Taking the LSAT at 16 years of age Forum

[RapidLUx]

Hey everyone,

I have recently decided to prepare and take the LSAT and I am currently 16 years of age
I have applied for the Feb 11th 2018 test date and am currently doing around 2 hours of practice papers a day. Will this be enough preparation to get to my goal of 160+ points first attempt.

Would also like some advice from experienced test takers regarding practice methods.

I have done numerous practice tests and found that logic games is very time consuming even tho I have scored around 90% on all 5 previous practice tests I have done, any advice to speed up processing logic games is appreciated.

Average score breakdown for the last 5 practice tests (need some help on the logic reasoning section so any helpful resources is appreciated)

LR: -8
LR: -7
RC: -6
LG: -3

Thanks, have a good day

[FN-2187]

Hey everyone,

I have recently decided to prepare and take the LSAT and I am currently 16 years of age
I have applied for the Feb 22nd 2018 test date and am currently doing around 2 hours of practice papers a day. Will this be enough preparation to get to my goal of 160+ points first attempt.

Would also like some advice from experienced test takers regarding practice methods.

Thanks, have a good day

Typo? I don't think there's an LSAT on Feb 22nd

[Barack O'Drama]

Hey everyone,

I have recently decided to prepare and take the LSAT and I am currently 16 years of age
I have applied for the Feb 22nd 2018 test date and am currently doing around 2 hours of practice papers a day. Will this be enough preparation to get to my goal of 160+ points first attempt.

Would also like some advice from experienced test takers regarding practice methods.

Thanks, have a good day

How do you expect anyone to give you a meaningful answer to this question with no details beyond your age?

Have you even looked at LSAT prep material yet?
Have you taken a diagnostic?
What was your score breakdown?

[RapidLUx]

Hey everyone,

I have recently decided to prepare and take the LSAT and I am currently 16 years of age
I have applied for the Feb 22nd 2018 test date and am currently doing around 2 hours of practice papers a day. Will this be enough preparation to get to my goal of 160+ points first attempt.

Would also like some advice from experienced test takers regarding practice methods.

Thanks, have a good day

Typo? I don't think there's an LSAT on Feb 22nd

fixed, its on the 11th haha

[181plz]

Are you about to finish your bachelors degree? I see no other reason that this would be useful

[A. Nony Mouse]

Why are you doing this? Leaving aside all sorts of other questions, LSAT scores expire after 5 years.

[RapidLUx]

Are you about to finish your bachelors degree? I see no other reason that this would be useful

I just thought it would look good on my CV because I'm from New Zealand and applying to prestigious overseas universities (law courses) are hard so having this on my CV would help

[mcmand]

Why are you taking it?? This post invites so many questions. Presumably you're not even in college yet.

[FN-2187]

I just thought it would look good on my CV because I'm from New Zealand and applying to prestigious overseas universities (law courses) are hard so having this on my CV would help

In the U.S. you don't apply directly to law school.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Are you about to finish your bachelors degree? I see no other reason that this would be useful

I just thought it would look good on my CV because I'm from New Zealand and applying to prestigious overseas universities (law courses) are hard so having this on my CV would help

I really don't think an American standardized test for graduate school is going to help at all for admission to overseas universities.

[RapidLUx]

I just thought it would look good on my CV because I'm from New Zealand and applying to prestigious overseas universities (law courses) are hard so having this on my CV would help

In the U.S. you don't apply directly to law school.

But like having this on my CV would be like having a backup standard SAT score just in case i mess my standard SAT score up

[Mikey]

Yeah... If your purpose for taking the LSAT is to have it on your resume to impress overseas universities (unless they are law schools who take the LSAT), there is literally like.. no benefit of doing LSAT prep. I'm assuming by your age you are applying to undergraduate schools overseas? if so, they will not give a crap about your LSAT score bruh.

[FN-2187]

I just thought it would look good on my CV because I'm from New Zealand and applying to prestigious overseas universities (law courses) are hard so having this on my CV would help

In the U.S. you don't apply directly to law school.

But like having this on my CV would be like having a backup standard SAT score just in case i mess my standard SAT score up

No, having this on your CV would not be like having a backup standard SAT score. If you mess up your standard SAT, you should study more for that.

[xRON MEXiCOx]

who the fuck has a CV at 16?

[181plz]

I just thought it would look good on my CV because I'm from New Zealand and applying to prestigious overseas universities (law courses) are hard so having this on my CV would help

In the U.S. you don't apply directly to law school.

