Avg. Prep Time for 170 Forum

[ben4847]

Hey all,

What is the Average Prep Time for 170+?

I am asking for "Average", so please do not come up with: "It varies from person to person" etc.

I think the responses to this question can be averaged out, and that will be really helpful to many people!

Medium score of LSAT takers is 150. In other words, an average person scores ~150. Thus, OP question can be simplified to ~ this: "How long does it take to improve from 150 to 170 or by 20 points?"

the correct answer is FOREVER.

for an average person on average it is simply impossible to improve 20 points. as far as I remember repeat takers score +/-2-3 points.

yes and besides, the 150's also did some practice so you'd have to count that also.

The correct answer is what I posted above, from Mein Boich. http://translate.google.com/#de|en|mein%20bauch

[LSAT_Tutor]

you got me with your "Mein Boich" source

[Jeffort]

you got me with your "Mein Boich" source

PS: Please change your username since it is deceptive and misleading given that you said in another thread you have never looked at an LSAT question. Thank you in advance.

[slsplease]

The kitten thing isn't funny and it definitely isn't clever...

OP should just go through the threads where people post the score they got and how much studying they did, average those, and report to us.

[Jeffort]

The kitten thing isn't funny and it definitely isn't clever...

OP should just go through the threads where people post the score they got and how much studying they did, average those, and report to us.

I wasn't trying to be clever. The kitty thing is a hackneyed internet way of insulting somebody without posting nasty text.

I'm being nice.

The dude should change his user name since he admitted that he has not even looked at/read a single LSAT question.
Therefore he has no qualifications to be posting with the pseudonym LSAT_Tutor in an LSAT study board.

It's deceptive and misleading. From his admissions he is not qualified to identify himself as an LSAT tutor.

If he just wants to Fck around on the forum he should do it in the off topic board.
People that are actually trying to prepare for/improve their performance on the LSAT seek advice in this section of the forum.

.

[Mr.Binks]

The kitten thing isn't funny and it definitely isn't clever...

OP should just go through the threads where people post the score they got and how much studying they did, average those, and report to us.

I wasn't trying to be clever. The kitty thing is a hackneyed internet way of insulting somebody without posting nasty text.

I'm being nice.

The dude should change his user name since he admitted that he has not even looked at/read a single LSAT question.
Therefore he has no qualifications to be posting with the pseudonym LSAT_Tutor in an LSAT study board.

It's deceptive and misleading. From his admissions he is not qualified to identify himself as an LSAT tutor.

If he just wants to Fck around on the forum he should do it in the off topic board.
People that are actually trying to prepare for/improve their performance on the LSAT seek advice in this section of the forum.

.

While I agree with you, I must ask:
--ImageRemoved--

[AbhiJ]

(170 - Cold Dignostic Score) * 30 * Intelligence Level = Number of Hours

Assuming Average Intelligence Level = 1;

[dudders]

I got the nerves on test day and only got 169, but I was PT-ing between 175-177 for my last three diagnostics before the test. All I did was take Testmasters, and I didn't even stay caught up with the homework (esp reading comp, I hate reading comp). My roommate went to a different class, did very little homework, and got like a 178.

Not to toot our horns or anything, but for people who the LSAT just clicks and were already good at standardized tests, the excessively lengthy or excessively involved study (think threads by people who've done every PT twice and have no more materials to study) just isn't necessary. 10 weeks of 10/hr/wk class (or comparable home study) seemed pretty sufficient for many of the people I went to undergrad with.

[givemea170]

I feel bad for those who score below their PT averages. I took 10 practice tests, all of them from 165-171 and got a 171 on the december test. I didn't study much. Maybe 3-4 hours before the 10 practice tests, so 25 prep hours in all maybe.

[094320]

..

[sailormoon]

Although it is helpful for some to know the average time they consumed in preparing before successfully getting a 170+ in LSAT. The success of your aim merely depends on you, to be precise, your preferences and attention levels. If you have taken an elementary course in microeconomics, you would be familiar with the concept of "diminishing marginal return." This means that the return to your "skills advancement" or in this case, let's call it "LSAT utility" diminishes, the more you consume, in this case, time and effort, to study. This is the reason why very long classroom or working hours are actually counterproductive. Your "learning curve" will increase and then at some point decrease if you keep on pushing it. The key is to find that maximum point in the curve based on the set of factors that you can only determine (e.g. preferences). This can be achieved, of course, through trial and error. In my case, it is 4 hours a day. If I go more than that, I tend to start hating it and make more mistakes as I practice. Just like how I love that 1st and 2nd slice of pizza, and then love less the 3rd slice, hate the 4th slice and if i shove the 5th slice in my mouth, I would probably throw up. Some people may only need 1 or 2 hours. Once you find yours, then you should follow it. Study, and then closed all the books and put it in a shelf. Do stuff that relaxes you and take your mind off it. In this way, when you do it again, you're "learning curve" is back to minimum and you can climb it again to its peak. Some LSAT prep schools might give you numbers (big ones) to encourage you to enroll in their classes. Always bear in mind that the achievement of your intended goal depends largely on your utility or satisfaction. Do not beat yourself for it. Just like many activities in our life, it is not the length of time spent but the quality of time spent and the "utility" that was achieved that matter.

