LSAT prep books you should avoid Forum

[Dr. Dre]

Poast which LSAT prep books (or companies) one ought to avoid, since many new poasters have admitted to using TTT prep materials. I'll go first:

[LSAT Blog]

This thread is a great idea. I've examined a few retail books that should be avoided. Reviews are below each book cover.



Reasons to avoid it (Last time I checked, their "Cracking the LSAT" series also had similar issues.)





Reasons to avoid it (Later editions likely have similar issues.)





Reasons to avoid it (This year's edition will have new authors, so it might be a bit different. However, I'll be surprised if it's worth buying even then. We'll see.)

[The LSAT Trainer]

Thank goodness for Steve Schwartz --

I still can't figure out how to load an image, but the REA books sold on Amazon and in Barnes and Noble are some of the worst I have seen.

[RhymesLikeDimes]

My campus library has the Barron's one, and it is literally the worst thing I have ever read.

[Dr. Dre]

REA books sold on Amazon and in Barnes and Noble are some of the worst I have seen.

--ImageRemoved--

[objection_your_honor]

Early in my prep I checked out a Kaplan RC book from my library. If you think you're scoring a bit too high lately, try The Kaplan Method® — guaranteed to lower your score with convoluted non-strategies.

[Dr. Dre]

[LSAT Blog]

Oh, and here's a general rule of thumb: if a book comes with a CD or DVD, it probably isn't good.

(This guideline *may* not be as helpful once the LSAT becomes a computer-administered test, but that probably isn't happening anytime soon.)

[Gamine]

Since I live abroad I'm not likely to run into LSAT books in libraries or bookstores and so when I started my prep I had to do a LOT of online research (which led me to Steve's blog and TLS) to separate the trash from the good stuff. More people need TLS. I've never even heard of any of those other preptest companies except for Kaplan - but TLS made it clear that it was a no-go from the beginning.

[jwaters92]

deleted

[LSAT Blog]

Since I live abroad I'm not likely to run into LSAT books in libraries or bookstores and so when I started my prep I had to do a LOT of online research (which led me to Steve's blog and TLS) to separate the trash from the good stuff. More people need TLS. I've never even heard of any of those other preptest companies except for Kaplan - but TLS made it clear that it was a no-go from the beginning.

+1

It's when people blindly choose their books based simply on what's on the shelf that they're most likely to run into trouble.

I'd wouldn't be surprised if ~99% of Barron's LSAT book sales were bookstore purchases where the customer didn't do any prior research.

[LSAT Blog]

Reviews suggest that it's full of typos and other errors, as well as unrealistic fake (non-LSAC-written) practice questions.





Reviews suggest that it's full of typos and other errors, as well as unrealistic fake (non-LSAC-written) practice questions. More recent editions may have similar issues. (The descriptions of the 2013 and 2014 editions don't mention using real LSAT questions, which means they probably don't.)

[RoaringMice]

Before I knew any better, I did the Princeton Review book. It sooo didn't help me. If anything, I feel it made my score worse. I do not recommend it.

[Ambitious1]

You should avoid just about anything from Kaplan, Barron and Princeton Review.

I would say Manhattan and Blueprint are in a class of its own. Powerscore books still have value. I assume that LSAT Trainer is up there as well, given the work of Mike and how brilliant the Manhattan series is.

[Ambitious1]

Oh yeah and don't get McGraw Hill either. I've heard horrible things and that they don't even use real LSAT questions in their analysis. If true, that's a joke.

[patfeeney]

Reviews suggest that it's full of typos and other errors, as well as unrealistic fake (non-LSAC-written) practice questions. More recent editions may have similar issues. (The descriptions of the 2013 and 2014 editions don't mention using real LSAT questions, which means they probably don't.)

I used McGraw-Hill to start my prep back in January. I took their diagnostic test (they include 6 "tests" in the book). My score came to roughly a 145 (they don't even provide an accurate curve, they just give you ranges, like if you get 30-40 right you score between 140-150).

Their strategy for Logic Games is one of the most numbskulled approaches I have seen, and I could sense this from day one of LSAT prep. They suggest you write down every deduction/ clue for the game in all its numerous incarnations and breakdowns of each interrelation. If X Comes before Y but after Z, they want you to not only diagram Z-X-Y but also Z-X and X-Y and Z-Y, and not Y-Z, not Y-X, not X-Z... you get the idea. FOR EACH RULE. The end result is a list of "deductions" that is longer than your average reading comp section. You end up spending 6 or 7 minutes creating deductions. It's ridiculous.

Reading comp advice is equally ridiculous. Their examples show pretty much every word in the passage underlined.

To top it off, the stock model on the 2013 edition that I bought looks more like Drew Pickles than a law student.

All-around suckitude here.

[LSAT Hacks (Graeme)]

Great thread, should be stickied. This issue is complicated for newbies because most of these books are actually decent choices for SAT, GMAT, GRE, etc. where the test makers haven't released many official tests.

[RoaringMice]

The worst thing about me for the Princeton Review book is that, not knowing how badly it sucked compared to others, I did the whole thing, taking up quite a bit of my limited prep time. If only I'd had the better prep books then. But I ended up wasting most of my prep time on the PR. It wasn't until I started one of the other books and instantly - I mean instantly - got concepts I was messing up with PR that I realized. I wish I could have that time back. My score on this June test would no doubt be higher.

[nugnoy]

Manhattan's Reading comprehension is bad. Their analysis on the first law passage was way off. Also, their obsession of "weighing scale" is just inappropriate for many passages. Even the instructors in the RC forums end up awkwardly forcing the scale structure into passages for the sake of using the scale rather than for its having any utility.

Also, REA's lsat logic games is great. It has 100 original games, and they're really useful - they test concepts relevant for the lsat/tested on the lsat. And many of the games are harder than lsat games, making them helpful for people who want perfection.

[romanticegotist]

Reviews suggest that it's full of typos and other errors, as well as unrealistic fake (non-LSAC-written) practice questions.





Reviews suggest that it's full of typos and other errors, as well as unrealistic fake (non-LSAC-written) practice questions. More recent editions may have similar issues. (The descriptions of the 2013 and 2014 editions don't mention using real LSAT questions, which means they probably don't.)

That LG book fucked me over hard; I went through it before diving into the PTs and that basically meant that I lost a month of my life or more. Don't buy it.

[patfeeney]

I went to the local bookstore just to check out their prep materials shelf. My findings:

An entire shelf of materials with five useful books. No wonder so many people fail to break 160 on the test. Who's going to buy Manhattan or Powerscore when they're inundated with so many volumes of crap?
I smell conspiracy.

[TheMostDangerousLG]

I went to the local bookstore just to check out their prep materials shelf. My findings:

An entire shelf of materials with five useful books. No wonder so many people fail to break 160 on the test. Who's going to buy Manhattan or Powerscore when they're inundated with so many volumes of crap?
I smell conspiracy.

You mean literally five? Because I see multiple Manhattan guides, several books of PTs, the Blueprint LG guide (I believe), and Master the LSAT (not the best, but potentially worth purchasing). And a lot of crap. There is admittedly a lot of crap.

[CalAlumni]

Anything with fake LSAT questions should be avoided at all costs, esp. since there are so many real PT's available.

[patfeeney]

You mean literally five? Because I see multiple Manhattan guides, several books of PTs, the Blueprint LG guide (I believe), and Master the LSAT (not the best, but potentially worth purchasing). And a lot of crap. There is admittedly a lot of crap.

Two manhattan guides and four official books, also Master the LSAT. 7 total; the Blueprint-looking one is actually REA.

[steven21]

.