Tuesday, 27 October 2009
You Heard It Here First!
You heard it here first: the sixth season of The Office sucks. Even worse than the last two seasons. Someone had to say it.
My life is a series of shambolic episodes
I took the LNAT, law national admissions test, today. It's the admissions test for studying law in Britain.
Let me tell you something about my life. It is a series of shambolic episodes.
Avid readers will remember the episode of my being almost too late to take the LSAT.
Today I took the bus down to central London at an indecently early hour to take the LNAT. I had my test confirmation ticket, which they said to bring and ID. Now, this is what their website says are valid forms of ID:
A current signed passport (an unsigned passport will be acceptable only if it is of a biometric type that does not allow for a signature)
A current signed photocard driving licence (full or provisional)
A current identity card, issued by the government of the country where the test centre is located, that carries your photograph and signature
Now I'm no lawyer, but it doesn't seem to specify that the driving license has to be issued by the government of the country where the test centre is located, unlike the current identity card option. So I think, 'Great, I don't have to needlessly carry my passport into town, I can just use my valid driver's license from my home State.' NO, NO YOU CAN'T. It doesn't say it has to be British BUT IT DOES. DIDN'T YOU KNOW THAT???
Reader, I did not know this because the LNAT website is a piece of shit. So is the LNAT for that matter.
It wasn't a complete disaster. I just had to go back home and get my passport and come back, which isn't a big deal except that is a 2 hour round trip in London. I did it though and got through the exam.
It's funny all the prep books tell you that just before the exam you should take your mind off it, distract yourself with something else. Well, I was certainly distracted.
Now my complaints about the exam itself.
This exam is ridiculous. First, I took several practice tests and got massively widely differing scores on each one, which shows that it isn't a very reliable measuring tool. Second, for each question you could make a strong argument that a different answer was correct. The exam simultaneously requires you to think less, making intuitive generalisations and to think more--for some questions you have to make several assumptions or logical jumps to get the correct answer. In other words, some questions require a gospel reading, some require further interpretation and you never know which is which. Third, it is an extremely badly written exam. The question stem will ask, 'What are the people in the article arguing?' but their correct answer will answer the question, 'What is the author of the article arguing?'. These are clearly different questions. Fourth, although they claim no outside knowledge is required to answer the questions, sometimes it really is. You would be at a particular disadvantage if you were not British or British-educated. The passages are often about British politics and education and require certain foreknowledge about such things as the European Union or Council of Europe political mechanisms or about British standardised testing. Luckily I have been here long enough that I'm familiar with most of it. How is someone outside of the UK supposed to know what GCSEs are? I don't think I had ever used the word 'accession' before I came to the UK and studied the EU. Fifth, the LNAT makes up its own definitions for words and expects you to know them. Assumption, assertion, opinion, suggestion, fact--you would have to have foreknowledge of how they define these to answer the questions correctly.
I will get my LNAT score in January. By the way, what the hell is that about? You get your LSAT score in 3 weeks and it helps you decide what law schools you can apply to. Here you have to finish your applications before you even have to take the exam. And you don't get your score back until after you've been interviewed? Surely that doesn't make sense.
Sometimes you have to give up questioning why Britons do things the way Britons do them. Thinking about the fact that I spent 4 hours on a bus today makes me really excited about studying law at my Midwest State School where a commute is 20 minutes tops.
This concludes all application activities for British universities. It is entirely out of my hands now.
Let me tell you something about my life. It is a series of shambolic episodes.
Avid readers will remember the episode of my being almost too late to take the LSAT.
Today I took the bus down to central London at an indecently early hour to take the LNAT. I had my test confirmation ticket, which they said to bring and ID. Now, this is what their website says are valid forms of ID:
A current signed passport (an unsigned passport will be acceptable only if it is of a biometric type that does not allow for a signature)
A current signed photocard driving licence (full or provisional)
A current identity card, issued by the government of the country where the test centre is located, that carries your photograph and signature
Now I'm no lawyer, but it doesn't seem to specify that the driving license has to be issued by the government of the country where the test centre is located, unlike the current identity card option. So I think, 'Great, I don't have to needlessly carry my passport into town, I can just use my valid driver's license from my home State.' NO, NO YOU CAN'T. It doesn't say it has to be British BUT IT DOES. DIDN'T YOU KNOW THAT???
