A Guide To The Law Admissions Test

A Guide to the Law Admissions
Test
By Michael Nguyen-Kim
2018 Edition
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................4
Using the guide ........................................................................................................................4
I – An Argumentative Framework ................................................................................................6
Exercises ..............................................................................................................................8
Evaluating and countering arguments .....................................................................................8
Attacking the mechanism of an argument ............................................................................8
Attacking the impacts of an argument .................................................................................9
Attacking the premise of an argument ...............................................................................10
Exercises ............................................................................................................................10
Principled arguments .............................................................................................................10
Constructing a principled argument ...................................................................................11
Exercises ............................................................................................................................13
Countering a principled argument ......................................................................................13
Themes ..................................................................................................................................14
Exercises ............................................................................................................................14
Weighing themes ...............................................................................................................14
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................15
II – Taming the LAT ....................................................................................................................16
Question 1 – Evaluating an argument ....................................................................................16
Sample Question 1 .............................................................................................................16
Frequently asked questions – Question 1 ...........................................................................20
Exercises ............................................................................................................................21
Question 2 – Composing an argument ...................................................................................21
Sample Question 2 .............................................................................................................21
Frequently asked questions – Question 2 ...........................................................................24
Exercises ............................................................................................................................25
Tips for LAT writing ................................................................................................................25
III – On test day .........................................................................................................................27
Before the test ...................................................................................................................27
During the test ...................................................................................................................27
After the test .....................................................................................................................28
Michael Nguyen-Kim 2
IV – Analysing your results ........................................................................................................29
V – Conclusion...........................................................................................................................30
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................31
Question 2 sample stimulus materials ...................................................................................31
Other references ...................................................................................................................31
About the author ......................................................................................................................32
Introduction
The Law Admissions Test (LAT) was introduced by the University of New South Wales in 2016 to
provide a more effective measure of students’ readiness for law school. Admissions for school-
leavers had previously been based solely on the ATAR, which was often observed to be a poor
predictor of a student’s aptitude for studying law. To insulate against these shortcomings, the
LAT is designed to screen for particular skills and traits that are critical to the study of law. These
include critical thinking, concise writing, and the ability to apply a rigid structure to one’s
thoughts and arguments.
Some of these traits are inborn and are hence difficult to improve in the short-term. Others are
highly malleable and respond well to dedicated study and preparation. In particular, becoming
more succinct in your expression and acquiring a strong argumentative framework are
investments that yield substantial dividends when it comes to your LAT percentile (and in your
everyday life). As it happens, these skills are often neglected by the ordinary school curriculum.
The aim of this guide is hence to endow you with these skills in the quickest and most efficient
manner.
Unlike the HSC, your performance on the LAT rarely correlates with the amount of effort you
exert in preparation for it. Working on skills like those previously mentioned will initially result in
rapid improvements. After you have become familiar with these skills, however, your growth will
eventually plateau, and further preparation will be of limited use. The only way to get better once
you reach this point is to work on your underlying intellectual ability. If you find yourself in this
situation, keep in mind that reading a good book or talking to interesting people will do far more
for your LAT percentile than hammering out another practice essay ever will.
Using the guide

The guide is broken up into two main sections. The first is dedicated to developing a general
argumentative framework through which you will compose and evaluate arguments. This is the
most essential aspect to doing well in the LAT and a great deal of emphasis is accordingly placed
on it. Once you are familiar with the ideas in Section I, the later sections facilitate the application
of your argumentative framework to actual LAT-style questions. This is where all the LAT-specific
content can be found, including writing tips, sample questions, and a discussion of exam
technique.
It is highly recommended that you work your way through the guide sequentially. The temptation
to jump straight into practice papers can be strong, particularly if you have been reared in the
tradition of the HSC. Keep in mind, though, that you actually have to have covered the syllabus
for a subject in order to tackle past papers for it. Without stretching the analogy too far, you
might accordingly consider Section 1 of the guide as being the ‘syllabus’ of the LAT.
Finally, a quick disclaimer. This guide was created with the aim of helping as many people as
possible, so I encourage you to share it widely. However, I’d like to ask that any reproductions of
this guide carry a proper attribution of its source, and that any distribution be made on a strictly
non-commercial basis.
I – An Argumentative Framework
Anyone who has ever been a competitive debater will understand that there are certain things
that an argument must cover to be persuasive. These components are known as the ‘anatomy’
of an argument, or an ‘argumentative framework’. At its most basic level, the essential
components of an argument are as follows:
1) What the claim is.

2) Why the claim is true.
3) Why the claim matters in the context of the issue you are discussing.
I will highlight each of these components by way of example. Let us imagine that we are
discussing whether Australia should ban coal-fired power stations.
Component Example
What is the claim? “Banning coal-fired power stations will reduce

the severity of global warming.”
(the ‘argument’)
A clear summary of what the argument is
essentially trying to say.
Why is the claim true? “Coal-fired power stations emit greenhouse

gases, which warm the atmosphere. By
(the ‘mechanism’) banning coal-fired power stations in Australia,
less greenhouse gases will be emitted. Global
temperatures will hence rise at a slower rate.
This will alleviate global warming.”
A ‘proof’ or ‘mechanism’ of why and how the

claim holds up. This can consist either of
logical deductions or external evidence (e.g.
quotes, statistics, anecdotes, etc.)
Why does the claim matter? “Global warming is a severe threat to

humanity. If it continues, rising sea levels will
(the ‘impact’) drown many of the world’s major cities and
arable land. Resources will grow scarcer and
famines will become increasingly frequent.
Many people will die, and those who survive
will experience a deterioration in their quality
of life. By banning coal-fired power stations
and alleviating global warming, we can reduce
the chances of these harms coming to pass.”
An examination of the effects or ‘impact’ of

