Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

skip james
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:53 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby skip james » Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:49 am

Diag: 151
(untimed, something like 1.5 hour sections)

Average: (last 10 tests out of the entire 60, 172.1) time was an issue though

1st take: 172

Average for retake 177

2nd take: 177

User avatar
alex_cryp
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby alex_cryp » Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:05 am

1) What was your score on your initial diagnostic?
149

2) What were you getting on preptests?
Average 162-not including the very first diagnostic

3) What did you score on the June (or any previous LSAT)?
165 (higher end of my pt range)

chicagodude
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby chicagodude » Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:28 am

Diag: 151
(untimed, something like 1.5 hour sections)

Average: (last 10 tests out of the entire 60, 172.1) time was an issue though

1st take: 172

Average for retake 177

2nd take: 177


skipjames, that's amazing. what did you do to experience that kind of jump? how many PTs did you take and over how long a period of time did you take them?

User avatar
Nulli Secundus
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:19 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby Nulli Secundus » Fri Nov 19, 2010 6:04 am

Initial Diag: 178
Oct LSAT: 170

:cry: :cry:

t-ender
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:26 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby t-ender » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:44 pm

Diagnostic: 159
PT: Mid-High 170s
October LSAT: 172

Slightly disappointed but it got me into my top choice school with a below 25% GPA so I can't complain.

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby 2011Law » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:53 pm

t-ender wrote:Diagnostic: 159
PT: Mid-High 170s
October LSAT: 172

Slightly disappointed but it got me into my top choice school with a below 25% GPA so I can't complain.


Mind if I ask roughly what top school(s) you got into?

t-ender
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:26 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby t-ender » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:25 pm

2011Law wrote:
t-ender wrote:Diagnostic: 159
PT: Mid-High 170s
October LSAT: 172

Slightly disappointed but it got me into my top choice school with a below 25% GPA so I can't complain.


Mind if I ask roughly what top school(s) you got into?



MVP range

coug11
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:02 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby coug11 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:28 pm

Diagnostic: 155
Practice Tests: 164 (high 166)
October LSAT: 170

skip james
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:53 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby skip james » Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:46 am

chicagodude wrote:
Diag: 151
(untimed, something like 1.5 hour sections)

Average: (last 10 tests out of the entire 60, 172.1) time was an issue though

1st take: 172

Average for retake 177

2nd take: 177


skipjames, that's amazing. what did you do to experience that kind of jump? how many PTs did you take and over how long a period of time did you take them?


I studied for about three to four months about 40-50 hours a week (that's not really including breaks, and I may possibly be understating the extend of hours I actually put in.

It wasn't really easy, I can say that. I think I spent about 40-50 hour weeks doing games (probably did each game about 3 times each, was pretty strict about how I was approaching redoes, i.e. not giving myself inferences and forcing myself to to find viable reasons for eliminating answer choices and stuff), then I spent pretty much the rest of the time doing LR training, and intermittently RC (which I hate doing even to this day). I did probably 30ish untimed tests, which I timed anyway (just to get a guage of how long it took, and to see if, even though I may not have increased in accuracy, I had made some sort of gain in time. Then when I realized I was going to run out of tests, I started cracking down on tests that I had taken and started dissecting the crap out of them, writing out premises and conclusions and trying to understand how to prephrase the basic idea or ideas that would make the argument work (i.e. sufficient assumptions, or as I like to call them, suppressed premises). That last part was the hardest but when I had it down, it got me to the point where I missed literally 0 flaws, 0 strengthens, 0 weakens, 0 sufficient assumptions (dur), and 0 necessary assumptions. I took my remaining 30 and starting semi-timing and transitioning into full-blown 35 minute sections. I think I was comfortably in the 32 minute range-ish for most sections for all of them (except rc where I'd blow over every once in a while) for my last 10-ish tests (except maybe one of em I think). It was a LOT of work. But it payed off, so I consider it as a worthwhile investment of my time.

Personally, I think most people could put in the time that I did and most could make the gains that I did, but also that most people just really don't care enough to really put in the time and energy I put in to, quite literally, just 'kill' the test. I think this 'I'm gonna f'ing kill this test' mentality goes a long way in motivating a person to study as much and learn as much as they can to do to frickin nail the test.

