Hi! I’m an incoming sophomore at the University of Arizona on the pre-law track, and I’d love some advice from current law students, attorneys, or anyone familiar with the process.
A little background: ten years ago, I dropped out of high school and got my GED with scores that honestly wouldn’t have gotten me into college at the time. Back then, I was working in the service industry and figured college just wasn’t in the cards for me.
I started at community college last year and completely fell in love with academics. I got involved in Student Government, worked closely with staff and administration, joined Phi Theta Kappa, took honors classes, and currently have a 4.0 GPA.
I originally planned on majoring in political science, but after taking a journalism class, I realized I genuinely loved it, so now I’m majoring in Journalism and minoring in Gender & Women’s Studies.
I’m hoping to spend the next three years building the strongest application possible for a T14 law school, and I’d really appreciate any advice on what I should prioritize during undergrad, internships/extracurriculars that helped, LSAT prep timelines, relationships with professors/networking, or anything you wish you had done differently before applying.
I also have a question specifically for attorneys: did the law school you attended significantly influence where you ended up practicing? I’ve toured a few campuses and absolutely fell in love with some of them, but an advisor told me that “where you go to law school is usually where you end up practicing,” which honestly changed how I’m thinking about applications.
Any advice is appreciated, except “don’t do it.” Thanks :)

So I have someone in my office who came back for the summer after finishing their 1L year at the law school I’ll be starting at this fall. I feel like I should have a ton of questions to ask to help prepare myself, but every time I try to think of something, I completely blank. I’m looking for good questions you either wish you had asked before starting law school or would recommend learning more about

I am pre-law with a double major in poli sci and Criminology. I also am in the process of getting my paralegal and legal issues in criminal justice certificates. I would like to work to the ACLU or anything DA (prosecutor/ maybe judicial) related, mainly because I do know how competitive international jobs are if you don't attend a T-14. I have 4.0 and am attending Barrett Honors with ASU as well. Of course every new lawyer wants to change the world, but I believe that I could be one of those few that can accomplish that in my lifetime. Any help in the right direction would be amazing!

I’m currently a Junior at UNF (Swoop!) and I’m spiraling. I’ve been told that the legal market is "saturated," so I’ve spent every waking second since freshman year building a resume that is basically a structural load-bearing document at this point. I just signed my 17th internship offer letter, but I’m worried that without a 18th, Yale will just throw my application in the trash.
I wanted to list my experience to see if anyone has "pivoted" from a heavy internship load to actually having a soul again.
The "Normal" Years (1–8)
The first two years were standard. I was a "grindset" king. I was commuting from Jacksonville to Tallahassee, living on Celsius and campus Chick-fil-A.

