Thanks for this post - I'm currently in the process of applying for law school, this post was really helpful!
One bit that I would add about the LSAT vs GRE decision is that law school applicants with both a GRE and an LSAT score on file don't need to report their GRE score(s) to schools if they don't want to, but will almost always be required to report all their LSAT scores (law schools almost always require applicants to apply using the Law School Admissions Council's "Credential Assembly Service", which automatically reports all your LSAT scores to schools you apply to).
If you're on the fence about whether to take the LSAT or GRE, my suggestion would be to try taking the GRE first. That way, if you happen to get a really good GRE score (and don't think that you could get an equally good or better LSAT score), you can avoid taking the LSAT and just submit your GRE score instead. If you underperform on the GRE, you can still take the LSAT and only submit your LSAT score. (Many law schools also allow you to submit both scores if you choose to do so. It's sort of unclear how schools weigh the scores against each other when applicants submit both GRE and LSAT scores - and there's probably a lot of variability between schools in this respect - but most experts seem to think that your LSAT score will mostly override your GRE score if you submit both.)
I personally took the GRE, happened to get a really good score (much better than I was doing on practice LSATs), and am currently planning on applying with only that GRE score. In addition to (likely) increasing my odds of getting into my top choice school, this strategy has saved me a lot of time and stress that would've gone into studying for the LSAT. In my case, the GRE required relatively little study time to score well on. I thought the GRE was very similar to the SAT and ACT, while the practice LSATs I took felt very different. So the case for trying the GRE before taking the LSAT might be especially strong for people (like me) who did really well on the SAT or ACT but aren't doing as well on practice LSATs.
Obviously, this is anecdotal and might not be true for others. It's also possible that I'm underestimating how much taking the GRE disadvantages law school applicants, especially since many admissions officers seem to think it's not as accurate a measure of ability as the LSAT (if this is true, I might be in for some disappointing results in my own application process).
Thanks for this post - I'm currently in the process of applying for law school, this post was really helpful!
One bit that I would add about the LSAT vs GRE decision is that law school applicants with both a GRE and an LSAT score on file don't need to report their GRE score(s) to schools if they don't want to, but will almost always be required to report all their LSAT scores (law schools almost always require applicants to apply using the Law School Admissions Council's "Credential Assembly Service", which automatically reports all your LSAT scores to schools you apply to).
If you're on the fence about whether to take the LSAT or GRE, my suggestion would be to try taking the GRE first. That way, if you happen to get a really good GRE score (and don't think that you could get an equally good or better LSAT score), you can avoid taking the LSAT and just submit your GRE score instead. If you underperform on the GRE, you can still take the LSAT and only submit your LSAT score. (Many law schools also allow you to submit both scores if you choose to do so. It's sort of unclear how schools weigh the scores against each other when applicants submit both GRE and LSAT scores - and there's probably a lot of variability between schools in this respect - but most experts seem to think that your LSAT score will mostly override your GRE score if you submit both.)
I personally took the GRE, happened to get a really good score (much better than I was doing on practice LSATs), and am currently planning on applying with only that GRE score. In addition to (likely) increasing my odds of getting into my top choice school, this strategy has saved me a lot of time and stress that would've gone into studying for the LSAT. In my case, the GRE required relatively little study time to score well on. I thought the GRE was very similar to the SAT and ACT, while the practice LSATs I took felt very different. So the case for trying the GRE before taking the LSAT might be especially strong for people (like me) who did really well on the SAT or ACT but aren't doing as well on practice LSATs.
Obviously, this is anecdotal and might not be true for others. It's also possible that I'm underestimating how much taking the GRE disadvantages law school applicants, especially since many admissions officers seem to think it's not as accurate a measure of ability as the LSAT (if this is true, I might be in for some disappointing results in my own application process).