Reader, I did not know this because the LNAT website is a piece of shit. So is the LNAT for that matter.
It wasn't a complete disaster. I just had to go back home and get my passport and come back, which isn't a big deal except that is a 2 hour round trip in London. I did it though and got through the exam.
It's funny all the prep books tell you that just before the exam you should take your mind off it, distract yourself with something else. Well, I was certainly distracted.
Now my complaints about the exam itself.
This exam is ridiculous. First, I took several practice tests and got massively widely differing scores on each one, which shows that it isn't a very reliable measuring tool. Second, for each question you could make a strong argument that a different answer was correct. The exam simultaneously requires you to think less, making intuitive generalisations and to think more--for some questions you have to make several assumptions or logical jumps to get the correct answer. In other words, some questions require a gospel reading, some require further interpretation and you never know which is which. Third, it is an extremely badly written exam. The question stem will ask, 'What are the people in the article arguing?' but their correct answer will answer the question, 'What is the author of the article arguing?'. These are clearly different questions. Fourth, although they claim no outside knowledge is required to answer the questions, sometimes it really is. You would be at a particular disadvantage if you were not British or British-educated. The passages are often about British politics and education and require certain foreknowledge about such things as the European Union or Council of Europe political mechanisms or about British standardised testing. Luckily I have been here long enough that I'm familiar with most of it. How is someone outside of the UK supposed to know what GCSEs are? I don't think I had ever used the word 'accession' before I came to the UK and studied the EU. Fifth, the LNAT makes up its own definitions for words and expects you to know them. Assumption, assertion, opinion, suggestion, fact--you would have to have foreknowledge of how they define these to answer the questions correctly.
I will get my LNAT score in January. By the way, what the hell is that about? You get your LSAT score in 3 weeks and it helps you decide what law schools you can apply to. Here you have to finish your applications before you even have to take the exam. And you don't get your score back until after you've been interviewed? Surely that doesn't make sense.
Sometimes you have to give up questioning why Britons do things the way Britons do them. Thinking about the fact that I spent 4 hours on a bus today makes me really excited about studying law at my Midwest State School where a commute is 20 minutes tops.
This concludes all application activities for British universities. It is entirely out of my hands now.
Monday, 26 October 2009
Something Completely Different!
And now for something completely different: actual legal issues!
I have been following the trial of Radovan Karadzic since he was arrested almost a year and half ago. International justice is an issue that is near and dear to my heart. This morning Karadzic refused to leave his jail cell to attend the first day of his trial, which means the trial can't go anywhere yet. He wants a few more months to prepare because he wants to defend himself.
What is with these war crimes suspects wanting to defend themselves?!?!? Is it just a delay tactic? Do they think they can teach themselves how to be effective defense lawyers while delaying their trial for a few years thus killing two birds with one stone? This article claims that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has three choices--appoint Karadzic a lawyer, drag him to court, or grant him extra time to prepare. I may be missing some key information here but isn't he in prison? Doesn't that mean he has to go where they tell him to go... because he's a prisoner? Even Charles Taylor eventually showed up, even if it was only to rant and rave about the illegitimacy of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. That trial is also starting up again today.
Reading up on this stuff after focusing on other areas for a while is getting me all excited about international criminal law again. I'm thinking... law school, maybe an LLM in International Public Law, practice domestic criminal law for a few years, do an internship at an international criminal court/tribunal, then maybe become a staff lawyer. Could be amazing. And as I understand it the ICC is bleeding staff because everyone thinks it's so poorly run. Having been unemployed and unemployable for as long as I have been makes you willing to put up with things other people would not be willing to put up with, just to have a paying job that is interesting.