1. State Attorney’s Office (4th Circuit): Standard file-clerk stuff. Learned that "justice" involves a lot of jammed printers.
2. Boutique Personal Injury Firm (Jax Beach): Spent a summer looking at photos of fender benders.
3. Tallahassee Legislative Intern: Spent 40 hours a week getting coffee for people who didn't know my name.
4. In-House Legal at a Logistics Co: Reviewed shipping manifests for 10 weeks. I can now recite the liability limits for lost refrigerated poultry by heart.
5. Public Defender’s Office (Volunteer): Realized the world is sad.
6. Real Estate Title Firm: I learned that "easements" are the leading cause of suburban warfare.
7. Judicial Internship (County Court): I sat behind a judge and tried not to sneeze for three months.
8. Corporate Compliance Intern: I read 1,200 pages of "Terms of Service" and now I’m convinced we all unknowingly sold our kidneys to a software company in 2019.
   The Descent (9–17)
   This is where the burnout hit, the "hellscape" opened up, and the job descriptions started getting... specific.
9. Exotic Animal Estate Planning: I spent a semester drafting "Trusts and Will" documents for a retired circus capuchin monkey. I had to ensure his banana stipend was legally protected from his estranged nephews (also monkeys).
10. Sovereign Citizen Mediation: My job was to sit in a room with a guy who claimed he was a "maritime vessel" and explain why he still had to pay a speeding ticket on JTB.
11. Metaphysical IP Firm: I spent 15 hours a week filing trademarks for "Dream Catchers that actually work." We sued a local psychic for "predictive copyright infringement."
12. Night-Shift Weather Litigator: I worked for a firm that exclusively sues local meteorologists when it rains on outdoor weddings. I had to document "cloud intent."
13. Subterranean Mineral Rights (Hollow Earth Division): I was tasked with researching the property taxes for a group of people who believe they live in a city at the center of the earth. The filing fees were paid in "vibrational crystals."
14. The Raccoon Retainer: My supervisor was a man who lived in a dumpster behind a courthouse. He claimed to be a retired Supreme Court Justice. My "internship" was just me helping him file "Habeas Corpus" petitions for the local feral cat population.
15. Trial by Combat Consultant: I worked for a firm that represents extreme LARP communities. I had to draft a "Death Waiver" for a guy named Sir Galavant who was planning to duel a teenager in a Publix parking lot with a foam mace.
16. Subconscious Document Review: I was part of a "pilot program" where I had to wear a headset while I slept so a law firm could "bill" my dreams as research time. I woke up with a $2,000 invoice for a dream about a giant lizard in a tuxedo.
17. Counsel for the Concept of Entropy: My current gig. I spend 60 hours a week in a windowless room under the UNF library, filing paperwork to ensure that the heat death of the universe follows proper regulatory guidelines. My boss is a flickering fluorescent light that communicates in Morse code.
    The Question
    I haven't seen the sun in three weeks. My skin is the color of a discarded deposition transcript. I can only speak in Italicized Latin Phrases. I tried to go to a bonfire at the Green, but I ended up serving the fire a "Notice of Intent to Extinguish" because it didn't have a permit from the Dean of Students.
    Is this enough for Harvard? Or should I see if there's an internship available for "Interdimensional Tax Law"?
    TL;DR: 17 internships deep. I am currently representing a ghost in a slip-and-fall case against a cemetery. Is my GPA high enough to offset the fact that I no longer have a physical form? Swoop... I think?

Current stats:

Current Junior at State School, 3.65 GPA

Extensive Resume with Policy Background and work in government, extensive leadership on and off campus

First generation, low income with compelling story as to why I want to go into law school

Studying for LSAT since March 2026, planning to take and retake till October/November 2026, unsure what score I need atleast but I want a 170

Ultimate question, if I get my GPA somehow up to a 3.75/3.8, should I apply for fall 2028 or do I have any good chances of a t50 with these stats? Apologies in advance for lack of detail.

I wrote this to give my students the kind of context that would help them prep most effectively and to give anyone visiting my site a basic framework for moving forward. If you're clear on what you need to do and why you need to do it, it becomes easier to make the right decisions and to maintain the kind of consistent engagement that you'll need to improve your score. I'm sure that I've left stuff out and that there's things that people might disagree with but I wanted to keep this both broad and comprehensive without diving into a ton of details.

This post is a general overview of the entire LSAT process — it's a condensation of a much-longer 14-post series on the test that I have on my site completely for free. Here I give you the basic info on what the test is and what's at stake, the core analytical skills the test is built on, how the two scored sections work, how to structure your preparation, and the logistics from registration through post-test decisions.

What the LSAT Is

Why the LSAT Carries the Weight It Does

At most law schools, admissions decisions reduce to two numbers: your LSAT score and your undergraduate GPA, combined into an index score. The LSAT carries slightly more weight than the GPA. US News factors each school's incoming LSAT median into its rankings, so schools have a direct incentive to admit students with higher scores — and your score is evaluated against a specific school's median.

Merit scholarships follow the same logic. Law school merit aid is awarded almost entirely based on how your score compares to a school's median, not on financial need. Roughly 90% of students scoring 166 or above receive some form of merit aid, with average scholarships around $24,000/year against a total cost of attendance of approximately $82,000/year.