But like having this on my CV would be like having a backup standard SAT score just in case i mess my standard SAT score up

That’s absurd. Undergraduate colleges don’t care about LSAT score, and putting it on your CV would be weird. Study for the SAT, and if you for some reason want a backup test that’d be the ACT

[Law 202x]

Are there countries that allow legal studies before undergraduate? I suppose there are, but I don't know of any. I think this on your CV is one of those "Cool story, bro" moments, to be soon followed by, "But what qualifications do you have?" Now by all means, if there is a legal program out there that will take you without a four year degree, by all means follow your conscience. My guess is the SAT would be better for you since that would be more relevant to undergraduate admissions. I think the reasoning is if you do so well on LSAT, then you must do really well on the SAT. Just take the SAT and make a 1600. That is something to brag about. Not this.

[RapidLUx]

Are there countries that allow legal studies before undergraduate? I suppose there are, but I don't know of any. I think this on your CV is one of those "Cool story, bro" moments, to be soon followed by, "But what qualifications do you have?" Now by all means, if there is a legal program out there that will take you without a four year degree, by all means follow your conscience. My guess is the SAT would be better for you since that would be more relevant to undergraduate admissions. I think the reasoning is if you do so well on LSAT, then you must do really well on the SAT. Just take the SAT and make a 1600. That is something to brag about. Not this.

Thanks I will take your advice into consideration

[A. Nony Mouse]

Are there countries that allow legal studies before undergraduate? I suppose there are, but I don't know of any. I think this on your CV is one of those "Cool story, bro" moments, to be soon followed by, "But what qualifications do you have?" Now by all means, if there is a legal program out there that will take you without a four year degree, by all means follow your conscience. My guess is the SAT would be better for you since that would be more relevant to undergraduate admissions. I think the reasoning is if you do so well on LSAT, then you must do really well on the SAT. Just take the SAT and make a 1600. That is something to brag about. Not this.

There are certainly countries where law is an undergrad degree - probably more countries than treat it as a graduate degree. If the OP is applying for undergraduate law programs, they’re likely not applying in the US, though, so US standardized tests won’t really serve any useful purpose. They’re probably even less useful than something like British A levels would be for someone applying to the US because the US tests aren’t subject-based.

[AJordan]

If you're smart enough to get a 160 on the LSAT you're smart enough to crush the SAT. This "if I don't crush the SAT" thing is absurd. That test is far easier. If you really want to impress American undergrad Universities get a perfect score on the SAT.

[Law 202x]

And if you have the wherewithal to study for LSAT and do well on it at all, a commanding SAT score is within reach.

[heythatslife]

Prepping for the LSAT now is detrimental to your overall admissions strategy. You are wasting time on something that no undergraduate program cares about, whereas you should be spending it on things that do matter such as your SAT, GPA, and extracurriculars. Time is a finite resource - use it wisely.

[MercW07]

Can you even take the LSAT at 16? Im not even sure LSAC will let you. Assuming they will let you, you should definitely not take it anyway. The SAT is so much easier that its honestly not even really comparable. If you were to do poorly on the SAT then I can almost guarantee you will not score 160+ on the LSAT. Study hard for the SAT, take it a couple of times if necessary, enjoy your time in uni, end of story.

[ms9]

Can you even take the LSAT at 16?

I've seen a 12 year old *admitted* to law school, fyi. Neither condemning or condoning, just stating a fact.

[ArthurTimothyRead]

Here's my advice to you: Take the ACT rather than the LSAT or SAT.

The LSAT and SAT are aptitude tests. You can study for them and improve your score, but they're ultimately skill based and developing skills takes a lot of time and effort. It's not always guaranteed that you'll reach the score you want to, and it's plausible for your score to not reflect the skills you have spent time developing.

The ACT is an achievement test. There is a defined scope of content that will be tested on the ACT, and if you know all of it you're going to get a very high if not perfect score. Time tends to be scarcer on the ACT than on the SAT, but in terms of seeking consistency in performance and cashing in on the fruits of your labor, the ACT is your superior option.

I got a 36 on the ACT in high school spending ~10 hours studying material and ~15 hours taking practice tests. Math is math, I knew how to do basic trig and algebra word problems. Grammar rules are pretty straightforward. Get a study book and familiarize yourself with rules for Oxford commas and dangling modifiers. Science and Reading aren't as clear-cut, but still very learnable.

Good luck, and feel free to reach out if you have questions or seek tutoring for the ACT/SAT/LSAT

[Blougram]

The LSAT and SAT are aptitude tests ... The ACT is an achievement test.

Interesting. I never thought of that distinction before (even though it is obvious from the initialisms). So, on the aptitude-achievement continuum, where would you put the GRE? If it is more of an achievement test, I might actually study for the math section and re-take.

Languages have always come easy to me, but I have no *aptitude* whatsoever for math, so when I scored 170/170 on the verbal but a measly 158 on the quant section on my PT, I figured that that was my unbreakable ceiling, and that studying would do me no good.