can anyone give me some advice?

[youarehydrogen]

I have taken the LSAT three times, improving my score each time.  I have received a 146, a 151, and a 155.  I have applied to a few schools for the '08-'09 cycle, and recently got an email from Loyola Chicago stating that since I have a 4 point gain, I need to explain this. I am having a hard time coming up with something meaningful to write about. The main reason that my score has improved is that I have trouble with standardized tests that dont focus on learning facts or skills, but focus on logic and analyses such as that on the LSAT. Any help or suggestions for this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you all in advance.

[BurtsBees]

I have taken the LSAT three times, improving my score each time.  I have received a 146, a 151, and a 155.  I have applied to a few schools for the '08-'09 cycle, and recently got an email from Loyola Chicago stating that since I have a 4 point gain, I need to explain this. I am having a hard time coming up with something meaningful to write about. The main reason that my score has improved is that I have trouble with standardized tests that dont focus on learning facts or skills, but focus on logic and analyses such as that on the LSAT. Any help or suggestions for this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you all in advance.

In my opinion, and I have no expertise on this subject, taking that route would be bad. I don't think a law school would want to hear: I have trouble with logic. If you simply studied harder, or were more comfortable the second and third time then say that. How were you practicing before all three tests?

Be honest? Why do you think you improved?

[gtg931r]

Not to be too blunt, but I wouldn't use the phrases that that imply that logic and the ability to analyze aren't "skills." Because I think you'd lose that argument in the eyes of an admissions committee.

I wouldn't try to debunk the test, but rather offer reasons why you (and things you did) to performer better. The reasons don't have to be meaningful or profound, just be focused on yourself and not the test. Unless you have a history of low performance on standardized tests, in which case that would be a good thing to say.

[jack24]

You should avoid cliches, but linking your test score improvement to hard work and determination probably wouldn't hurt your cause. Try to show that you've always been smart, but you just needed to approach the LSAT differently in order to improve.  The applications committee wants to know which of your scores most accurately represents your ability to succeed in law school.  Emphasize those traits that will make you successful and explain why they led to your improvement.  (Note that I am only a student, and this is my opinion based on what I have heard from different admissions offices I've talked to)
   

[youarehydrogen]

Thank you for all the advice so far. I definitely dont plan on talking about any weaknesses in the essay for obvious reasons.  I have always been a poor standardized test taker, I scored a 21 on my ACT and ended up with a 3.45 from DePaul, so it seems to be more the style of test rather than overall intelligence.  My first ever LSAT without any practice was a 136, so I am happy with my score even though its not nearly good enough for top schools. Do you recommend focusing on how I am able to perform well academically despite consistently poor standardized test scores?