What It Tests

The LSAT tests close reading of dense, difficult text and verbal reasoning — you follow complex arguments and analyze the logical connections and implications in them. There's no legal knowledge required; preparation is the development of specific skills and not memorization of specific facts or concepts (though there will be some concepts you'll need to learn in order to apply those skills appropriately).

The Current Format

Four sections, 35 minutes each: two scored Logical Reasoning sections, one scored Reading Comprehension section, and one unscored experimental section. The experimental is either LR or RC, it's indistinguishable from the scored sections, and its position is randomized. Treat every section as scored.

• Logical Reasoning — 2 sections, scored
• Reading Comprehension — 1 section, scored
• Experimental (LR or RC) — 1 section, unscored

10-minute break between sections 2 and 3. Delivered digitally through LawHub, with in-person and remote testing currently available. Remote testing ends for most test takers starting August 2026.

LSAT Writing is a separate 50-minute writing sample administered through LawHub on a different day. It doesn't affect your score, but law schools won't receive your score report until you complete it.

Scores and Targets

Scale runs 120–180; national median is approximately 152–153.

Top school medians (approximate):

• Yale — 177
• Stanford, Harvard, Chicago — 176
• Columbia, Northwestern, Virginia — 175
• Penn, NYU — 174
• Georgetown, Michigan — 173
• Duke, UCLA, Berkeley — 172

A 170 is below the median at every T14 school. Use the above as a rough guide — as you move toward less prestigious schools the medians drop.

The Underlying Skills

There are three key skills you'll need to develop before everything else becomes easy to learn: reading comprehension, verbal reasoning, and formal logic. Understanding these before you encounter specific question types matters — the question types are essentially applications of these skills.

Reading Dense Text: Grammar and Sentence Structure

The difficulty in LSAT text isn't just vocabulary. It's sentence complexity: long and awkward constructions that bury meaning inside layers of modification and make it opaque who the agent is and what they're doing. Every sentence has a core — a subject and a predicate — and additional complexity gets layered on through three mechanisms:

• Modification — adding information through words, phrases, or clauses
• Nominalization — converting verbs into nouns, which buries the action and the agent
• Passive voice — making the agent optional, removing actors from view

Arguments: Verbal Reasoning

An argument has a conclusion — the claim being made — and premises, the reasons offered in support. Indicator words often signal which is which: conclusion indicators (therefore, thus, so, hence) point forward to the claim; premise indicators (because, since) point back to the support. Arguments can also have sub-conclusions (claims that both receive and provide support) and response structures where the author pushes back against a stated position.

Formal Logic: Conditionals and Quantifiers

Conditional reasoning is if-then reasoning. The "if" part is the sufficient condition; the "then" part is the necessary condition. Think of conditionals as rules: the sufficient tells you what triggers the rule, the necessary tells you the consequence. A valid rule is one where the consequence always follows when triggered — you can't have sufficient without necessary. The one valid deduction from any conditional is the contrapositive: if the necessary is absent, the sufficient must be absent (flip and negate both sides). Two common errors: false reversal (treating necessary as sufficient) and false negation (negating the sufficient to conclude the negation of the necessary). Both mainly come from applying everyday speech habits to a more technical usage.

Syllogistic reasoning uses "all," "no," "some," "most." "All" and "no" map directly to conditionals. Formal "some" means at least one; formal "most" means more than half — neither implies incompleteness. This isn't as common as conditional reasoning but it appears and you have to know the specific language.

The Two Scored Sections

Logical Reasoning

Each LR question gives you a short argument and asks you to do something with it. Question types fall into four categories:

Relevance — answer choices bring in new information from outside the argument:

• Strengthen — find the choice that makes the conclusion more likely
• Weaken — find the choice that makes the conclusion less likely
• Evaluate — find the question whose answers would both strengthen and weaken the argument
• Paradox — stimulus presents a contradiction; find the choice that resolves it

Rule — answer choices bring in principles rather than new facts:

• Principle (Justify) — find the rule that bridges premises and conclusion when applied
• Sufficient Assumption — find the assumption that makes the conclusion inevitable
• Principle (Illustrate) — stimulus is a scenario; find the generalization derived from it
• Principle (Scenario) — stimulus contains a principle; find the argument it correctly applies to