I have been following the trial of Radovan Karadzic since he was arrested almost a year and half ago. International justice is an issue that is near and dear to my heart. This morning Karadzic refused to leave his jail cell to attend the first day of his trial, which means the trial can't go anywhere yet. He wants a few more months to prepare because he wants to defend himself.
What is with these war crimes suspects wanting to defend themselves?!?!? Is it just a delay tactic? Do they think they can teach themselves how to be effective defense lawyers while delaying their trial for a few years thus killing two birds with one stone? This article claims that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has three choices--appoint Karadzic a lawyer, drag him to court, or grant him extra time to prepare. I may be missing some key information here but isn't he in prison? Doesn't that mean he has to go where they tell him to go... because he's a prisoner? Even Charles Taylor eventually showed up, even if it was only to rant and rave about the illegitimacy of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. That trial is also starting up again today.
Reading up on this stuff after focusing on other areas for a while is getting me all excited about international criminal law again. I'm thinking... law school, maybe an LLM in International Public Law, practice domestic criminal law for a few years, do an internship at an international criminal court/tribunal, then maybe become a staff lawyer. Could be amazing. And as I understand it the ICC is bleeding staff because everyone thinks it's so poorly run. Having been unemployed and unemployable for as long as I have been makes you willing to put up with things other people would not be willing to put up with, just to have a paying job that is interesting.
Sunday, 25 October 2009
New Blogroll
Hi all,
I've been looking for other law blogs to read and have found a few that are still running and update reasonably frequently. I have put them in a law blogroll on the sidebar. I'm also considering putting up a blogroll for my favourite time-wasting websites. I'll get around to putting that up one of these days.
EH
I've been looking for other law blogs to read and have found a few that are still running and update reasonably frequently. I have put them in a law blogroll on the sidebar. I'm also considering putting up a blogroll for my favourite time-wasting websites. I'll get around to putting that up one of these days.
EH
LNAT Practice; Let me tell you something about the LNAT
I've been doing some practice on the LNAT in preparation for taking the exam on Tuesday. I know, I know--this has been nothing like my LSAT prep. The LNAT and LSAT are very different tests though.
Let me tell you something about the LNAT.
First, the LNAT is only 2 hours long. It is comprised of an 80 minute section of 30 multiple choice questions based on 10 excerpts, followed by a 40 minute essay section. In contrast, the LSAT has 6 sections, 5 of which contain 23-38 multiple choice questions comprising 2 logical reasoning sections, one reading comprehension, one logic games and one experimental section of one of the three types, followed by an essay writing section. The LSAT takes about 4 hours of testing time.
Excluding the writing portion, the LNAT is basically just a longer version of the LSAT reading comprehension section, with 10 passages of shorter length, each with 2-4 questions. The final score is the number correct out of 30. The average score is around 17, which seems rather low.
The writing section, like the LSAT writing section, is unscored. The good news for me is that there is no logic games section on the LNAT. I always score the lowest on Logic Games and the highest on Reading Comprehension.
For this reason and because I have already done 4 months of preparation for the LSAT I have not been sweating the LNAT too much. Which is why I haven't gotten around to any prep for it until 2 days before the test. I took a practice test today and I was happy with my score. Hopefully I can reproduce it at the actual exam.
Let me tell you something about the LNAT.
First, the LNAT is only 2 hours long. It is comprised of an 80 minute section of 30 multiple choice questions based on 10 excerpts, followed by a 40 minute essay section. In contrast, the LSAT has 6 sections, 5 of which contain 23-38 multiple choice questions comprising 2 logical reasoning sections, one reading comprehension, one logic games and one experimental section of one of the three types, followed by an essay writing section. The LSAT takes about 4 hours of testing time.
Excluding the writing portion, the LNAT is basically just a longer version of the LSAT reading comprehension section, with 10 passages of shorter length, each with 2-4 questions. The final score is the number correct out of 30. The average score is around 17, which seems rather low.