the argument now that it has been proven.
Describes the consequences of the claim
relative to the wider discussion.
Even in this very simple argumentative framework, all the components are absolutely essential.
To illustrate why, let us examine some variations of the above argument that are missing key
components:
Example 1: “Banning coal-fired power stations will reduce the severity of global warming. Global
warming is a severe threat to humanity. If it continues, rising sea levels will drown many of the
world’s major cities and arable land. Resources will grow scarcer and famines will become
increasingly frequent. Many people will die, and those who survive will experience a deterioration
in their quality of life. By banning coal-fired power stations and alleviating global warming, we
can reduce the chances of these harms coming to pass.”
Example 1 omits the ‘mechanism’ of the argument; the part that establishes why the claim is
true. Without it, the above formulation of the argument is not convincing at all, as it simply
asserts that banning coal-fired power stations will alleviate global warming without explaining
how.
Example 2: “Banning coal-fired power stations will reduce the severity of global warming. Coal-
fired power stations emit greenhouse gases, which warm the atmosphere. By banning coal-fired
power stations in Australia, less greenhouse gases will be emitted. Global temperatures will hence
rise at a slower rate. This will alleviate global warming.”
Again, Example 2 sounds wholly unconvincing. Even though it establishes that a ban on coal-fired
power stations will reduce the effects of global warming, it fails to detail why global warming is
necessarily undesirable. In this example, the harms are somewhat obvious and will likely be
inferred by the reader. However, where arguments regarding more complex topics are
concerned, the impacts of an argument may be considerably less intuitive. Describing the impacts
and ramifications of a given claim is therefore an essential step in formulating a persuasive
argument.
Most arguments that appear in everyday life are to do with solving problems. Their aim is to
show that a particular course of action addresses a problem in a way that generates more
benefits than harms. These are known as ‘practical arguments’.
There is also another type of argument that is entirely unconcerned with benefits and harms; this
is known as a ‘principled argument’. These will be covered in more detail later on.
Exercises
1) Read the article ‘Why private schools should be banned’
(https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/elizabeth-farrelly-why-private-schools-should-be-
banned-20171208-h010p1.html). Note the arguments the author makes and their
components in the following table:
Argument Mechanism Impact
If you can, try to do the same with the counterarguments that are mentioned.
2) Now it’s time to practice framing some arguments of your own. Using the table above,
determine the practical arguments you can make in support of the following statements:
a. ‘That tutoring should be banned.’
b. ‘That those under the age of 16 should be banned from playing contact sport (e.g.
rugby, AFL).’
c. ‘That Australia should reinstate the death penalty.’
d. ‘That governments should fund the arts.’
e. ‘That the recreational use of all drugs should be legalised.’
Evaluating and countering arguments

Now that you know how to compose an effective argument, it should be quite easy to spot
deficiencies in ones that already exist. An argument that is missing either a mechanism or an
impact will always be highly unpersuasive. However, even if all necessary components are
present, the argument can still be attacked. This is particularly easy when the logical links that
bind together the mechanism and/or impact are tenuous.
Attacking the mechanism of an argument

To illustrate this, we’ll revisit the ‘coal power’ argument that was discussed in the previous
section. Let’s first have a look at the mechanism:
“Coal-fired power stations emit greenhouse gases, which warm the atmosphere.
By banning coal-fired power stations in Australia, less greenhouse gases will be
emitted. Global temperatures will hence rise at a slower rate. This will alleviate
global warming.”
The mechanism of the argument (or the pathway by which the argument’s benefits are realised)
is that a ban on coal-fired power stations will reduce greenhouse emissions and hence slow the
process of global warming. However, there is an issue with this mechanism. Consider the
following objection:
• What if a ban on coal-fired power stations causes electricity companies to instead focus
on other forms of fossil fuels such as oil? These energy sources produce just as much
greenhouse gases as coal does.
If we can establish that electricity companies will simply switch to other fossil fuels instead of
investing in clean energy, then the mechanism breaks down. In this case, the ban on coal-fired
power stations would not reduce Australia’s carbon footprint, precluding any of the policy’s
benefits. This example illustrates one way you can respond to a practical argument; that is, to
deny that the proposed solution will actually fix the problem at hand. This is always what you
are aiming to do when you attack the mechanism of an argument.
Attacking the impacts of an argument

An argument can also be kneecapped by pointing out that a proposed solution leads to outcomes
that are insignificant or undesirable.
“Global warming is a severe threat to humanity. If it continues, rising sea levels will
drown many of the world’s major cities and arable land. Resources will grow
scarcer and famines will become increasingly frequent. Many people will die, and
those who survive will experience a deterioration in their quality of life. By banning
coal-fired power stations and alleviating global warming, we can reduce the
chances of these harms coming to pass.”
Some potential issues with the above are as follows:
• By alleviating global warming, isn’t one condemning areas of the Earth that suffer from
cold weather? People in Northern Europe and Canada suffer from snowstorms and
blizzards every winter, which reduces their quality of life and harms economic
productivity. Global warming would make their climate more hospitable. It’s also terribly
difficult to farm crops in these areas; global warming would extend the length of the
harvest and increase agricultural productivity in these places.
• Australia is a relatively small country whose total greenhouse emissions pale in
comparison to countries like the US and China. Banning coal-fired power stations here
wouldn’t make a dent in the level of global emissions.
When attacking the impacts of an argument, you should assume that the mechanism works as
expected. In this example, we assume that the ban on coal-fired power stations works as
advertised and that Australia’s greenhouse emissions decrease accordingly. Instead, we wish to
attack the outcomes that result from that decrease in emissions.
One way to do this is to is to claim that the proposed solution to an existing problem will simply
create a new problem that is more serious than the existing one. Although the alleviation of
global warming will save the lives of many people in low-lying coastal areas, this is at least
partially counteracted by the fact that colder climates will continue to suffer from lower
agricultural productivity and extreme weather events such as blizzards. It therefore cannot be
assumed that the proposed solution results in a universal increase in happiness. Indeed, there
are some aspects of the solution that increase happiness, and others that decrease it. If you were
attempting to argue against the ban, you would attempt to illustrate that the new problems that
it creates outweigh its benefits.
Another way to attack a solution’s outcomes is to claim that its benefits are so small as to be
rendered negligible. Since Australia is responsible for such a tiny proportion of the world’s total
emissions, a ban on coal-fired power stations would only have a very small impact on global
warming. The benefits could therefore be so insignificant that they would not justify the effort
and cost of implementing the ban.
Attacking the premise of an argument

