December 2012 Re-takers

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Cobretti » Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:43 am

Sugar Lumps wrote:
CR2012 wrote:Got a shiTTTY email today from Hofstra Law. Check out the guy to the left.
http://law.hofstra.edu/

Edit: Click over to the picture with two guys standing to the left of a woman.


Further confirmation that law students are wicked unattractive. Especially since schools tend to pick their most attractive students for these online promo shoots.


You should write a diversity statement about being hot

User avatar
ph5354a
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:40 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby ph5354a » Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:45 am

bananashotgun wrote:serious and honest question for the people who are scoring ~10 points under their average PTs:

Is there a reason you're scoring so much lower on the real thing such as taking extra time during the PTs or reusing old PTs? Or is it just nerves?

It seems that more than a small minority are scoring significantly lower than their PTs. The first time I took it I scored right where I thought I would, but I was also taking my PTs in the most realistic fashion I could on fresh tests. Then again I was around 160 where now I'm around 170 so maybe that makes a difference?

Not trying to offend anyone but I'm nervous and anything under 170 for me means that I will most likely be sitting out this cycle. And all this talk about going 10 points below average means I'm fudged.


It's a good question and I've thought about it a lot. I scored a 166 in October and was averaging about 171 on my PTs, with a high of a couple 173s. Not a huge drop, but significant. I was taking brand new PTs under timed conditions, most of them at a Kaplan center so it was a fully-stimulated test day proctoring. I think my score drop came down to a couple things:

1) Text anxiety, big time. I put a lot of pressure on myself and that didn't really work out well. This time around, I'm going to try to have the exact same mindset that I do when I do a PT. It's just another test just like the ones that I've taken dozens of times before.

2) Timing issues. Because it was test day, i wanted to be 150% sure of every question, instead of being confident on the easy ones and moving on, so I ended up having to leave two blank on LG because I ran out of time, and I only got 1 other question wrong on that section, so that made a big difference. Same thing on RC --i didn't save enough time for the hardest passage, so I basically guessed on 2-3 questions and ended up with a -6. Even on my worst PTs, I would only get -4. This time around, I'm aiming to finish all of my timed sections 4-5 minutes early (which I generally do on LR anyways) so that even if I move a little slower on test day, it won't be as catastrophic.

Also, I do legitimately feel that some of the PTs are easier than the current tests. Now I'm paying more attention to when the PT was given and trying to only focus on the most recent ones I can get my hands on. I was consistently getting -0 or -1 on my LG sections beforehand, but when I hit that zones game, well...we know what happened.

The other thing I am changing this time around is I'm trying to give myself a large buffer. I was excited as soon as I hit my goal of 170 last time that I got a little too confident and didn't really make any gains for the last month of studying. This time around, I'm shooting to hit a couple 175's on my PTs before 12/1 so even with some anxiety or a surprise zones game, I won't end up too disappointed on test day.

Sorry for the long response! I hope this helps other people that had the same issue.

User avatar
Sugar Lumps
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 7:50 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Sugar Lumps » Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:48 am

mrizza wrote:
Sugar Lumps wrote:
CR2012 wrote:Got a shiTTTY email today from Hofstra Law. Check out the guy to the left.
http://law.hofstra.edu/

Edit: Click over to the picture with two guys standing to the left of a woman.


Further confirmation that law students are wicked unattractive. Especially since schools tend to pick their most attractive students for these online promo shoots.


You should write a diversity statement about being hot


Image

User avatar
annet
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:19 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby annet » Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:55 am

Stupid work, stupid getting dark so early. *grumble grumble grumble*

Managed 20 or 30 LR questions last night before I fell asleep super early. Gonna have to start hitting Starbucks on the way home.

bananashotgun wrote:serious and honest question for the people who are scoring ~10 points under their average PTs:

Is there a reason you're scoring so much lower on the real thing such as taking extra time during the PTs or reusing old PTs? Or is it just nerves?

It seems that more than a small minority are scoring significantly lower than their PTs. The first time I took it I scored right where I thought I would, but I was also taking my PTs in the most realistic fashion I could on fresh tests. Then again I was around 160 where now I'm around 170 so maybe that makes a difference?