The writing section, like the LSAT writing section, is unscored. The good news for me is that there is no logic games section on the LNAT. I always score the lowest on Logic Games and the highest on Reading Comprehension.
For this reason and because I have already done 4 months of preparation for the LSAT I have not been sweating the LNAT too much. Which is why I haven't gotten around to any prep for it until 2 days before the test. I took a practice test today and I was happy with my score. Hopefully I can reproduce it at the actual exam.
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
Finalised Cambridge Application; Let me tell you something about... British admission requirements
I have finished the last component of the Cambridge application and can't do anything more for it now.
Let me tell you something about British admission requirements. British high school students have it rough. At the age of 16 they have to take these big exams called GCSE exams. The most eager students take 10 in one year. The scores you receive on these exams determine what classes you can take in the next two years. Then at the end of those two years you take another set of massive exams called A-level exams. A-level exams and results determine what subject you can study and at what university. How cruel is that? I can't imagine having to decide at the age of 15/16 what I'm going to major in at university! I guess that has something to do with the increasing popularity of conversion courses and post-graduate diplomas that basically qualify you in a subject completely different from the one you studied in college.
Anyway, I mentioned before that the British university applications process is much simpler than the American undergraduate system because of the UCAS clearinghouse. Unless you've been educated somewhere where you don't do GCSEs and A-levels as I was. This makes it a lot harder to fill in the electronic application. Luckily I got good help from the adviceline and also sent in all my high school and university transcripts to substitute for it.
Most of the people applying for these degree courses are 17-18 year olds. I am old enough to be their... babysitter. I also already have a bachelor's and master's degree. Now I'm going back for another bachelor's. Yes, I'm a mature student.
Let me tell you something about British admission requirements. British high school students have it rough. At the age of 16 they have to take these big exams called GCSE exams. The most eager students take 10 in one year. The scores you receive on these exams determine what classes you can take in the next two years. Then at the end of those two years you take another set of massive exams called A-level exams. A-level exams and results determine what subject you can study and at what university. How cruel is that? I can't imagine having to decide at the age of 15/16 what I'm going to major in at university! I guess that has something to do with the increasing popularity of conversion courses and post-graduate diplomas that basically qualify you in a subject completely different from the one you studied in college.
Anyway, I mentioned before that the British university applications process is much simpler than the American undergraduate system because of the UCAS clearinghouse. Unless you've been educated somewhere where you don't do GCSEs and A-levels as I was. This makes it a lot harder to fill in the electronic application. Luckily I got good help from the adviceline and also sent in all my high school and university transcripts to substitute for it.
Most of the people applying for these degree courses are 17-18 year olds. I am old enough to be their... babysitter. I also already have a bachelor's and master's degree. Now I'm going back for another bachelor's. Yes, I'm a mature student.
Tuesday, 20 October 2009
LSAT Score
We got back our LSAT scores this past weekend. I did achieve the goal I set for myself but didn't see much improvement overall which was disappointing. I guess in the end Ivey was right that it isn't worth it to retake the LSAT. I also think I was right that I simply hit my natural wall. It's a disappointingly low wall.
I was about to go into a rant about standardised testing, but I'll save that for another time!
Anyway, I guess this is pretty much what expected, though not what I hoped for. I hope it will at least be enough to get me into my Midwest State School. I don't know what will happen if I don't get into a law school. I'll probably just curl up into a ball and die. I can't think of any other thing I want to do as much.
One of my British applications was one day late! It was a paper application that I had to mail in. There have been postal strikes all over the UK which have been extremely disruptive. I sent it FedEx to avoid that problem. It was meant to be delivered next day. The day after that I got a call that it hadn't been delivered yet because the envelope covering had been ripped off. So it actually didn't get delivered until the day after the deadline. I have no idea whether the university will take it.
It's like the universe doesn't want me to get into law school.
The LNAT exam is one week from today and I haven't cracked a book for it yet. I figure all that work for LSAT didn't help much, it probably won't help with LNAT, so I'm not going to work too hard on it. Cynical, cynical, cynical and pessimistic.