One final way of countering a practical argument is to strike at its very foundations. As every
practical argument involves the addressing of a problem, the most comprehensive way to
dismantle one is to establish that the problem doesn’t exist at all. In the case of coal-fired power
stations, some coal industry lobbyists have resorted to simply denying that global warming even
exists. If the non-existence of global warming could be established, then the entirety of the
argument in favour of a ban becomes meaningless. Of course, the obviousness of the premise in
the present example (that global warming exists) means that this approach isn’t really feasible
here. There are, however, cases where it can be a very powerful tool.
Exercises
3) Referring again to the article ‘Why private schools should be banned’, describe the
counterarguments you can make in response to the author’s claims. Some of them are
already mentioned in the article; see if you can think of any more.
4) For each of the arguments you made in Exercise 2, find possible counterarguments.
Indicate which part of the argument (mechanism, harm or premise) your response is
targeting.
Principled arguments
Principled arguments are just like practical arguments in that they require the essential
components of an ‘argument’, a ‘mechanism’, and an ‘impact’. Unlike practical arguments,
however, they are not concerned with addressing problems, nor maximising the ratio between
benefits and harms. Instead, they aim to uphold an absolute standard of behaviour based on core
values. Examples of such values include freedom, justice, and national sovereignty.
A purely principled argument cannot be countered at all by appealing to practical benefits and
harms. Let’s say there was a proposal to eliminate famines in Africa by culling half of the
population (the ‘Thanos’ doctrine). Do you think the proposal would be implemented? Of course
it wouldn’t. This is because we recognise that killing people without their consent is an affront to
the ideals of personal dignity and freedom. Even if the proposal worked as advertised and did
eliminate all famines, we would still never implement it. It doesn’t matter that those who remain
will live significantly improved lives as a result of having more food to eat. The conviction with
which we hold the aforementioned principles means that they can never be meaningfully
weighed against practical considerations.
Not all principled arguments are like this, however. While all our values are important to us, we
are often willing to sacrifice them to some extent in the pursuit of practical benefits. An example
of this is compulsory seatbelts. Most of us would agree that individuals have the right to exercise
their freedom in choosing what they want and don’t want to do, especially if their actions don’t
harm others. However, this freedom is compromised on a daily basis whenever we step into a
car and are forced by law to wear a seatbelt. We accept this interference because forcing
someone to wear a seatbelt may well save their life. In other words, we are trading off one of
our basic principles (freedom) in favour of a practical benefit (saving lives).
Principles also often get sacrificed when they conflict with other principles. A classic example is
taxation. Most of us would agree that individuals have the right to own their own property and
to exercise their freedom in choosing what to do with it. Yet society compels most people to hand
over a proportion of their income to the government in the form of income tax. One of the
reasons we allow this is because our tax is redistributed as welfare payments to those who are
less well-off. In this case, we are trading off one of our basic principles (the right to own and
control property) in favour of another conflicting principle (equality).
In reality, very few principled arguments are as ‘pure’ as the one we described in the ‘Thanos’
example. These are known as ‘non-contingent principles’, because their strength is not
‘contingent’ on the practical harms or benefits that arise from them, nor on their compatibility
with other principles. The vast majority of principled arguments are ‘contingent’, in that their
strength is at least partially dependent on how well they weigh up against competing practical
considerations or other principles.
Constructing a principled argument

As mentioned before, a principled argument contains the same core components as any practical
argument. However, there is a particularly effective way of presenting a principled argument, as
we will demonstrate using our coal-fired power stations example:
Argument “Coal-fired power stations should not be
banned because companies and individuals
should be free to invest their own resources in
whatever way they see fit.”
‘What is the principle?’
Mechanism “Banning coal-fired power stations would

prevent people building and investing in them.
This robs people of the freedom to invest their
resources in the way they wish. By continuing
to permit coal-fired power stations, we
‘How is the principle upheld?’
maximise people’ capacity to choose.”
Impacts “The way we act indicates that freedom is a

principle that is very important to us. For
example, even though smoking harms both
the smoker and those around them, it remains
legal. This implies that we as a society place a
‘Why is the principle important to the way we
very high value on an individual’s right to
act in the world?’
choose. Banning coal-fired power stations
would interfere with this right.”
The main way the construction of a good principled argument differs from a practical argument
lies in how its impacts are established. This is best done through an analogy. You can create an
analogy by thinking of another situation where the principle you are defending is applied. In the
above example, the principle of personal freedom is seen in the continued legality of cigarette
smoking. Since the principle is so clearly accepted in the case of smoking, then it should be equally
applicable with regards to coal-fired power stations.
When choosing an analogy, it is usually best to pick a situation that is as non-controversial as

possible. In the present example, the smoking analogy was effective because the applicability of
the freedom principle is virtually uncontested (hardly anyone thinks cigarettes should be
banned). The principle would have been far less effective if I had instead analogised the situation
to the legal status of plastic bags. In the latter example, a significant amount of people think
personal freedoms should give way to environmental concerns and that plastic bags should be
banned. Since its not as obvious that the principle of freedom is important in this situation,
analogising it to the case of coal-fired power stations would be detrimental to the argument.
Exercises
5) It’s time to construct some principled arguments of your own. With reference to the
essential components of an argument, and including an analogy for each, compose
principled arguments in favour of the following statements:
a. All drugs should be legalised for recreational use.
b. Fox hunting should be banned.
c. The death penalty should remain abolished.
d. It is never acceptable to invade another country.
6) Are each of the principled arguments you made ‘contingent’ or ‘non-contingent’. If they
are all contingent, can you think of any further principles that would be ‘non-contingent’?
7) What are the possible objections to each of your principled arguments? Do they come
with practical downsides? Or do they conflict with other principles?
Countering a principled argument

