1) What score did you get?
169
Diagnostic was 159

2) What books did you use? (Kaplan, Powerscore LRB, Powerscore LGB, etc)
Nova's Master the LSAT - not great, good for a brief overview though
Powerscore LRB - Amazing, must use this
10 official LSAT's
Next 10 Official LSAT's
10 More Official LSAT's

3) What prep courses did you take (if any)? Full length, weekend?
None

4) How long did you study for, and under what conditions? (during school, during the summer, etc)
Studied at night and on weekends while working 50 hours+/week . Started stuyding a little in March, started studying a lot in April and May and got burnt out by June. Tried to do the not drinking thing, but it didn't work out so well. I would usually take a practice test Saturday morning and go out Saturday night.

5) How many preptests did you do?
20-25 - not all timed or as full tests though. I would do as many sections as I could one night after work and then go over wrong answers the next night. I would take full length tests once/week on Saturdays. Rinse and repeat

6) What would you change if you were to do it again?
Start earlier and be more relaxed about it. Not study so intensely for 2 months, which caused me to burn out and not do as well as I think I could have. Also, on the real test, DON'T assume that any section is experimental. I did this and it turns out it wasn't experimental. It caused me to miss 8 on that section!:(

1) What score did you get?
160
167

2) What books did you use? (Kaplan, Powerscore LRB, Powerscore LGB, etc)

Bought Princeton Review initially. Thought their "LSAT-like questions" were garbage. Mostly dirty tricks.
Powerscore LGB. Very good.
All the prep tests. This was the key.

3) What prep courses did you take (if any)? Full length, weekend?
None.

4) How long did you study for, and under what conditions? (during school, during the summer, etc)
Studied on my own daily for several hours a day in the library for a couple of months before LSATs. I took it twice (see "what would you change" below).

5) How many preptests did you do?
All of them. Photocopied the tests and took test on photocopy. Saved questions I missed, organized them into type of question. Did maybe 2 tests per week under real timed conditions, the others I did section by section-just starting a stopwatch, hiding it, and writing the section w/o worrying about the time. Correcting it and seeing how I did.

6) What would you change if you were to do it again?
I would get up to take a leak on the test-day as soon as I felt the need. I tried to hold it so as not to waste time but ended up blowing the whole test b/c I kept thinking I was gonna pee my pants. The second time around I had to go too so I just raised my hand and didn't sweat the time.

I read a ton of the books that are written for the LSAT. But some are good some are nothing like the LSAT. eg Barrons is horrible.

I started a studying about a year or more before the exam. What worked best for me was to develop a tech for each of the three topics. I learned the LR with the EK books, I learned the games with curverbreakers book conquering the LSAT games, and reading comp with EK. The Bibles are tech books and are highly recommended by many.

Once you have a grasp of the tech get the big orange book of real LSAT or kaplans mastery book and apply what you learn from your tech books. When you're finish with these then do as many prep test as possible.

If you still have time then look into other books just for problems to practice with.

Why was this a mistake?

Hey Roo

I was looking at your post from July on the 178 you got..congrats!

You had a rigoruos plan of study...and my q is what was your initial diagnostic on the lsat?

Thanks!!

Awesome. Sounds a lot like the track (and the issues) that I'm on. Looking forward to a 178.

[size=85]1) What score did you get?
top 5%
Now - >175

2) What books did you use? I flipped through ARCO for LG, and used Kaplan course books for LR. I was woefully unprepared when I took the test the first time. Since then, I have been teaching the LSAT for over 6 years and routinely score in the high 170's. I think the Powerscore books are good, and of course I recommend that people use as many recent real LSATs as possible. They were easier in the 1990's.

3) What prep courses did you take (if any)? Full length, weekend?
None. But I did taugth a Kaplan course after the LSAT. I think that a large group course is not a great idea unless it is cheap. The $1500 price tag is outrageous. I have since developed a course which is less than half of that price and which is a small group capped at 6 and with over 34 hours of class time.

4) How long did you study for, and under what conditions?
Studied on my own a few hours per week for a month.

5) How many preptests did you do?
About 7. 1-2 per week for the month before the test. I progressively improved.

6) What would you change if you were to do it again?
A) When I took the LSAT 6 years ago, I had no idea how important it was. It was a year later when I started to apply to law schools that I understood just how important this test is. In part, that is why I started to teach it. I thought it important that others be better informed about the test.
B) I'd have visited the test site, found out where parking was located and also have my IDs ready to go in the morning. I'd also have taken a more snacks with me just in case I was hungrier than expected.