**************
In happier news, we have our tickets to come home for Christmas. I'm looking forward to blissful peace, cold, warmth, food, family, friends, driving in the snow and some R&R.
I was about to go into a rant about standardised testing, but I'll save that for another time!
Anyway, I guess this is pretty much what expected, though not what I hoped for. I hope it will at least be enough to get me into my Midwest State School. I don't know what will happen if I don't get into a law school. I'll probably just curl up into a ball and die. I can't think of any other thing I want to do as much.
One of my British applications was one day late! It was a paper application that I had to mail in. There have been postal strikes all over the UK which have been extremely disruptive. I sent it FedEx to avoid that problem. It was meant to be delivered next day. The day after that I got a call that it hadn't been delivered yet because the envelope covering had been ripped off. So it actually didn't get delivered until the day after the deadline. I have no idea whether the university will take it.
It's like the universe doesn't want me to get into law school.
The LNAT exam is one week from today and I haven't cracked a book for it yet. I figure all that work for LSAT didn't help much, it probably won't help with LNAT, so I'm not going to work too hard on it. Cynical, cynical, cynical and pessimistic.
**************
In happier news, we have our tickets to come home for Christmas. I'm looking forward to blissful peace, cold, warmth, food, family, friends, driving in the snow and some R&R.
Wednesday, 14 October 2009
British Applications: Mission Accomplished! Almost. (Let me tell you something about... British college applications)
I have submitted my British applications!
Let me tell you something about British college applications. They are SO much easier than American college applications! I know American law school apps go through a clearinghouse called LSDAS where you submit all your transcripts and information and you send a single application electronically to all the schools you want to apply to. In the UK they do that with undergraduate applications too with a system called UCAS. UCAS allows you to submit applications for up to 5 universities. I have mentioned the ones I'm applying to before.
Now that bit is done, there is only one more thing before my British applications are completely done and dusted: I have to take the LNAT. I'm registered and now I have to start preparing a bit. I have about 2 weeks.
And I have to start the American applications. Yikes!
Let me tell you something about British college applications. They are SO much easier than American college applications! I know American law school apps go through a clearinghouse called LSDAS where you submit all your transcripts and information and you send a single application electronically to all the schools you want to apply to. In the UK they do that with undergraduate applications too with a system called UCAS. UCAS allows you to submit applications for up to 5 universities. I have mentioned the ones I'm applying to before.
Now that bit is done, there is only one more thing before my British applications are completely done and dusted: I have to take the LNAT. I'm registered and now I have to start preparing a bit. I have about 2 weeks.
And I have to start the American applications. Yikes!
Tuesday, 13 October 2009
UK Applications Update
I was having drinks with a friend of mine who read law at King's College London and was on my master's course at my Master's University. She has been a great resource for all my random questions while trying to figure out the British applications process. She also tends to forcefully argue her advice despite my objections... Thus I have been convinced that I should also apply to several other UK law schools including, surprise, King's College London. I have subsequent to the initial conversation been convinced that this is a good idea. In addition to Oxford and Cambridge, I'm applying to University College London, King's College London and the London School of Economics. So instead of two solid rejection letters, I'll get perhaps one acceptance and a handful of rejections. Or just a gigantic steaming pile of rejections.
Friday, 9 October 2009
Applications to Oxford and Cambridge
Dear readers, especially the one from Indonesia, I have had a busy few weeks since the LSAT. I have had to move apartments and am still in the process of unpacking and figuring out what goes where. This apartment, by the way, is a veritable comedy of fuck-up-edness. Everything in it is broken or so cheap it will be broken soon.
Anyway, I have also been in the process of submitting applications to Oxford and Cambridge. They both take UCAS applications. UCAS is a sort of clearinghouse, a single application you create online and submit to all the colleges to which you are applying. It is great for convenience, if you are a British high school student about to graduate. If you're a foreign-educated mature student, well it's a hell of a lot more difficult. However, they have a helpline which is extremely useful and has already seen a few calls from me. For Cambridge, you also have to submit a separate overseas student application, which is another hoop to jump. I am almost completely ready to send both applications off before the famous deadline of October 15th.
