<p>I've done some research on this site and I haven't found a definitive answer to my question SO here it goes. Basically I'm an undergraduate student in my 2nd year of college with a hefty workload at the moment. I've been trying to prepare for the LSAT in my spare time but I find myself with too many obligations, and doubt that I will be able to achieve my full potential under such circumstance. I would like to be finished with college before I take the test and have time to study under less stressful conditions, but I'm not sure if this will adversely affect my admittance into a decent law school. My reasoning is that law schools might look down on students who avoided taking the test till after college, and might consider them as lazy, as opposed to those who took the test while in school.</p>
<p>I’m an admissions consultant for Blueprint Test Prep. I help a lot of students through the application process, and your question comes up quite a bit.</p>
<p>In short, the schools won’t care at all when you take the test. They know that the LSAT is stressful, and some people won’t have enough time to study for it. Whether it be because of work or because of an intense major, every law school knows that few students study under ideal situations. It’s one of the reasons that the test is offered 4 times a year (that, and the LSAC likes themselves some cash).</p>
<p>And, in fact, I would imagine that the schools would prefer that you take it when you’re most prepared. They’d like to have perfect information on you - that includes you reaching your potential on the LSAT. As much as it feels like the schools are against you, looking for any reason to cut you from their ‘Accepted’ pile (which, I imagine, is some type of golden Inbox sitting on the Dean’s desk) while twirling their cartoonish mustaches, it’s better to think about it this way: the law school, as much as it aspires to be academically pure, is a business. You’re a paying customer. They want you to come, pay them, and do well enough that you make it through all three years, earn a ton of money, get a hot wife (or husband) and a nice car and drive around with an alumni license plate, showing off your hot SO and nice car so that others want to pay $120,000/yr (which it will cost by the time you’re married and driving) to go to that school, and perpetuate the cycle. They can’t do that if your LSAT score is too low, so study when it is most ideal for you and take the LSAT when it’s most convenient!</p>
<p>And check us out at <a href=“http://www.moststronglysupported.com;%5B/url%5D”>www.moststronglysupported.com;</a> our message board is staffed by consultants (like me) who are happy to answer any questions you have about the test or admissions practices.</p>
<p>BPMattShins, in your attempt to paint an accurate picture of law school admissions as a business (which is an accurate statement), why do you have to include the stereotypes of “earning a ton of money, getting a hot wife (or husband) and a nice car/$120,000 salary”? This is so indicative of BluePrint, whose image is so materialistic and objectifying of women that it’s awful to even watch your sample videos. While the lines may be witty and funny (which many are and reflective of comedic talent), you guys really promote a degeneration of an idealistic culture. I feel sorry for J.Triplett on your faculty…not realizing she’s getting exploited by your promotion of a macho, chase-wealth-and-women, lifestyle approach. </p>
<p>I say this with all due respect and not to take away from your teaching talent or business savvy. Also know that I’m neither female or fervently feminist. I just wanted to voice the truth on how BluePrint is so materialistic and quite noxious in its personality.</p>