Not trying to offend anyone but I'm nervous and anything under 170 for me means that I will most likely be sitting out this cycle. And all this talk about going 10 points below average means I'm fudged.


I scored 4-5 points under my average and can attribute that 100% to poor timing on the games section. Not sure how to solve this - obviously as soon as I stop drilling and go back to full PTs I'm going to start fiddling with ways to use my watch more effectively to break out 8 minute segments. I may have sucked it on LR but I sucked it just as bad as I had been on my PTs.

User avatar
ph5354a
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:40 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby ph5354a » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:01 pm

annet wrote: I scored 4-5 points under my average and can attribute that 100% to poor timing on the games section. Not sure how to solve this - obviously as soon as I stop drilling and go back to full PTs I'm going to start fiddling with ways to use my watch more effectively to break out 8 minute segments. I may have sucked it on LR but I sucked it just as bad as I had been on my PTs.


I've started winding my watch back to 12 after each section on my PTs so I know exactly how much time I have in the section. It's easier than trying to remember when the section started and I've been able to pace myself much better.

User avatar
Lenahan3
Posts: 264
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 12:57 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Lenahan3 » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:02 pm

bananashotgun wrote:serious and honest question for the people who are scoring ~10 points under their average PTs:

Is there a reason you're scoring so much lower on the real thing such as taking extra time during the PTs or reusing old PTs? Or is it just nerves?

It seems that more than a small minority are scoring significantly lower than their PTs. The first time I took it I scored right where I thought I would, but I was also taking my PTs in the most realistic fashion I could on fresh tests. Then again I was around 160 where now I'm around 170 so maybe that makes a difference?

Not trying to offend anyone but I'm nervous and anything under 170 for me means that I will most likely be sitting out this cycle. And all this talk about going 10 points below average means I'm fudged.


This question seems almost tailored to my experience. I scored almost 10 points below my average, and these are the reasons that seem to weigh most heavily on the "why" of the matter:

Nope. Didn't cheat on any of my PT's pre-test. All were taken within the allotted time and had an experimental. I didn't reuse old PT's so my scores weren't boosted at all. My average PT was legit going into the test.

1) I didn't take the test very seriously. I thought I was, but on test day, I wasn't even nervous. I thought I had it in the bag, and as such, I got destroyed. LR was atrocious, as my intuition failed me, and I hadn't bothered creating an attack for it because my intuition had always been good enough for the 170's. Same thing happened with RC. LG wasn't a problem, as I just missed one question on zones.

2) I went too fast. Way too fast. I even beat my normal LR and RC times, finishing my LR's in less than 20 minutes apiece and RC in 27 or 28 (around there, I think).

Came out with a woeful score. Lessons learned? Take this shit seriously and realize I'm not an LSAT god. I went through Manhattan LR again, learning to actually classify questions. My entire LR technique has been revamped. Same thing with RC.

Nerves didn't affect me. Overconfidence combined with a lack of an LR/RC attack and too much intuition bombed me.

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Cobretti » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:07 pm

Sugar Lumps wrote:
mrizza wrote:
Sugar Lumps wrote:
CR2012 wrote:Got a shiTTTY email today from Hofstra Law. Check out the guy to the left.
http://law.hofstra.edu/

Edit: Click over to the picture with two guys standing to the left of a woman.


Further confirmation that law students are wicked unattractive. Especially since schools tend to pick their most attractive students for these online promo shoots.


You should write a diversity statement about being hot


Image


For real, claim URM

User avatar
GabeQuixote
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:26 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby GabeQuixote » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:09 pm

I feel dumm.

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Cobretti » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:11 pm

GabeQuixote wrote:I feel dumm.


Gabe I'm convinced your inconsistency is 90% due to lack of confidence. You should do untimed drills until you have your confidence back.

User avatar
Psib337
Posts: 315
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 11:18 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Psib337 » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:31 pm

bananashotgun wrote:serious and honest question for the people who are scoring ~10 points under their average PTs:

Is there a reason you're scoring so much lower on the real thing such as taking extra time during the PTs or reusing old PTs? Or is it just nerves?