Now I'm applying to Oxford, I have to take the LNAT, the British equivalent to the LSAT. I have already spent some time preparing for it, and I hope my LSAT practice will aid me.
Also, I should get my LSAT score in a week or so. Stay tuned.
Anyway, I have also been in the process of submitting applications to Oxford and Cambridge. They both take UCAS applications. UCAS is a sort of clearinghouse, a single application you create online and submit to all the colleges to which you are applying. It is great for convenience, if you are a British high school student about to graduate. If you're a foreign-educated mature student, well it's a hell of a lot more difficult. However, they have a helpline which is extremely useful and has already seen a few calls from me. For Cambridge, you also have to submit a separate overseas student application, which is another hoop to jump. I am almost completely ready to send both applications off before the famous deadline of October 15th.
Now I'm applying to Oxford, I have to take the LNAT, the British equivalent to the LSAT. I have already spent some time preparing for it, and I hope my LSAT practice will aid me.
Also, I should get my LSAT score in a week or so. Stay tuned.
Thursday, 1 October 2009
Post-LSAT
I took the LSAT last Saturday and I meant to write about it much sooner, but happily I've been too busy living life to write about my life.
I was almost too late to be allowed into the LSAT test facility. If you take it here in London, it is scheduled for the early afternoon so that it is done simultaneously with test-takers in the US. That meant I had a whole morning to be nervous and to worry about getting to the test centre on time. I looked up the route for getting there on the Transport For London website. It calculates the best route for you.
I should have known better.
It told me to take 2 buses, the first down to Angel, the second to the location of the test centre. It said the whole trip would take about 45 minutes. I decided to leave 1 hour 15 minutes early, so that I would get there in plenty of time. Big mistake! It took 45 minutes just to get to Angel. I was sitting there, waiting for the next bus, which I estimated would take half an hour to get to the test centre. Yet there was... No bus in sight... and just 25 minutes before the test was to begin. I decided there was nothing for it but to do what I should have done in the first place. I topped up my Oyster card and got on the tube. I had to go down two stops, change lines, go one more stop. I got to the change and walked to the platform--guess what??? unannounced line closure!!!!! I then had 15 minutes to get to my test centre which was still one tube station away. So I got out of the station and half-speedwalked, half-ran to the test centre. I was pouring sweat when I got there but I made it. Only 6 people got in behind me before they started turning people away for being too late. Fortunately, the room where most people were seated got filled up and a bunch of us had to be put in a different room. I had a few moments to catch my breath while they sorted out the chairs and tables.
Lesson: Don't trust bloody public transport, and don't trust god-less computer programmes!
As for the test...
I'm not supposed to talk about the actual content of the exam until the results come out, so no specifics. But generally speaking, it went okay. Not great, but okay. First, I've been doing a full practice test every Sunday for months now. It was an excellent way to practice and paid off great dividends on the big day. The heart attack-inducing arrival notwithstanding, I was generally very calm. I could very easily tell myself it was just like sitting down to another practice test. In the LSAT it is especially important to stay calm, because a section like Logic Games can very easily spiral out of control. It's also a very mental test and particularly for me; I was competing against myself, my old score, and therefore my greatest natural competitor! Also, in practical terms, you're used to the time put in, your neck doesn't get stiff, your bum doesn't get sore. You make good use of your short break. It's nice to feel that you're in control of the situation.
That's all the good I can say about the exam. The rest is ambiguous or downright bad.
The logic games... the logic games. Well for some reason they seemed a little too easy which is a sure sign that in my excitement I missed some important detail. But then I don't really know. In truth, I have no idea how I did. I will find out in two week's time.
