations, giving an example of a principle that might underlie each.

Why?

Because the LSAT Logical Reasoning section has increased the number of principle questions in recent years.

The LSAT more frequently asks you to take a given principle and apply it to different situations.

***

On 9/11, Jay Z dropped his sixth album, The Blueprint. He toured during the months of September and October 2001, donating a dollar from every concert ticket sold to 9/11 relief organizations.

This week, Jay Z's Rocawear clothing line will release a line of T-shirts with the message "Occupy All Streets." His spokesperson stated:

The 'Occupy All Streets' T shirt was created in support of the 'Occupy Wall Street' movement. Rocawear strongly encourages all forms of constructive expression, whether it be artistic, political or social. 'Occupy All Streets' is our way of reminding people that there is change to be made everywhere, not just on Wall Street. At this time we have not made an official commitment to monetarily support the movement.

(Although they were briefly removed from Rocawear.com, they're back, should you be interested.)

***

So, what principles might help to justify Jay Z's donations (or lack thereof) in each situation?


For Jay Z's concerts surrounding the release of The Blueprint:

Principle: "If an artist drops an album on the same date as that of a national crisis, the artist should make some financial contribution to the victims of that crisis."

Application: Jay Z dropped The Blueprint on 9/11, and he made donations to 9/11 victims.



For Jay Z's new T-shirts:

Principle: "Even if an artist makes a profit from the sale of merchandise related to a political movement, this does not obligate to make a financial contribution to that movement."

Application: Jay Z makes money from selling "Occupy All Streets" T-shirts, but he doesn't give any money to Occupy Wall Street.


For both:

Principle: "Supporting those affected by political or economic events does not constitute a requirement to provide financial support for those affected."

Application: Jay Z supports both 9/11 victims and Occupy Wall Street, yet gives money to the former, but not the latter.

Logic and Games

* Judge rules against Occupy Wall Street protesters' right to remain in Zuccotti Park. [Above The Law]

* Guys, please don't lie on your law school applications. I wouldn't want you to end up like this. [FindLaw]

* Also, don't take this approach to dealing with personal statement writer's block. [Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis]

* Penn State, Joe Paterno, and other Penn State administrators may be looking at some civil lawsuits. [The Atlantic; NYTimes]

* Law professor / scamblogger has a tough time with critics.

* Advocacy groups are requesting that the Supreme Court remove the Federal Communications Commission's ban on George Carlin's seven dirty words. [Ars Technica]

Law School Application Deadlines List

I was recently forwarded the following description of a list containing information regarding law school application deadlines (in spreadsheet form). It also includes information regarding whether a dean's letter is required.

(Elisabeth also created a list of law schools offering application fee waivers.)

Those of you applying to law school in this admissions cycle will likely find it useful:

Aloha y'all!

Last month, we created an application fee waiver spreadsheet for our university's pre-law advising center. See http://ow.ly/6OuFM

This month, we looked for deadlines and dean's letter requirements. We used the same unscientific process as we did last time: If we found this information within a couple minutes of searching the law school website, we added it to a Google spreadsheet (law school name, URL, description/policy, and date accessed). The URL for the new spreadsheet is http://ow.ly/7jZdY. Corrections, welcome.

Please advise applicants to contact the individual law schools for the most accurate information.

Thank you!

Elisabeth Steele Hutchison
Director of Admissions & Special Projects
University of Hawai'i at Manoa | William S. Richardson School of Law

Photo by aidanmorgan