Re: 167 PT with no prep, freshman in college
Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:08 pm
Clyde Frog wrote:
OP is a freshman in college. Factored the philosophy major. Only logical reasoning problems would be the LSAT ones and that would count as prep. OP said they had no prior prep. Just calling it how I see it. Have seen many threads like this the past couple years.
Most have been lies.
Clyde Frog wrote:Not saying it's not possible to score a high diagnostic, for example a girl on here last year scored something like a 174 on hers and hit a 180 on the real thing, although they claimed to have been struggling with time. -25 minutes is blazing though.
I've just seen a ton of bullshit on here that makes me think otherwise.
I share the same suspicions as Clyde Frog for the same reasons. Many threads like this pop up every year on the forum where the users first TLS post makes this same really high first cold diagnostic timed PT score with no prep claim along with questions about how/when to prep, and almost all of them turn out to be BS.
Aside from the fact that historically threads like this have usually turned out to be BS, the main logically based reason I'm suspicious of them is due to the high level of raw (non LSAT prep enhanced) critical reading, logical reasoning and analysis skills/abilities and knowledge of certain heavily tested logical concepts a person must possess in order to achieve a high/top 5% LSAT score on first virgin run cold diagnostic timed PT with no prior prep. If one already possesses such high level critical reading, logical analysis and problem solving skills, they should easily be able to use those skills to figure out or already know the answer(s) to the really basic prep questions they ask without needing or feeling the need to seek advice/answers from random strangers on the internet.
With that said, it's possible OP is telling the truth and really is an exceptionally gifted well educated recent High School graduate that's possibly on the level of being one of the rare young 'prodigy'/LSAT naturals types.
I don't really care either way, so I'll just give important information to answer his/her question under the assumption that OP is for real.
OP, although LSAC considers valid and reports LSAT scores that are up to five years old to law schools people apply to, most top ranked and many other law schools only consider LSAT scores that are no older than three years. That being the case, if you prep for and take the LSAT within the next year in the time window you're asking about, by the time you graduate and are ready to apply to law school (if you still want to go to law school ~4 years from now), that score will probably be too old for most top law schools to consider and you'll have to prep again and re-take the LSAT again later.
As others already said, enjoy being an undergraduate, focus on maximizing your GPA, have fun, explore all sorts of different ideas about other possible career path options in order to make sure LS is really what you ultimately want to do after you've been exposed to and learned about all sorts of the new things UG classes and experiences will expose you to, etc. The LSAT and law schools are not going anywhere so you've got plenty of time in terms of several years to even decide whether or not you really want to or will need to prep for and take the LSAT.
If you're for real and actually achieved a 167 under strict test day conditions without even needing the full 35 minutes for some of the sections like you described, you shouldn't need to prep very hard or for more than 2-3 months if even that long to get yourself into good shape to achieve a 170+ score on an actual LSAT administration since a virgin run 167 demonstrates that you already have high level skills and abilities with the things the LSAT is designed to test/measure.