One thing that isn't going to help at all is that when I didn't finish the last 5 or 6 questions in the logic games section, time was called and I had forgotten to fill in the bubbles. You're not penalised for taking a guess in LSAT so even if you can't answer the question, you should always guess. On probability, I would have gotten 1-2 more points. That is a significant number of points in the LSAT, and I spent the entire following section yelling, 'Shit, shit, shit!' at myself in my head.
Overall, I have no idea how I did. I didn't feel strongly about any section--I might end up scoring the same or lower than my first score! In the Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions, Anna Ivey highly discourages taking the LSAT more than once and says most people do not improve on taking it a second time. (By the way, I do highly recommend that book. Ivey was an admissions officer for the University of Chicago and the book is an excellent resource.)
I've not done things the way she recommends, but... I don't know. I guess I'll have to wait for my score to see if I've been vindicated.
I was almost too late to be allowed into the LSAT test facility. If you take it here in London, it is scheduled for the early afternoon so that it is done simultaneously with test-takers in the US. That meant I had a whole morning to be nervous and to worry about getting to the test centre on time. I looked up the route for getting there on the Transport For London website. It calculates the best route for you.
I should have known better.
It told me to take 2 buses, the first down to Angel, the second to the location of the test centre. It said the whole trip would take about 45 minutes. I decided to leave 1 hour 15 minutes early, so that I would get there in plenty of time. Big mistake! It took 45 minutes just to get to Angel. I was sitting there, waiting for the next bus, which I estimated would take half an hour to get to the test centre. Yet there was... No bus in sight... and just 25 minutes before the test was to begin. I decided there was nothing for it but to do what I should have done in the first place. I topped up my Oyster card and got on the tube. I had to go down two stops, change lines, go one more stop. I got to the change and walked to the platform--guess what??? unannounced line closure!!!!! I then had 15 minutes to get to my test centre which was still one tube station away. So I got out of the station and half-speedwalked, half-ran to the test centre. I was pouring sweat when I got there but I made it. Only 6 people got in behind me before they started turning people away for being too late. Fortunately, the room where most people were seated got filled up and a bunch of us had to be put in a different room. I had a few moments to catch my breath while they sorted out the chairs and tables.
Lesson: Don't trust bloody public transport, and don't trust god-less computer programmes!
As for the test...
I'm not supposed to talk about the actual content of the exam until the results come out, so no specifics. But generally speaking, it went okay. Not great, but okay. First, I've been doing a full practice test every Sunday for months now. It was an excellent way to practice and paid off great dividends on the big day. The heart attack-inducing arrival notwithstanding, I was generally very calm. I could very easily tell myself it was just like sitting down to another practice test. In the LSAT it is especially important to stay calm, because a section like Logic Games can very easily spiral out of control. It's also a very mental test and particularly for me; I was competing against myself, my old score, and therefore my greatest natural competitor! Also, in practical terms, you're used to the time put in, your neck doesn't get stiff, your bum doesn't get sore. You make good use of your short break. It's nice to feel that you're in control of the situation.
That's all the good I can say about the exam. The rest is ambiguous or downright bad.
The logic games... the logic games. Well for some reason they seemed a little too easy which is a sure sign that in my excitement I missed some important detail. But then I don't really know. In truth, I have no idea how I did. I will find out in two week's time.
One thing that isn't going to help at all is that when I didn't finish the last 5 or 6 questions in the logic games section, time was called and I had forgotten to fill in the bubbles. You're not penalised for taking a guess in LSAT so even if you can't answer the question, you should always guess. On probability, I would have gotten 1-2 more points. That is a significant number of points in the LSAT, and I spent the entire following section yelling, 'Shit, shit, shit!' at myself in my head.
Overall, I have no idea how I did. I didn't feel strongly about any section--I might end up scoring the same or lower than my first score! In the Ivey Guide to Law School Admissions, Anna Ivey highly discourages taking the LSAT more than once and says most people do not improve on taking it a second time. (By the way, I do highly recommend that book. Ivey was an admissions officer for the University of Chicago and the book is an excellent resource.)
I've not done things the way she recommends, but... I don't know. I guess I'll have to wait for my score to see if I've been vindicated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)