u/Electronic-Cow604

a lot of people here and on adjacent subs say to take your first diagnostic blindly… for anyone like me who had no prior clue what the lsat entails, don’t do this!

it may seem like common sense (probably is—definitely is) but i took it a diagnostic blindly as a first-gen everything with no clue what was actually on the test other than logical reasoning and it being hard. i think it goes without saying, but i got VERY discouraged.

i’m now doing lawhub’s article section, taking notes (because i have a very bad memory), and doing the questions embedded in and in the videos. i’m already seeing better results and feeling more confident with what i’m doing. i HIGHLY recommend the articles for anyone just starting out and who has no clue where to start since it’s free and the only thing you need is an lsac account, which you need anyway to apply.

does anyone know of any good free diagnostics online? i plan on taking my first one today and seeing where i fall as a rising college sophomore just to get an idea of how much i need to study before the real thing.

i just wrapped up my first year of undergrad and am wondering how good published research looks to law schools. i’m aiming t14 but not bust. through my history major one research project is required but it isn’t required that’s it published, however i do work on our school’s undergraduate historical review. we also have an undergraduate law review which i am attempting to become an editor on in the fall. i’d also like to publish in that as well but this year we have a special edition and it is only accepting submissions around the first amendment which i believe is extremely oversaturated right now.

anyway, the main question here is do law schools like applicants who have published legal research? my historical research may end up being on the history of copyright law and it’s english foundations.