Consequence — works entirely within the stimulus:

• Must Be True — find the choice that has to be true given the stimulus
• Must Be False — find the choice that contradicts the stimulus
• Necessary Assumption — find what the conclusion can't hold without
• Disagreement — two speakers; find what one is committed to that the other contradicts

Structure — asks how the argument is built:

• Conclusion — identify the main point
• Method of Reasoning (Role) — identify what function a specific statement plays
• Method of Reasoning (Structure) — describe the overall logical structure
• Parallel Reasoning — find the argument with the same logical structure
• Flaw — describe the logical error

These question types all have different variations and a big part of doing well is learning to recognize them.

Reading Comprehension

RC passages cluster into recognizable types, and every passage is built from three levels: claims (substantive or evaluative statements), claim groups (arguments, descriptions, explanations, or perspectives), and paragraphs (each performing one of five functions: Introduce, Claim, Support, Challenge, or Resolve). Identifying these building blocks helps track overall meaning.

Common passage patterns:

• Argumentative passages make a case — Critical (attacking a position), Defensive (defending against attack), or Constructive (proposing something new)
• Descriptive passages explain: what something is, how something works, how something changed over time, or covering an artist/work/movement
• Dual passages pair two texts whose relationship is itself part of what the questions test

Each passage has 5–7 questions that are broadly similar to LR questions. The primary difficulty is accurately understanding the passage in the time given.

Preparing

Materials

You need access to official PrepTests — actual released LSAC exams available through LawHub Advantage at $120/year. This is a separate purchase from any third-party course.

For the prep approach, two factors matter: budget and how you learn.

• Self-study — books and self-paced courses; least expensive but requires self-direction. Most recommended books: PowerScore Bible Trilogy, The Loophole by Ellen Cassidy, and the LSAT Trainer by Mike Kim. Most recommended self-paced courses: 7Sage and Blueprint. I personally recommend PowerScore over the other two books, though the Loophole is very good for grammar and reading comprehension. I'm not a big fan of the LSAT Trainer.
• Live classes — 7Sage Live, Blueprint Live Online, LSAT Demon; add external structure and real-time instruction at higher cost. The most commonly recommended is 7Sage — fairly comprehensive with good production quality. I'm less familiar with Blueprint and not a big fan of LSAT Demon.
• One-on-one tutoring — most individualized option; makes the most sense when you've plateaued or need more direct guidance than a course can provide. When choosing a tutor, look for someone who has done well on the test and has enough experience to identify your specific problems and communicate solutions effectively.

Macro Study Plan

Take a diagnostic first: a cold, full-length official LSAT through LawHub before any prep. Your diagnostic is your starting point — don't get anxious about it.

Rough timeline based on improvement goal:

• ~5 points → 1–2 months
• ~10 points → 3–6 months
• 20+ points → 6+ months

Working professionals: plan for 4–6 months at minimum with roughly 15 hours/week for significant score increases.

Also, think about what you bring to the table. Do you read often, and is it challenging material? Good reading skills are foundational for this test — analogous to being in shape before trying out for a sport. How organized and disciplined are you? How resilient? The test is difficult and covers a lot of ground; these basic skills make the process go more effectively.

Prep moves through three stages:

1. Fundamentals — learn how the test works and build core reasoning skills through course material and question-type study. Rushing fundamentals to get to practice tests is one of the most common and damaging prep mistakes.
2. Drilling — targets specific weaknesses; should be untimed so you're focused on understanding the concepts and developing the right approach to questions and passages.
3. Timed practice — timed sections first, then full practice tests to build integration and stamina.

When starting timed practice, give yourself more time than allotted at first, then gradually reduce it as accuracy improves. You'll continue drilling concurrently since timed sections will reveal which question or passage types are giving you trouble.

How to Study

The key distinction is active vs. passive practice.