It seems that more than a small minority are scoring significantly lower than their PTs. The first time I took it I scored right where I thought I would, but I was also taking my PTs in the most realistic fashion I could on fresh tests. Then again I was around 160 where now I'm around 170 so maybe that makes a difference?

Not trying to offend anyone but I'm nervous and anything under 170 for me means that I will most likely be sitting out this cycle. And all this talk about going 10 points below average means I'm fudged.


I score 9 points lower in October than my PT average and I have no idea why. I've never done well on standardized tests but if it was a testing issue then my PTs would've been closer to where I actually scored and with 2 exceptions (one day when I just bombed for no apparent reason and one where I was exhasted). I do know that in high school when I would take multiple choice tests almost every answer I got wrong I would narrow down to two choices and I would just pick the wrong one but then when I would get to a short answer or essay question I would do great. Almost every teacher I ever had would talk to me and ask what happened no multiple choice sections and I could never explain it. It's been the same way on test day with the LSAT. When I look over what I got wrong most of the time I have no idea why I picked that answer but I know at the time it seemed like the right choice.

I wish it was a timing or lack of preparation thing because I can figure out how to fix that. Right now I'm hoping that if I understand the test better I won't make as many stupid mistakes. I also know on PTs when I miss something it's because I wasn't reading carefully enough and I would miss something so I'm tryng to fix that too. But I'm terrified of having my PTs go up again and then getting the December test back and seeing another low 150...mostly because that means I probably won't be going to law school.

User avatar
bitsy
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:06 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby bitsy » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:07 pm

mrizza wrote:
Sugar Lumps wrote:
CR2012 wrote:Got a shiTTTY email today from Hofstra Law. Check out the guy to the left.
http://law.hofstra.edu/

Edit: Click over to the picture with two guys standing to the left of a woman.


Further confirmation that law students are wicked unattractive. Especially since schools tend to pick their most attractive students for these online promo shoots.


You should write a diversity statement about being hot


Image

gettingerdone
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby gettingerdone » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:08 pm

Does anyone think the lack of Justify/ Sufficient Assumption Questions we saw on PT 67 is a trend that is going to continue?

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Cobretti » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:17 pm

bitsy wrote:
mrizza wrote:
Sugar Lumps wrote:
CR2012 wrote:Got a shiTTTY email today from Hofstra Law. Check out the guy to the left.
http://law.hofstra.edu/

Edit: Click over to the picture with two guys standing to the left of a woman.


Further confirmation that law students are wicked unattractive. Especially since schools tend to pick their most attractive students for these online promo shoots.


You should write a diversity statement about being hot


Image


Its really sad that her hands are still carving out a traditional hourglass figure, indicating her own self-awareness of her non conformity with traditional beauty; adding a bitter and sarcastic tone to this seemingly benign tune.

chadbrochill
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:19 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby chadbrochill » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:37 pm

mrizza wrote:
GabeQuixote wrote:I feel dumm.


Gabe I'm convinced your inconsistency is 90% due to lack of confidence. You should do untimed drills until you have your confidence back.


Its time to stop feeling sorry about the past and attack the test Gabe. Analyze your mistakes deeply but move on when you're done, this test requires "short memory/amnesia" like a quarterback. There's two weeks to go, just put on the blinders and go H*A*M. You know your weaknesses are LG/RC, you should really get LG down since its a huge confidence booster to have 1-2 (if exp) sections automatically in your pocket.

User avatar
GabeQuixote
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:26 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby GabeQuixote » Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:47 pm

Thank you everyone. The short term/amnesia comment really does describe this game well.

I have a great memory. I can memorize facts and use them to synthesize premises and conclusions fairly well.

However, taking the LSAT is like starting a race with an empty bag and once you hit every milestone (or question) you put a rock in said bag.

By the time I'm at the LSAT's last section, I have 100 questions in my head eating away at my CPU's processing power.

-I'm practicing endurance.
-I'm going to start doing untimed Logic Games and Reading Comprehension sections to get my confidence up and take some pressure off.
-I still have two and a half weeks.

