6 posts • Page 1 of 1
- Posts: 5152
- Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm
- Posts: 565
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 6:04 pm
I was +1 on the real thing as compared to my average of the five exams I took just before the real thing. I was much higher if one goes all the way back to include all my PT's in the average. On the real exam, I just had greater concentration than in my practices. I finished each section at least five minutes early (and then went back to check over my answers), whereas with PT's, I always felt the time pressure. So, I don't really think my improvement was luck: rather, it was something that I would be able to do again if I took another official exam.
Last edited by sumus romani on Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Posts: 739
- Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 3:21 pm
I was about -5. 172 avg. 167 on the real thing. It was frustrating. I didn't have a bad test or get tripped up by a game or anything. I was just really nervous and not well rested. I got 14 questions wrong. 11 of those came in the first two sections of the test. Once I settled in, I rocked the remaining sections.
- Posts: 1633
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am
I've mentioned my long and sordid history with the LSAT before, but I voted that it was the same just because my only PT immediately before the February test was PT 58, and I got the same score on that. A few months earlier, I did 57 and got 1 point lower.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw and 10 guests