• Passive — reading/watching explanations without synthesizing what you've learned; just reading explanations for questions you got wrong.
• Active — more engaged; redoing questions you got wrong, making detailed logs of why you picked what you picked and why you eliminated what you eliminated, building outlines and flashcards.

Make sure your studying is active.

Blind review — after any timed work, flag uncertain answers, re-attempt every flagged question without the key and without time pressure, then check. The gap between timed and blind-review performance tells you whether time management or concept understanding is the problem — knowing which lets you focus more effectively.

Error logging — a running record of wrong answers covering why the right answer is right and specifically where your reasoning went wrong. Patterns across entries feed directly back into drilling priorities.

The actual learning in LSAT prep happens in drilling. Most students over-rely on full practice tests. If you're doing more full tests than drills, you're probably not improving as fast as you could.

Registration, Test Day, and After

Registration

Everything is done through a free account at lsac.org (JD Services portal). The LSAT is offered approximately 8–9 times per year; registration deadlines fall about 40 days before each test date.

Approximate costs:

• LSAT registration — $248
• CAS subscription — $215
• CAS report (per school) — $45

Fee waivers are available in two tiers based on income; apply at least six months before your target test date.

CAS (Credential Assembly Service) collects transcripts, processes letters of recommendation, recalculates your GPA on a standardized LSAC scale, and sends a compiled report to each school you apply to. Transcript processing takes about two weeks. Register for CAS at least four to six weeks before your first application deadline — schools won't receive your score report until CAS is complete.

Test Day

In the final week, take one full timed practice test early in the week, then stop. The final week is too late to patch gaps. Sleep matters more than most students account for — consistent 7–8 hours across the final week has a real impact. The night before: handle logistics. Test morning: eat normally (protein-heavy meals tend to give more sustained energy; carb-heavy meals can cause a crash), keep caffeine consistent with your usual intake, and use breathing techniques to manage anxiety. I use box breathing (inhale 4 sec → hold 4 sec → exhale 4 sec → pause 4 sec) but find whatever works for you. During the test: one question at a time. Mark genuinely hard questions and move on. Three minutes of anxiety on one question costs you on every question that follows.

After the Test

Score Preview ($45 before testing, $85 after) lets you see your score before releasing it. You have a 6-day window to cancel after seeing it. Cancelling does not hide the score — cancelled scores appear as "C" on the CAS report every school receives. You have 5 attempts within the current reportable period (June 2020 onward) and 7 lifetime; LSAC removed the 3-per-year cap in 2023. Law schools use your highest score; multiple scores or a cancellation generally don't require explanation.

The retake decision comes down to one question: is a meaningful improvement achievable with a concrete change to your prep? The clearest signal is an official score 5+ points below your recent practice average. A retake without a real change to your approach tends to produce similar results.

Most schools use rolling admissions; the optimal submission window is October–November. The earlier you apply, the more spots are available — later in the cycle you're competing for fewer. If you're planning to retake, either wait for the result or apply in parallel and notify each school explicitly about the pending score.

I hope this overview helps — like I said, everything covered here is expanded in the individual posts on my site and I recommend you check it out for more details.

Hey all,

Would love some insight/suggestions if people are willing. If you're not interested, that's cool, no need to comment.

I'm a law admissions consultant who has my own business that I started about a year ago. I spent eight years in admissions at UHLC and have about a decade total of experience. While I have the expertise of being on the other side of the table from where y'all are now, I would really like to hear from people who are currently going through/have recently gone through the admissions process in the current landscape. I went through the admissions process in 2001 and things were...a LOT different.

For a while I've really wanted to create a comprehensive law admissions course on a platform like LearnDash or Thinkify that people could pay for one time and have access to forever. While I love working with applicants one on one, I understand that not everyone needs or wants a consultant nor does everyone have the resources to spend on that. However, I'm pretty passionate about giving applicants as much info as possible so that they can be as successful as possible throughout their admissions journey, so I thought creating a course would be a great way for those who maybe aren't looking to hire a consultant to still have the same info (minus the personalization aspect).