Countering a principled argument is similar to countering a practical one; you can attack either
its mechanism or its impacts.
Countering the mechanism of the principle is simple; you just need to establish that the
proposed course of action does not actually uphold the principle. For example, one might assert
that banning coal-fired power stations promotes the principle of equality. An opponent could
attack the mechanism of that argument by pointing out that a ban would increase power prices.
This would disproportionately affect poorer people as opposed to richer ones, causing society to
become less equal. The proposed course of action does not in fact uphold the stated principle.
There are also a number of ways you can attack the impacts of a principle. The first is to claim
that the principle is not actually relevant to the situation at hand. As the principle’s relevance
to the issue will normally be established by way of analogy, the best way to accomplish this is to
attack the analogy. In the above example, this could be done by arguing that smoking is not
analogous to the use of coal-fired power stations as the harms of global warming are on a far
greater level than those of smoking. This claim contests the applicability of the freedom principle
to the issue of coal-fired power stations, hence negating the argument.
Another way to attack the impacts of a principle is to establish that the principle isn’t actually all
that important. As discussed above, a ‘contingent’ principle can be weighed against both
practical considerations and other principles. If you can establish that a principle is outweighed
by either of these, the principle is no longer sufficient grounds for supporting a given course of
action. For example, while banning coal-fired power stations does impinge on investors’
freedoms, this is potentially outweighed by the grave consequences of rising sea levels and mass
famine that result from global warming.
Themes
There are multiple facets to every issue. The examples we have discussed regarding the issue of
coal-fired power stations have focussed upon the environmental and moral consequences of a
ban. However, these are not the only angles from which the issue can be approached. Other
important considerations include the economy (how many jobs will be created or lost?) and the
potential for social problems (how will the social fabric of coal mining towns be affected by plant
closures?). These different aspects are known as ‘themes’. Some common general themes
include:
• The economy
• The environment
• Society (including social issues such as crime and domestic affairs)
• The political system
• Morality and ethics
More specific issues may have narrower themes that are only relevant to that particular issue.
However, at least one of the above will usually be an important consideration in the majority of
topics.
Classifying individual arguments into broader themes makes it easier to think about and discuss
issues. Instead of focussing on whether a ban on coal-fired power will increase global warming,
for example, you could instead discuss whether such a ban would have a positive or negative
effect on the environment as a whole. In this case, such an approach would allow you to consider
other environmental issues that arise from coal power, such as tree clearing and water pollution.
Exercises
8) State the main themes that are involved in each of the following issues:
a. Whether there should be a gender quota in parliament.
b. Whether the death penalty should be reinstated.
c. Whether fox hunting should be banned.
d. Whether refugees should be held in offshore detention (some additional research
may be necessary).
Weighing themes
Often certain themes will be more important than others when considering an issue. This is
because different issues naturally have different types of consequences, and so will weigh more
heavily on particular themes compared to others. For example, the debate around compulsory
seatbelts has significant social and moral implications, as someone dying in a car crash can cause
their friends, family and the wider community substantial emotional trauma. On the other hand,
whether seatbelts are compulsory or not has little bearing on the welfare of, say, the
environment.
A position that properly addresses the most important themes of an issue will always be more
persuasive than one that focusses on its more irrelevant aspects. In every debate, whether it be
verbal or written, there will always be time and length constraints that limit the amount of
information you can get across. It is therefore vitally important to identify and focus on the
arguments that are genuinely critical to persuading your audience.
Conclusion
You should now have a decent idea of how to compose and evaluate arguments in a structured
and systematic way. Don’t worry if it doesn’t all make sense at the moment; this type of thinking
can take some getting used to.
The best way to get good at using the argumentative framework is apply it to everyday
situations. We encounter controversial issues every day; whether that be at school, at work, or
on the news. When you encounter a controversy that interests you, try breaking it down in your
head. What do people on different sides of the issue say? What are the arguments that support
each of their positions? Are they principled arguments, or largely practical? Do they contain all
the necessary components of an argument, or are there gaps? Are there any counterarguments
that you can think of? These questions will help you form your own opinion on these issues.
Once you think you’ve settled on a position, lay out the arguments that support it and think about
how they relate to one another. Can they be bundled into themes? Are some of the
arguments/themes more important than others? Are there any flaws in your own reasoning,
and if so, how will you change your position to reconcile them?
When you can, try talking through this process with someone else. Placing your thoughts under
the scrutiny of someone else allows you to pick up on details that you otherwise would have
missed or overlooked. Above all, engaging in a real-time discussion forces you to think on your
feet. This makes your mind more agile and flexible.
If you repeat the above exercise at least once daily, preferably with another person, you will
begin to see a rapid improvement in your argumentative skills. You will know when you reach
this point. Your thoughts will be clearer, and the process of breaking down issues will become
almost automatic. It is only when you have this foundation that you can meaningfully start
preparing for the LAT itself.
II – Taming the LAT
The LAT is comprised of two questions, both extended-essay type responses. The first asks you
to comment upon and evaluate an argument presented as part of a written stimulus. The second
asks you to make arguments on a given topic with reference to written and visual stimuli. Both
questions are easy to tackle by applying the argumentative framework in a systematic way. This
section will illustrate the best way to do this by working through sample LAT questions.
The best sample material is contained in the ‘Law Admissions Test Sample Paper 2018’, which
can be found on the ACER website
(https://lat.acer.edu.au/files/Law_Admission_Test_Sample_Paper_for_Website_2018.pdf).
These are the only sample questions that come directly from the test writers and should thus be
regarded as the most accurate representation of the real exam.
Question 1 – Evaluating an argument

Like any essay, a Question 1 response requires an introduction, a certain number of body
paragraphs (usually 3-4), and a conclusion. The process of composing a Question 1 response can
be broken down into a series of defined steps which are aimed at ‘filling out’ these components.
We will demonstrate this process with reference to a sample question:
Sample Question 1
Analyse the arguments made in the following letter. You must evaluate the strengths and
weaknesses of the arguments presented and determine whether they would be successful
in persuading the audience.
Your response will be judged based on how well you analyse the arguments presented, your
assessment of the persuasiveness of the arguments, and the overall structure and
expression of your response.
Background:
The Federal Government has proposed a nationwide ban on the hunting of foxes. Under the
ban, it would be unlawful for private citizens to kill foxes and other small mammals,
regardless of whether the mammals are on public or private lands.
A number of hunters’ groups are against the ban. Below is a letter written by a member of
such a group to his local MP:
Dear Mr Richardson,
As you know, fox hunting is a sport that I and many others dearly cherish. It is an activity that has
many virtues. It brings people together, keeps people active, and provides opportunities for us to
get up and close with nature. Banning the sport would destroy all of these things. Why should
something that my friends and I have built up over many years be annihilated at the simple whim
of a bunch of tree-hugging, leftist radicals?
Everybody knows that public health is facing a crisis. People aren’t moving as much as they used
to and a rapidly increasing percentage of the population is overweight. What is the cure for this?
Exercise, of course. When people get out and about, the chances of them dropping dead of a heart
attack or something drastically reduces. The government should be subsidising fox hunting! But
all they want to do is play the fun police and ban something that’s good for everybody. My mates
don’t do much sport aside from our weekly hunt. If fox-hunting is banned, I know a lot of them will
spend their weekends sitting on their arses watching TV. Is that what the government wants? I
know there are other sports out there but it’s difficult to change people’s habits, especially since
fox-hunting has been a lifelong passion for most of us.
Furthermore, what other sport brings thousands of tourists into the region every spring? People
from around the world flock to our state forest every year. These tourists would surely disappear
if fox hunting were to be banned. This would be a disaster for the economy.
The proposed ban is simply another instance of the nanny-state suppressing our individual
freedoms. They want to ban everything that’s fun or worthwhile. First a ban on dog-fighting, now
a ban on fox-hunting. What’s next, a ban on eating meat? If the government’s going to ban
everything that hurts animals there’ll be nothing left. It’s time to recognise that the interests of
humans do outweigh those of animals. Fox-hunting is something we choose to do in our own free
time. It doesn’t harm anyone else, so let us be.
Instead of ostracising and marginalising fox-hunters, we should be encouraging them. Funding

