Very Different Diagnostic Results

hafsahmad
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:59 pm

Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby hafsahmad » Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:56 am

Hi everyone,

I had very minimally prepped for the LSAT before my diagnostic. I took my first diagnostic test(the June 2007) and I got a 154. That day, I felt particularly unsure and uncomfortable with the test and I felt unsure about whether or not my test accurately reflected my ability. I took another test (Oct 2002) the next day, without having studied at all in between, and I got a 164.

As you can imagine, my first score disappointed me and my second reassured me. However, I don't want to be fooling myself, and I am not sure which one was a better indicator of my ability.

Are the earlier tests (as in, 2002) significantly easier? Could that be why I scored so much higher on that test? Or is a 10 point variation in tests normal?

Any help or clarification would be awesome. Thanks!

msmith19
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:33 pm

Re: Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby msmith19 » Thu Sep 27, 2012 12:22 pm

"Cold diagnostic" is probably the dumbest thing in the world. First, it doesn't accurately tell you your natural ability. And second, who cares what your natural ability is? You want to get a good grade on the LSAT right? Then why does it matter. Write 10-15 PTs, spend a couple months learning the fundamentals and drilling, then see where you're at and what a realistic mark on the LSAT would be for you. I tend to believe that 'natural ability' might account for 170+ or even 175+ but that's about it.

vegso
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 2:08 pm

Re: Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby vegso » Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:04 pm

you can brute force your way to any score if you put in the work, i never did a diagnostic because they're pointless. The only value i see in them is if you're a prep company so you can be like we help students jump 20 points! Because it is not about where you start, it's where you end up

bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby bp shinners » Thu Sep 27, 2012 8:01 pm

hafsahmad wrote:However, I don't want to be fooling myself, and I am not sure which one was a better indicator of my ability.

Are the earlier tests (as in, 2002) significantly easier? Could that be why I scored so much higher on that test? Or is a 10 point variation in tests normal?
!


They're not easier. A 10 point variation is not normal. The 164 should tell you that you are capable of receiving that score.

As to which is the better indicator, take a few more PTs and then you'll know for sure.

A 164, however, is a great second-test score. So you're in good shape for a top score.

noobishned
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby noobishned » Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:34 pm

I'll just throw in my two cents... Even if your subsequent scores do drop a bit as you prep(in the early phases), I still wouldn't get discouraged. With hard prep it is very likely that you will be able to earn a stellar score regardless of your diag.

Case and point: my friend got a 146 on his cold diag. and brought it up to a 168. He goes to Vandy now. Hit the test prep hard!

msquaredb
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 9:19 am

Re: Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby msquaredb » Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:45 pm

I am having this problem even after lots of studying. I range from a 167 to a 178 with the average being 170.

patentlybored
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby patentlybored » Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:49 pm

msmith19 wrote:"Cold diagnostic" is probably the dumbest thing in the world. First, it doesn't accurately tell you your natural ability. And second, who cares what your natural ability is? You want to get a good grade on the LSAT right? Then why does it matter. Write 10-15 PTs, spend a couple months learning the fundamentals and drilling, then see where you're at and what a realistic mark on the LSAT would be for you. I tend to believe that 'natural ability' might account for 170+ or even 175+ but that's about it.


How do you figure a cold diagnostic doesn't tell you of your natural ability? You seem like you got a shitty diagnostic and are bitter about it

msmith19
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:33 pm

Re: Very Different Diagnostic Results

Postby msmith19 » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:24 am

patentlybored wrote:
msmith19 wrote:"Cold diagnostic" is probably the dumbest thing in the world. First, it doesn't accurately tell you your natural ability. And second, who cares what your natural ability is? You want to get a good grade on the LSAT right? Then why does it matter. Write 10-15 PTs, spend a couple months learning the fundamentals and drilling, then see where you're at and what a realistic mark on the LSAT would be for you. I tend to believe that 'natural ability' might account for 170+ or even 175+ but that's about it.


How do you figure a cold diagnostic doesn't tell you of your natural ability? You seem like you got a shitty diagnostic and are bitter about it


I didn't take a cold diagnostic because I think it is stupid. Secondly, why the hell would I care about my cold diagnostic score that if I had wrote one, would have occurred 5 months ago? I have a feeling this is a troll attempt. The LSAT has such a huge component of timing and familiarity that a cold diagnostic doesn't provide you with much. Many of my friends wrote a cold diagnostic and then after no further prep wrote another and scored 5-10 points higher.

However, I on my first timed LG section before much prep I scored 10/25. I had no clue how to set up the games. After spending an hour learning how to diagram games, I scored 20/25 on the next. So, what is my natural ability?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 4 guests