User avatar
Sugar Lumps
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 7:50 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Sugar Lumps » Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:59 pm

mrizza wrote:Its really sad that her hands are still carving out a traditional hourglass figure, indicating her own self-awareness of her non conformity with traditional beauty; adding a bitter and sarcastic tone to this seemingly benign tune.


You're amazing.

User avatar
GabeQuixote
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:26 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby GabeQuixote » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:11 pm

Sugar Lumps wrote:
mrizza wrote:Its really sad that her hands are still carving out a traditional hourglass figure, indicating her own self-awareness of her non conformity with traditional beauty; adding a bitter and sarcastic tone to this seemingly benign tune.


You're amazing.


Smells like an English major. Beware.

User avatar
mg7
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby mg7 » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:20 pm

After a week and a half of being depressed about my October score, I got a relatively good score on a PT, and I now feel refocused enough to take on December.

User avatar
boblawlob
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:29 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby boblawlob » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:31 pm

Took PT 59 (for the 4th? time...last time being right around April/May at 167)

178

I am not going to give that score any credence because I saw way too much stuff that I was aware of.

Because of that, I actually performed slightly slower on some sections because I was trying to justify every answer choice. This especially happened for the reading comp section.

LG -0 (accurate because although I remember the games, I didn't remember specific answers and plus I'm naturally adept at games)
LR -0
LR (exp from PT 52)
LR -2
RC -3

Because my timing for LR is so slow, I decided to implement the 13-end, then 1-12 strategy. Success in getting most of the 13-end right, but I had to guess for around 3 questions for LR in the first 12...which I felt that I'm giving away freebie points. Any insight on the 13-end/1-12 strategy? I did the 13-end in a little over 20 mins and only gave between 8-10 mins on the first 12. Obviously need to improve on time there, but insight would help. I mean I think starting with the hardest first is a decent strategy because when you start getting pressed for time, you tend to go with your gut with less analysis and that fits best with 1-12.

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Cobretti » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:35 pm

GabeQuixote wrote:
Sugar Lumps wrote:
mrizza wrote:Its really sad that her hands are still carving out a traditional hourglass figure, indicating her own self-awareness of her non conformity with traditional beauty; adding a bitter and sarcastic tone to this seemingly benign tune.


You're amazing.


Smells like an English major. Beware.


Nooooope

Did PT 32 Today (first time)

178
-1LR
-2RC (Fuck ya)
-2LG

Starting to see some consistent improvement in RC so that's awesome. Losing a 180 to stupid LG oversights kind of sucks, but whatever.

User avatar
dowu
Posts: 8334
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:47 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby dowu » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:35 pm

Took October. Got a 160. Retaking in December. Not studying for it.

Fuck law school.

User avatar
Sugar Lumps
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 7:50 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Sugar Lumps » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:41 pm

Retaking pt 63 which was my first scored test. People freaking out over this LG was a joke.

User avatar
Sugar Lumps
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 7:50 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Sugar Lumps » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:44 pm

Wormfather wrote:
Sugar Lumps wrote:Retaking pt 63 which was my first scored test. People freaking out over this LG was a joke.


OUCH!


I was one of them.

User avatar
HawkeyeGirl
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:13 pm

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby HawkeyeGirl » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:54 pm

Need advice. Im getting crushed at work. Like the next two weeks (excluding thanksgivig and the day after) will likely be 9-1am type days. And I just found out I'll be in Milwaukee on nov 27-28 for work and will like get 0 studying in while I'm there as well as little sleep. Do I cancel dec lsat and just hope my 169 will fly? I can't take off the 29th or 30th since I've already taken 1 vacation day for the LSAT...

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: December 2012 Re-takers

Postby Cobretti » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:57 pm

nmop_apisdn wrote:Took October. Got a 160. Retaking in December. Not studying for it.

Fuck law school.


Sun Tzu would not endorse this.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: KtLaw747, mrgstephe, ngogirl12, StopLawying, Tazewell, Yahoo [Bot] and 11 guests