and publicising local competitions would be good for people’s health and would give the region’s
economy a good boost. We need more people to visit this corner of the world; our forests are
sublime and I’m sure people would be more mindful of the environment if they knew the beauty
of what it is they are protecting.
Humans have been hunting animals for thousands of years and it’s a part of our way of life. It’s
high time the government recognised this. Instead of kowtowing to the radical leftist tree-huggers,
they should instead be encouraging an activity that provides substantial health, economic and
environmental benefits. It ain’t broke, so don’t fix it.
Craig Overton
President, Riverina Hunters’ Association
The first step is to isolate the main claims of the stimulus material. These should roughly
resemble the ‘anatomy’ of an argument and include the essential components of an argument,
a mechanism, and an impact (although one or more may be weakly constructed or absent). Take
note of any deficiencies you perceive in any of these arguments; there are usually quite a few of
them.
Step 2 involves classifying the arguments you identified in Step 1 into a series of themes (usually
three or four). As mentioned earlier in this guide, the arguments within each theme will cover
similar ground, but the themes themselves may be vastly different to one another. For example,
the four main themes in the sample stimulus are public health, the region’s economy, the rights
of individual humans versus animals, and the environment. These themes will form the basis of
the body paragraphs (1 body paragraph per theme).
Now that you have a good idea of where your analysis is headed, you can begin writing. Step 3
consists of writing the introduction. There are three essential components to an introduction:
1) A very brief overview of what the stimulus is about.

2) A judgement of the stimulus’ overall persuasiveness.
3) An introduction to each of the stimulus’ themes, and a brief comment as to how
persuasively each of them were dealt with in the stimulus.
Keep in mind that the introduction/conclusion are meant to frame your response as a whole.
They should hence be written in a way that promotes a sense of flow to your response. You can
get a sense of how to do this in the following sample response (key components marked in
parentheses):
“Craig Overton’s letter makes a number of points in favour of the continued legality
of fox hunting. (1) The persuasiveness of his argument is mixed. (2) His arguments
regarding the importance of fox-hunting to public health and the rights of
individuals are well-formed and compelling. On the other hand, his argument is
harmed by his speculative and incomplete analysis of the economic and
environmental effects of a potential ban. (3)”
After the introduction is complete, the next step is to write the body paragraphs, each of which
corresponds to a theme. The exact structure of a body paragraph will differ depending on your
writing style and train of thought. However, the aim of each of the body paragraphs is always to
assess how strong the arguments made under a given theme are. As such, the sub-components
of a good body paragraph will correspond to the criteria by which a good argument is assessed.
The following components are key to a strong body paragraph:
1) A topic sentence. This topic sentence should introduce the theme that you are discussing
in the paragraph (e.g. the economy, public safety, etc.) and your assessment of how
persuasively the arguments within the theme have been presented in the stimulus. This
assessment need only be brief (the strength of the argument can be categorised using
terms such as ‘very persuasive’, ‘unpersuasive’, ‘mildly persuasive’, or ‘unconvincing’).
2) An analysis of each of the claims made under the theme with reference to the
argumentative framework. If a claim contains a strong mechanism and an impact, say so
and acknowledge the strength of the claim. If it is missing either of these, point out the
omission and explain how it weakens the argument.
3) Counterarguments. Even when a claim contains all necessary components, you should
still try to isolate a weakness in either the mechanism or impact and explain how it could
be attacked from an opponent’s perspective. If the author pre-empts a counterargument
by directly addressing it in the stimulus, point it out and acknowledge it as a strength of
the argument.
4) Analysis of expression. You should always try to make a comment on how the author uses
words to get his point across. The following factors affect how messages are received by
audiences:
a. Is the tone formal or informal? A formal tone will be persuasive to a mature
readership, but a more casual approach that makes use of slang and simple
sentences may be more appealing to a younger audience.
b. What about the use of jargon? Technical and sophisticated language makes the
author seem more credible.
c. Does the author seem reasonable? If they acknowledge opposing perspectives on
the issue, they are more likely to be seen as rational and impartial. Their credibility
takes a shot, however, if the stimulus is excessively one-sided.
d. How intense is the language? The use of strong and emotive language can make
the author seem biased, but at the same time cause the reader to be emotionally
invested in their argument. Gentle and subdued diction has the opposite effect.
e. Who is the author? The name and occupation of the author is usually provided in
the stimulus. If the author is an expert on the subject, their claims are likely to be
respected. Conversely, if the author appears to have a vested interest in the issue
they are arguing about (e.g. they might stand to make money off a policy change),
then their arguments will attract more scrutiny.
5) A final judgement on how persuasive the author’s stance on the theme is. This can be a
very short summary sentence (e.g. “for the reasons discussed above, the author provides
strong economic reasons for the adoption of the proposed policy.”).
An example of a complete body paragraph is as below (key components marked in parentheses):
“The author’s analysis of the economic benefits of fox-hunting is unconvincing. (1)

The stimulus claims that fox-hunting makes a significant contribution to the
region’s economy, and that banning it would be an economic ‘disaster’. The author
does firmly establish that tourist revenue would be reduced because of a ban, as
fewer people would be drawn to the area if they weren’t able to hunt foxes.
However, the argument fails to establish the significance of such a decrease in
revenue. As the precise impacts of a tourist downturn are never detailed
(possibilities such as job losses are never explicitly mentioned), the argument is less
persuasive than it otherwise could have been. (2) Furthermore, the author fails to
address obvious counterarguments, such as the possibility that the presence of fox-
hunting might deter opponents of the practice from visiting the area. (3) The
author’s strong language (“surely”, “disaster”) makes the argument seem less
credible as the audience might assume it is being made on the basis of emotion as
opposed to fact. This is particularly reinforced by the author’s vested interest in the
issue as the president of a hunting club. (4) All in all, the author’s inability to detail
the economic impacts of a ban as well as his misguided use of language severely
weaken his claims regarding the economic benefits of fox-hunting. (5)”.
The final part of the response is the conclusion. This should contain the same core components
as the introduction but worded in a different way.
Frequently asked questions – Question 1