What would you want to see for this course? My plan is to do videos for each section and then to have downloadable resources as well. If a video section doesn't apply to you, you could obviously skip it, but I would want to treat it as if I'm talking to someone who has no idea about the process at all, especially since my clientele is a lot of first-gen and/or historically marginalized/underrepresented groups in the legal profession.

Nothing is too small or too obvious - give me ALL of your suggestions. I have a basic outline, but I really want to hear from people in my target audience what you would want to see in a comprehensive course.

I would also give a discount for my services to those who purchase the course if they decide they want more personalized editing/reviewing/etc, but the course would be meant as a standalone otherwise.

Thanks so much; I truly appreciate it.

I was originally pre-law, on track to graduate my old college with a high GPA, but my parents significantly impacted my mental health, and we didn't have a lot of money, so I transferred to a T10. They forced me to to give up my pre-law ambition, which made me try really desperately to become a SWE (BAD IDEA). Because of that, my GPA is a lot lower than I intended.

I have around a 3.45 uGPA at a T10 in a quantitive subject, like a Computer Science related subject. I am really interested in going to a T20 law school. I have a 175 LSAT score as well.

- I am a URM and don't plan on being a KJD, will likely get 1-2 years of WE.

- I transferred colleges, but at my old university basically had a 4.0 as a Poli Sci major, until I tried being a CS major which was *NOT* the move.

- I am a strong writer and think that my essays will be a strong factor; I have had civic tech experience and worked alongside a NGO started by a T14 Law School dean (couldn't get a rec letter out of them tho :( ), but my other rec letters should be decent and they vary from professor's I've done research with, to just busting my butt in their CS course.

- I did a lot of equity and diversity related leadership work at my university; I think I present myself as a pretty interdisciplinary candidate.

- I think my quantitative background will make it so that I'm a decently unique applicant, but no significant reason for my GPA addendum besides transferring and being shit at my major.

One part of me knows I'd make a good attorney. I know I want to sus out industry for a bit, but law school admissions is so competitive and so cut-throat. I still grieve the uGPA I could've had ;(. But, as Sylvia Path once said, I don't want this to be a fig I let rot. I'm wondering if I should give this a shot. I also plan on maybe exploring volunteering roles like becoming a Legal aid intake volunteer and just doing more for my community, but not as interested in public interest, so don't think it's as relevant. Interested in hearing all of your thoughts!

hi! i’m currently a cc student (graduating with my associates in one year) with a 4.0 in poli sci. i’m transferring this fall to likely uva (already admitted) or another t25, but my end goal is harvard, yale, or columbia law (would love to aim for one of columbia’s tuition scholarships)

my interest is in IP / media law, just wondering if anyone else has gone to cc and then gotten into a top law school? i plan to major in econ at uva but not sure if i should do something else?

i want to have a gap year between attending or applying to law school for context likely.

any advice on my path and interests would be helpful!

- past ecs: us senate intern, campaign fellow & intern, running my own political media org and building it up currently, other state & national leadership in political orgs

when should i also start LSAT studying? and what GPA would i need at my 4 year of my cc one would be a 4.0?

I’m at the end of year 12 and I take bio, chem, phys and eng lit. I initially planned to do law but I crashed out one night over losing the chance to be a doctor so I took sciences instead. I am naturally very good at writing and am super passionate about politics and social systems and literature. I was planning on doing politics or ppe at uni but for the past week or so I’ve been reconsidering medicine and im definitely leaning towards it. I like biology but the main thing that interests me is the clinical setting and getting to see things that only doctors get to see. I’m also a big people person and I get more of that with medicine. I also have always aspired to be a doctor but it is very very long and hard. I know I could push through but something is stopping me from locking in the decision. NHS is also super bad so I’d prob have to come back to Pakistan which I don’t want to do. The only reason medicine appeals to me more is because of the identity/respect doctors have as well as hospital life. I can also sustain my other passions alongside med school but I can’t really sustain medicine if I do politics. I don’t want to look back and wish that I tried. How can I decide and also, if anyone has been in the same situation, please share what u ended up with.