[Magister]

I got a 171 (99th% when I took the test, the same as a 173 today) without knowing anything about the test and not doing any study specific to the test. So, for me it took 0 study hours to get over a 170.

I also taught for two national LSAT test companies. In an 80 hour course, for the students that showed up and did most of the homework, 7-10 point improvements were common, (at least while I was teaching). Since there is about 2 hours of homework per hour of class time this equates to 10 points per 240 hours of study. This is just about where another poster gave some formula which basically said 30 hours per point.

Where I disagree with most other posters is on the ceiling. I know the LSAT is a skills test, not an intelligence test. Let's compare another purely cerebral activity, chess. Early on in IQ research they tested the IQ's for the top ten chess players in the world and, surprisingly, found they had average IQ's. Other research has discovered what distinguishes them from the rest of us; the top level, internationally rated players put in an average of over 29,000 hours of practice. The next highest level of internationally rated players had put in over 19,000 hours. This means, in chess, at the highest levels, moving up in the rankings basically requires 10,000 hours of dedicated quality practice.

So, although the law of diminishing marginal returns probably applies to LSAT study once you gain your first 10 points or so, there is probably no ceiling on your potential score. It becomes a practical issue. I have heard of very few students who put in hours in excess of 300 or so hours. Compared to the 4,500 hours class and study for undergraduate and the 4,500 hours for class and study for law school, most students really put in very little time studying for the LSAT.

My working hypothesis is thus: A student who scores a 145 on a practice test and works with a highly qualified tutor for 400 hours and purchases quality books and materials who works 8 hours per day on LSAT study for a full year, thus putting in 2,000 hours can break a 170.

This requires being unemployed for a year and spending $25,000 to $50,000 on tutoring but probably has a positive economic return. The reason student's rarely do this is because the $100,000 for college and the $100,000 for law school can be financed, but the living expenses and tutoring for a high LSAT generally must be paid up front.

[hoos89]

/

[hoos89]

/

[JaymeMarie]

I studied for weeks and got a 170. kinda sad

[Bthennington1]

Hey all,

What is the Average Prep Time for 170+?

I am asking for "Average", so please do not come up with: "It varies from person to person" etc.

I think the responses to this question can be averaged out, and that will be really helpful to many people!

Median (not medium) score of LSAT takers is 150. In other words, an average person scores ~150. Thus, OP question can be simplified to ~ this: "How long does it take to improve from 150 to 170 or by 20 points?"

This logic is unbelievably flawed for someone whose user name is "LSAT_Tutor." You are making the faulty assumption that people who scored 170 on the test would have scored 150 without studying. If this were the case, the LSAT would merely be a measure of how much you studied for it and thus be completely pointless.

^ This and the fact that many people flat out do not study for the test. Many people think that they can waltz into the test and knock out a high score because they have a 3.7 GPA. Im sure that many people think that you either know the material, or you don't, and studying will not help. I assure you that this is wrong because as seen in this thread, http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... ?f=6&t=396 , studying will help. With that being said, 150 IS the median and everyone cannot score a 170. For some people they will never get close to 170 with months and months of studying. For some they can take a PT and make a 170+ every time. It all depends on the particular person. There is no set study time that will assure you a 170. The best thing that you can do is 1) stop worrying about how long it will take (start now/ quit procrastinating) 2) study your butt off everyday 3) Do the best you can, and have 0 regrets that you did not study enough.

As previously stated, "it all depends on the particular person."

[SublimeStyle]

168 diagnostic, started studying on thanksgiving for the december 3rd lsat. Took around 8 practice tests or so in about a week, got a 172. Retaking in June, I plan to study for 2 months this time around. I'll let you know the improvement but I'm hoping for 177+

[83947368]

.

[fosterp]

For some, 170 is simply not obtainable, and others get 170s with no prep. Whatever average you come up with some such a survey would be meaningless because the standard deviation would be too high as to have any worth.

Assuming your using the answers for your own personal judgment of how much time to put into studying, a better question would ask "how much time to reach your true lsat potential?"

And for that, I would answer that the 3 month guides you see stickied on top will probably do very well at getting you to the point where the marginal benefit of more studying tends to drop off sharply.