Q: Do I need to evaluate ALL the arguments made in the stimulus?
A: In short, yes. If you omit parts of the stimulus in your analysis, your judgement of the source’s
persuasiveness risks being undermined as you haven’t considered all of what the author has to
say. If you are running short on time or space, try grouping different arguments under the same
theme and addressing the theme as a whole.
Q: How many body paragraphs/themes should I include?
A: Three or four is generally best. This strikes a good balance between covering a variety of
material and being able to analyse that material in sufficient depth.
Q: How long should my response be? Do longer responses perform better?
A: In the LAT itself, you are given six pages of paper; you are not permitted to go over this. Your
response should be around 5/6 pages, which equates to around 800-900 words (although this
depends on the individual’s handwriting). If you include three themes/body paragraphs, your
response will roughly be made up of a 100 to 150-word introduction, three 200-word body
paragraphs, and a 100-word conclusion.
Longer responses don’t perform better in and of themselves; extra words only attract marks
insofar as what you are saying is valuable and makes sense. Express yourself as concisely as
possible and don’t add unnecessary fluff to your responses.
Exercises
9) Complete a draft response to the sample question. Write using pencil and paper, limiting
yourself to no more than six pages.
Question 2 – Composing an argument

Question 2 is almost the reverse of Question 1. Instead of dissecting an argument and critiquing
its flaws, you are asked to compose as strong an argument as possible from the ground up. An
important thing to keep in mind is that the response must be based off the stimulus materials.
Again, condensing the process into a step-wise procedure is helpful. We will illustrate this by way
of a sample question:
Sample Question 2
You are a policy adviser at the Department of Health. You have been tasked with making
recommendations as to whether access to junk food in Australia should be regulated, and if so,
how.
Referring to the stimuli below, compose a piece of writing that discusses your recommendations
in light of the issues relating to junk food regulation in Australia.
Item 1: Newspaper article
Public health campaigns are not designed to flatter people’s egos, but to raise awareness about
potential health dangers. Since the ban on indoor smoking in 2007, tobacco enthusiasts have been
turfed out through a side door to puff on their cancer sticks in the rain. Smoking is an addiction
that many struggle to control, but we don’t celebrate it with viral social media campaigns about
smoking pride. Although we acknowledge that some smokers can run 10 miles or live into their
90s, we recognise that the overall risks of tobacco inhalation are high, and vastly increase the odds
of a premature death. So what makes obesity different?” – The Guardian, 2017.
Item 2: Chart
- Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2017.
Item 3: Research article
“The UK sugar tax aims to incentivise sugar reduction in drinks. Because it is imposed on drinks
over a certain sugar threshold, manufacturers have the option of lowering sugar levels to avoid
the tax. This way, the government is sending a clear message to the industry: get your act
together and get sugar down.
On this measure of success, we don’t have to wait for the tax to be implemented to know that
it has had an effect. According to the UK Treasury, over 50% of soft drinks manufacturers
(including retailer own-brands) have already reduced sugar levels, responding to the stick of
legislation. So much so, in fact, that the Treasury has downgraded its forecast of how much
money the levy will bring in – still standing at an impressive £240m.” – The Conversation, 2018.
Item 4: Quote
“If you don’t want to get fat, stop eating so much and get out and go for a walk…This is just
going to be a tax that makes things dearer and after we finish with a sugar tax, why not have
a fat-tax or a cholesterol tax?...The ATO (Australian Tax Office) is not going to make you
healthier; it’s just going to make you poorer…Whatever they decide is immoral, they’ll tax.” –
Barnaby Joyce, 2017.
The first step is to examine the topic and stimulus materials and to isolate three main themes
that arise in them. This should be fairly straightforward as the stimulus materials generally give
you a lot of material to work with. In the sample question, three key themes that arise are the
role of government, public health, and the economic cost of obesity.
Step 2 is to determine the stance that you will argue for. All Question 2 problems will ask you to
advocate a course of action or policy in response to the issues mentioned in the question and
stimuli. The exact nature of this policy isn’t particularly important; it just needs to be simple and
reasonable. The most straightforward option this example is to propose a sugar tax, especially as
it was mentioned in Items 3 and 4. Other alternatives include a ban on sugary foods, or even
taking no action at all (the status quo).
Now that you have a general idea of where your argument is headed, you can start writing the
introduction.
The essential components are as follows:
1) A general statement establishing the nature and importance of the issue.

2) An outline of your proposed course of action.
3) A brief summary of each of the themes that relate to the issue.
An example of an introduction is shown below:
“The issue of obesity is one that has flummoxed policy-makers for decades. In 2012,
complications arising from obesity cost the economy $8.6 billion (Item 2). (1) In
light of this, an oft-suggested means of combating obesity has been a tax on sugary
foods. (2) Such a proposal raises a number of questions, particularly regarding the
role of government, the effect on public health, and the financial implications of
such a policy to the taxpayer. (3) Considering each of these themes in turn, it will
be established that a sugar tax is indeed an efficient and prudent means of
alleviating obesity in Australia.”
After you complete the introduction, you now need to start composing arguments in support of
your stance. These can be principled or practical and should include all the essential components
of an argument. They should also relate to the key themes you identified earlier. An example
argument is mapped out below:
Argument A sugar tax will improve people’s health by

encouraging weight loss.
Mechanism Taxes will give food producers an incentive to

reduce the sugar content in their foods,
meaning people will consume less sugar. This
will result in weight loss.
Impacts Weight loss will improve people’s health as

obesity is a known cause of issues such as
heart disease. This will increase people’s life
expectancy and reduce hospital admissions,
allowing them to spend more quality time
with their friends and family.
Once this is done, you can proceed to writing the body paragraphs themselves. Each body
paragraph will contain one or more claims that relate to a particular theme. The essential
components of a body paragraph are as follows:
1) A topic sentence that introduces the theme of the paragraph.