'a pupil who is never pushed to do more than he can, will never do all that he can'

- mill

think like a 180, train like a 180, and study like a 180, and who knows what you could do.. probably a 180.

*oh and for my second take, I redid about 10-ish tests (time was... once again an issue, but I understood the concepts pretty well still) and 2 new tests (which I hit 176 and 178 respectively) and hit 177 on the real deal. Much less prep, much more relaxed, and just not really giving a f'ing shit about my results helped me out tremendously in preforming much better than I anticipated.
Last edited by skip james on Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
swc65
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:27 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby swc65 » Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:51 am

Diag 168
PT 174 avg
LSAT 178 (game day adrenalin)

User avatar
downing
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:03 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby downing » Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:04 am

inspiring thread!

Diag: 154

June LSAT: 159

Oct LSAT: 165

I'm seriously thinking of taking it again in February, hoping to score in the low 170s with insane amounts of re-re-training.

User avatar
Blindc1rca
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:11 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby Blindc1rca » Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:15 pm

Initial Diagnostic: 165

PT Average: 170

--I did my PTs in order, although I did NOT do every single one. Something clicked around PT35 and I stayed relatively consistently above 170 after that.
PT45-55 Average: 175.6 (172-179)
PT 56-60 Average: 170...
...kind of a disappointing drop leading up to the test.

Oct 2010: 170

45-55 really got my hopes up. Boo hoo. Whatever though I'm not retaking. LSAT studying is too damn stressful to want to repeat. I feel for you guys.

User avatar
risktaker
Posts: 687
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:10 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby risktaker » Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:31 am

Damn all you high diag ppl! Now my score makes more sense.

Diag: 140
PT avg: 162
Actual: 157

I am pretty sure I could have scored a 160 but nerves got me every time. Guess I should be happy with my 17 pt improvement. This test is definitely the hardest fuckin test I have ever taken. Destroyed the SAT's without taking prep course but sucked at the LSAT. Once I go to law school, I will figure out if LSAT is in fact a good predictor of law school success.

Lasker
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:17 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby Lasker » Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:51 am

Diag: 180

PT avg: 178.7, median 179

Feb. Test: 178

User avatar
risktaker
Posts: 687
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:10 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby risktaker » Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:54 am

Lasker wrote:Diag: 180

PT avg: 178.7, median 179

Feb. Test: 178


That is freaking insane. You must be a genius. I honestly think the LSAT would correlate pretty well with an IQ test.

User avatar
rman1201
Posts: 959
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby rman1201 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:57 am

Anaconda wrote:1) What was your score on your initial diagnostic? 166

2) What were you getting on preptests? 173-175

3) What did you score on the June (or any previous LSAT)? 167

User avatar
TheFutureLawyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 2:28 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby TheFutureLawyer » Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:48 am

147
168
168

User avatar
iiibbystar
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 2:59 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby iiibbystar » Sun Jul 10, 2011 3:46 am

skip james wrote:
chicagodude wrote:
Diag: 151
(untimed, something like 1.5 hour sections)

Average: (last 10 tests out of the entire 60, 172.1) time was an issue though

1st take: 172

Average for retake 177

2nd take: 177


skipjames, that's amazing. what did you do to experience that kind of jump? how many PTs did you take and over how long a period of time did you take them?


I studied for about three to four months about 40-50 hours a week (that's not really including breaks, and I may possibly be understating the extend of hours I actually put in.

It wasn't really easy, I can say that. I think I spent about 40-50 hour weeks doing games (probably did each game about 3 times each, was pretty strict about how I was approaching redoes, i.e. not giving myself inferences and forcing myself to to find viable reasons for eliminating answer choices and stuff), then I spent pretty much the rest of the time doing LR training, and intermittently RC (which I hate doing even to this day). I did probably 30ish untimed tests, which I timed anyway (just to get a guage of how long it took, and to see if, even though I may not have increased in accuracy, I had made some sort of gain in time. Then when I realized I was going to run out of tests, I started cracking down on tests that I had taken and started dissecting the crap out of them, writing out premises and conclusions and trying to understand how to prephrase the basic idea or ideas that would make the argument work (i.e. sufficient assumptions, or as I like to call them, suppressed premises). That last part was the hardest but when I had it down, it got me to the point where I missed literally 0 flaws, 0 strengthens, 0 weakens, 0 sufficient assumptions (dur), and 0 necessary assumptions. I took my remaining 30 and starting semi-timing and transitioning into full-blown 35 minute sections. I think I was comfortably in the 32 minute range-ish for most sections for all of them (except rc where I'd blow over every once in a while) for my last 10-ish tests (except maybe one of em I think). It was a LOT of work. But it payed off, so I consider it as a worthwhile investment of my time.