2) One or more arguments in favour of the proposed policy that relate to the paragraph’s
theme. These must include mechanisms and impacts.
3) Pre-empting of possible counterarguments.
4) Summary sentence that links the arguments back to the proposed policy.
An example is provided below (key components marked in parentheses):
“A sugar tax is likely to be beneficial as it will improve the health and wellbeing of
overweight people. (1) As mentioned in Item 3, such a tax would incentivise food
producers to reduce the amount of sugar in their products. This would result in a
decrease in sugar consumption amongst the general public. Furthermore, a sugar
tax would prompt a public discussion regarding the negative health effects of
sugar. The increased awareness that arises from this would prompt people to think
more about their levels of sugar consumption and hence make better dietary
choices. As sugar consumption is correlated with obesity, the ensuing decrease in
sugar consumption would encourage weight loss, minimising the prevalence of
issues such as heart disease and stroke. Such a reduction would increase people’s
life expectancy and reduce hospital admissions, allowing them to spend more
quality time with their friends and family. (2) While individuals such as Barnaby
Joyce (Item 4) may hold individuals responsible for their own weight loss, many
people simply lack the knowledge or personal willpower necessary to maintain a
healthy weight. (3) As such, a tax on sugar would improve health outcomes for all
people in society, including those who have had difficulty controlling their weight
in the past. (4)
When you finish all the body paragraphs, you can finally move onto the conclusion. As
with Question 1, this is simply a restatement of the material found in the introduction.
Frequently asked questions – Question 2

Q: Do I need to use all the stimuli in my response?
A: No. You should, however, refer to an item when its contents directly relate to a point you are
making. Given that your response should be based on the issues that arise in the stimuli, you
should find plenty of opportunities to reference stimuli in your response (generally at least once
per paragraph).
Q: Do I need to make both principled AND practical arguments?
A: No. I managed to score 99/100 in my LAT without using any principled arguments at all. If you
manage to come up with lots of practical arguments that support your proposal, then it’s
perfectly acceptable to rely solely on them. However, being open to principled arguments gives
you more flexibility in constructing your response, especially if you’re having trouble thinking of
practical arguments.
Q: How many body paragraphs/themes should I include?
A: Three is generally best. This strikes a good balance between covering a variety of material and
being to analyse that material in sufficient depth.
Q: How long should my response be? Do longer responses perform better?
A: In the LAT itself, you are given six pages of paper; you are not permitted to go over this. Your
response should be around 5/6 pages, which equates to around 800-900 words (although this
depends on the individual’s handwriting). If you include three themes/body paragraphs, your
response will roughly be made up of a 100 to 150-word introduction, three 200-word body
paragraphs, and a 100-word conclusion.
Longer responses don’t perform better in and of themselves; extra words only attract marks
insofar as what you are saying is valuable and makes sense. Express yourself as concisely as
possible and don’t add unnecessary fluff to your responses.
Exercises
10) Complete a draft response to the sample question. Write using pencil and paper, limiting
yourself to no more than six pages.
11) LAT-style practice papers are extremely hard to come by. If you’ve completed all the
available sample questions (ACER plus this guide) and still want more practice on Q2, have
a look at practice papers of the Cambridge Law Test (CLT). The CLT is a one-question, one-
hour exam that is similar to Question 2 of the LAT (but without stimulus materials). The
lack of stimulus materials can make the questions quite challenging. Sample papers can
be found at https://resources.law.cam.ac.uk/documents/official/clt_sample_tests.pdf.
Tips for LAT writing

When it comes to writing, the one thing you must do is to keep it clear and concise. There are
two main errors that often stop students from achieving this.
The first is using overly complex sentences. Take the following example:
“A sentence, overly and perhaps overtly complexified, turgid with rarified

language, gains the semblance of scholarship though it may indeed lack the
capacity to communicate its import to any but a reader utterly dedicated in his
attentions.”
Now compare it to the following sentence, which says the exact same thing:
“A complex sentence may seem scholarly but confuse casual readers.”
One reason why the first example is so difficult to understand is because of the sheer number of
clauses and sub-clauses that are included in the sentence. It is grammatically complex, making it
harder for the reader to interpret. Complex sentences can be useful, but they should only be
used where necessary and not contain more than three clauses. Resist the temptation to include
many complex sentences in an effort to seem ‘sophisticated’ or ‘intellectual’.
An easy way to improve your sentence structure is to alternate between simple sentences and
complex ones. Roughly speaking, there should be one simple sentence for every complex
sentence in a paragraph.
The second common error is the use of overly sophisticated vocabulary. Again, this is usually
due to the writer wanting to appear more ‘intellectual’. The consequences of this can be seen in
the prior example.
The remedy for this is simple. In the words of George Orwell, “never use a long word when a
shorter one will do”. Of course, using a broad vocabulary can be necessary when you wish to
convey nuance or to avoid repeating words. However, don’t use complicated words just for the
sake of it.
III – On test day
Before the test
The LAT is usually held on a Tuesday. As with any exam, you should get a good night’s sleep
beforehand, and wake up with ample time to head to the venue. Contrary to popular belief, it is
not how much sleep you get that matters, but how consistent it is. For example, if you have only
gotten five hours of sleep each night in the week leading up to the exam, you will actually feel
more refreshed on five hours of sleep the night before as opposed to ten.
Before you head to the venue you must ensure that you have all the necessary materials. They
are as follows:
• Admission ticket.
• Photo ID (usually a driver’s license or passport).
• At least two 2B pencils.
• Pencil sharpener.
• A clean eraser.
• A clear water bottle.
• Anything else ACER asks you to bring.
It would be wise to prepare these materials and put them all in a ziplock bag the night before.
Arrive at the venue at the time listed on your admission ticket. Do not get there too early; waiting
idly in the exam room with nothing to do will break your rhythm. When you get to the exam
venue, you will have to present your admission ticket and identification to the proctors. Once
you are shown to your desk, you will need to fill in an identification/registration form (similar to
those used in NAPLAN and ICAS).
During the test

You will get ten minutes’ reading time before you are allowed to begin writing. During this time,
you should first read through both questions, including the stimuli. Briefly note any themes or
possible arguments that come to mind. This allows your brain to subconsciously work on the
second question while you consciously compose your answer to the first.
After you do your quick scan of the entire paper (which should take more than five minutes),
focus your attention on the question that you intend to complete first. Use the remaining five
minutes of reading time to map out a brief plan for your answer using the steps outlined in this
guide. Always remember to identify the key themes first as these will comprise your body
paragraphs. After you do this, you can start thinking of substantive arguments, and so on.
Begin writing your introduction once writing time starts. You should have already identified your
line of argument and the main themes at this point so this is relatively straightforward. This also
buys time for your brain to subconsciously generate arguments for your body paragraphs.
After the introduction is done, move onto the body paragraphs. These should take up the bulk of
your time. About 20 minutes in, you should start to get a sense of how quickly you are working.
You should aim to finish your first response within 55 minutes (to allow for a possible overrun on
the second question and proofreading). If you are on track to finish within 55 minutes, continue
working at the same pace. If not, you should try to accelerate. This may include making your
paragraphs shorter and/or writing faster.
When you finish the first question, do the same for the second. Aim to finish with about five to
ten minutes to spare to proof-read your responses. If you get time to proof-read, pay particular
attention to grammar, punctuation and spelling. There is usually little you can do at this point to
improve the structure or substance of your arguments, although it may be possible to add extra
detail in some places.
After the test