Personally, I think most people could put in the time that I did and most could make the gains that I did, but also that most people just really don't care enough to really put in the time and energy I put in to, quite literally, just 'kill' the test. I think this 'I'm gonna f'ing kill this test' mentality goes a long way in motivating a person to study as much and learn as much as they can to do to frickin nail the test.

'a pupil who is never pushed to do more than he can, will never do all that he can'

- mill

think like a 180, train like a 180, and study like a 180, and who knows what you could do.. probably a 180.

*oh and for my second take, I redid about 10-ish tests (time was... once again an issue, but I understood the concepts pretty well still) and 2 new tests (which I hit 176 and 178 respectively) and hit 177 on the real deal. Much less prep, much more relaxed, and just not really giving a f'ing shit about my results helped me out tremendously in preforming much better than I anticipated.


Thank you for taking the time to post this. :) It will help me tremendously in how I plan on studying for the LSAT.

die Zauberflote
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby die Zauberflote » Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:36 pm

1) 161

2) Averaged 178 on last 15 PTs

3) 171 last October (emergency bathroom break during scored section)

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=160273

User avatar
Funkycrime
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:31 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby Funkycrime » Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:12 pm

skip james wrote:
chicagodude wrote:
Diag: 151
(untimed, something like 1.5 hour sections)

Average: (last 10 tests out of the entire 60, 172.1) time was an issue though

1st take: 172

Average for retake 177

2nd take: 177


skipjames, that's amazing. what did you do to experience that kind of jump? how many PTs did you take and over how long a period of time did you take them?


think like a 180, train like a 180, and study like a 180, and who knows what you could do.. probably a 180.

*oh and for my second take, I redid about 10-ish tests (time was... once again an issue, but I understood the concepts pretty well still) and 2 new tests (which I hit 176 and 178 respectively) and hit 177 on the real deal. Much less prep, much more relaxed, and just not really giving a f'ing shit about my results helped me out tremendously in preforming much better than I anticipated.
Excellent post and highly appreciated. You seem to have the attitude of a wrestler or a combat athlete (I know many and firmly believe it is the best mindset for getting things done).
Last edited by Funkycrime on Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
chem
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:14 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby chem » Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:17 pm

Diagnostic: 169

PT 175

Real Score 171

Prep Powerscore bibles and 10 practice tests

moxie101
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 12:26 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby moxie101 » Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:05 am

thegrayman wrote:diag: 147
PT's: 167-175
October: 168

Lower end of where I was at but I'll take it, I came a long way from my cold diag


Hey bro, I saw your post and I must say your improvement from your diagnostic to your official score is an inspiration me. Im a also a URM male and Im currently testing in the low 150s-155. How did you improve? Can you give me any tips, suggestions and advice to make noticeably gains in my score.
Thanks

JLach
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:33 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby JLach » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:43 pm

This thread really motivated me in my studies so I felt compelled to share.

1. My initial diagnostic was a pathetic 138

2. After a few months of intense daily studying my prep tests were in the 157-161 range

3. I got a 160 on the actual LSAT :D

You can do anything you set your mind to. Just remember, a vision without action is merely a dream. Best of luck.

User avatar
lawjag2015
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby lawjag2015 » Fri Oct 24, 2014 5:06 pm

Diagnostic (Untimed): 164, the next day 168
PT average before June: 169
June Score: 163
PT average before September: 173
September Score: 160

Ashamed. Taking again in December.

stoopkid13
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 5:31 am

Re: Your LSAT Score vs. Your Initial Diagnostic

Postby stoopkid13 » Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:13 am

Diagnostic: 161
PTs: 171
Actual (Sep 14): 172




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cherrygalore, Dondraper88, Google [Bot], MSNbot Media and 10 guests