Once the papers are collected, you are free to go! Results are usually released at the beginning
of November. Don’t stress too much in the meantime. In particular, try to give yourself some free
time on the afternoon/evening after the test to recover.
IV – Analysing your results
Sometime in early November, you will receive an email containing your results. Two scores are
reported: your total mark out of a hundred, and your overall percentile.
Your total mark is an absolute measure of how well you did in the test. Each question is marked
out of fifty, and your marks from each question are added together to form a total mark out of a
hundred. It is unfortunately not possible to determine your marks for each individual question.
The more important score, however, is your overall percentile. This indicates the percentage of
test-takers whose score was lower than yours. For example, an 84th percentile means your total
mark was higher than 84 percent of test-takers. As you are competing against other test-takers
for a place at UNSW Law, the percentile is the score that contributes to whether you get an offer.
If you are a school-leaver, this overall percentile is considered in conjunction with your ATAR
(plus any applicable bonus points) to determine whether you get an offer. Combined ATAR/LAT
cut-offs change from year to year and are difficult to verify. However, it is safe to say that an
ATAR as low as 95 (plus bonus points) stands a chance of admission if combined with an
outstanding LAT percentile (high 99s). Furthermore, the median ATAR of admitted students in
both 2017 and 2018 was in the mid-98s.
First round offers are made in late-December via UAC to school-leavers. Further offers may also
be made in the later January rounds.
If you are sitting the test in Year 11, the score is valid for two years. If you scored highly there is
usually no need to take the test again the following year. This relieves you of the stress of having
to take the exam at a busy time in Year 12. A 90+ percentile is usually sufficient, although you
may want to aim for 95+ if you’re not particularly confident about your ATAR.
V – Conclusion
The LAT was created to measure attributes that cannot be identified through the ATAR alone. In
particular, it is screening for thinkers who are articulate, rigorous, and creative. The only surefire
way to ace the LAT is hence to become these things. The materials in this guide will help, but they
can only take you so far. The rest is up to you. Read the news. Visit museums. Have interesting
conversations. Most importantly, be curious about the world around you, how it works, and why
things happen in it. Do all these things, and success will be inevitable.
Whether you go to law school or not, the factors that determine your success in the LAT will also
contribute to your success in life. Every field, whether it be history, science, medicine or anything
in between, values people who are curious about the world and can express themselves well. So
try not to treat the LAT as just another test. If you prepare for it in earnest and embrace it
wholeheartedly, your hard work will reward you in kind.
Acknowledgements
Question 2 sample stimulus materials
Item 1: Cernik, L. (2017). It’s not fine to be fat. Celebrating obesity is irresponsible | Lizzie
Cernik. [online] the Guardian. Available at:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/10/fat-pride-obesity-public-
health-warnings-dangerous-weight-levels [Accessed 3 Sep. 2018].
Item 2: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2017). A picture of overweight and obesity in
Australia. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, p.vi-vii.
Item 3: Hawkes, C. (2018). Sugar tax: what you need to know. [online] The Conversation.
Available at: https://theconversation.com/sugar-tax-what-you-need-to-know-94520
[Accessed 3 Sep. 2018].
Item 4: Bettles, C. (2017). Joyce rejects sugar toll and warns about taxing “immoral” foods.
[online] Farm Online. Available at: https://www.farmonline.com.au/story/4933528/joyce-
rejects-sugar-toll-and-warns-about-taxing-immoral-foods/ [Accessed 3 Sep. 2018].
Other references
Students.case.edu. (2018). The Danger of Overwriting - CWRU. [online] Available at:
https://students.case.edu/academic/resources/writing/tone/tone4b.html [Accessed 3 Sep.
2018].
About the author
Michael Nguyen-Kim is currently studying Law as a Cambridge Trust Scholar at Trinity College,
Cambridge. Prior to this, he graduated as Dux of Canberra Grammar School in 2017 and spent a
semester studying Law/Economics at UNSW. As a Year 11 student, he scored 99/100 (100th
percentile) in the inaugural LAT – the highest mark recorded that year.
If you have any feedback or queries, he can be contacted at nguyenkimlaw@gmail.com.

A Guide To The Law Admissions Test

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Guide To The Law Admissions Test

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Guide to the Law Admissions

Using the guide

1) What the claim is.

What is the claim? “Banning coal-fired power stations will reduce

Why is the claim true? “Coal-fired power stations emit greenhouse

A ‘proof’ or ‘mechanism’ of why and how the

Why does the claim matter? “Global warming is a severe threat to

An examination of the effects or ‘impact’ of

Evaluating and countering arguments

Attacking the mechanism of an argument

Attacking the impacts of an argument

Some potential issues with the above are as follows:

Attacking the premise of an argument

Constructing a principled argument

Mechanism “Banning coal-fired power stations would

Impacts “The way we act indicates that freedom is a

When choosing an analogy, it is usually best to pick a situation that is as non-controversial as

Countering a principled argument

Question 1 – Evaluating an argument

Instead of ostracising and marginalising fox-hunters, we should be encouraging them. Funding

1) A very brief overview of what the stimulus is about.

An example of a complete body paragraph is as below (key components marked in parentheses):

“The author’s analysis of the economic benefits of fox-hunting is unconvincing. (1)

Frequently asked questions – Question 1

Q: How many body paragraphs/themes should I include?

Q: How long should my response be? Do longer responses perform better?

Question 2 – Composing an argument

Item 1: Newspaper article

- Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2017.

The essential components are as follows:

1) A general statement establishing the nature and importance of the issue.

An example of an introduction is shown below:

Argument A sugar tax will improve people’s health by

Mechanism Taxes will give food producers an incentive to

Impacts Weight loss will improve people’s health as

1) A topic sentence that introduces the theme of the paragraph.

An example is provided below (key components marked in parentheses):

Frequently asked questions – Question 2

Q: Do I need to make both principled AND practical arguments?

Q: How long should my response be? Do longer responses perform better?

Tips for LAT writing

“A sentence, overly and perhaps overtly complexified, turgid with rarified

“A complex sentence may seem scholarly but confuse casual readers.”

During the test

After the test

If you have any feedback or queries, he can be contacted at nguyenkimlaw@gmail.com.

You might also like