Last note: I took the LSAT ~8 years after having graduated from college. I was an English major with a concentration in critical theory and immediately upon graduation I took a practice LSAT and scored a 172 without preparation. So, I'd say that high-level critical theory classes are good preparation for the LSAT.

But 8 years later, I started off in the low 160's. Maybe bc I was older my timing was slower, and also my analytical brain had been on hiatus for a while. It is really tough to get those gears working again and to keep yourself motivated.

My advice would be to take the LSAT when your skills are at their peak. Don't waste your time and money with a large group course. Do as much self study on your own first, and then ask an LSAT-ace buddy to help you for free. If you don't have one, enroll in private tutoring (4 hours may even be enough) or small group tutoring.

Oh, and if anyone is interested in some free LSAT advice, feel free to give me a ring!

http://www.testheads.vpweb.com (http://www.testheads.com is under reconstruction)

Theresa

What makes you say that?

Hey there! I am not sure which of the many points you are referring to, so I'll go over the statements point by point.

1) "I was woefully unprepared." I had no idea how important the test was. Lucky for me, I did decently, but I could have really blown the score out of the water if I had known that many schools weighed the LSAT more than 4 years of college. I simply took the test a year before I started to apply to law schools thinking that it would be a "practice" test. 6 years ago, law schools were more prone to averaging your scores, so I threw away a chance to ace it on the only try.

2) "I think the Powerscore books are good." I discovered them fairly recently and was surprised to find that they conformed well to how I had already been teaching. I like their approach though they go into too much detail; understanding the basic mechanics is the most important thing.

3) "I recommend people take as many real LSATs as possible." Well, this doesn't need an explanation! It is best to practice on the real thing.

4) "LSATs were easier in the 1990's." I and my students typically score 3-6 points higher on pre-2000 tests as compared to post-2000 tests. It is that simple.

Theresa Gheen
Managing Member
Test Heads Educational Coaching, LLC
http://www.testheads.vpweb.com
- based in DC, also teaching in VA, MD, IN
- Skype/phone tutoring available worldwide

not sure if i trust people with only two posts, say they've only taken 7 tests, or used the arco book for logic games.

but you've done all three. if it was two, it'd be a double negative and i might visit your site. but as it stands, you've done three so you're shit out of luck.

Then your students must be real good at LGs. The curve might be better on older tests, but that doesn't make them "easier" that just means you can miss more and get a better score. "Difficulty" is incredibly subjective in LSAT talk. I think the more recent LRs are WAY easier then the ones in the early nineties, others wholeheartedly disagree with me.

That may well be, but it doesn't mean the older exams are any easier.
Your claim is an anomaly if anything.

"Each LSAT form is written to a common set of test specifications--specifications that describe both the content of questions and the distribution of questions across the spectrum of difficulty levels. Each scored LSAT question is pre-tested twice--once to gather data about how the item functions on its own, and a second time as part of an intact test section. Data from these pretests allow LSAC to 'equate' each LSAT form. Equating is a statistical process through which the very slight differences in difficulty across LSAT forms can be mitigated, thus allowing direct comparison of results from different tests. Therefore, a December 1998 LSAT score of 150 means the same thing as a 150 from the October 1995 administration, or from any administration since June 1991."

Meaning the harsher scales on recent exams are there to offset the lower logical difficulty levels.
Recent exams are noticeably easier, and I prefer them, as I tend to not freak out as much.
But either way, my scores between the old and new exams are pretty consistent, as they should be.

This looks like it is a fantastic forum. I am just getting started on my serious LSAT studying, and reading the posts on here has made me realize that I'm going to have to take this much more seriously than I initially expected.

So - a few questions for you...

Can anybody point me to good resources online for additional logic games, PDFs, or practice tests? Are most of these free, or if not, how much are they?

I've bought the Powerscore Bibles. Do people who have used them feel it is most effective to read through them and study them entirely before focusing on practice tests, or to use them as a resource while doing practice tests? How have people most effectively used these resources?

I'm sure I have more to ask...but this is a good start for me. Many thanks to anybody who can offer any advice, guidance or insights.

My advice:

Practice.

If practice does not help, practice more.

If practicing more does not help, practice even more.

If practicing even more does not help, stop practicing.

Give up.

The end.

cool thread

STOP POSTING YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

LOL

1) 165

2) Kaplan

3) testmasters, 2x a week on weeknights, occasional saturday and sunday diagnostics

4) i studied while taking a large load of classes. additionally, i had most my classes clumped on tues/thurs, which is when my lsat classes were.

5) probably 5 diagnostics

6) don't know about future

7) I suggest we have to amke it on our own by self study.

good luck!
------------------------------------------------------------
Tampa Lawyers

When doing prep tests, simulate the environment as closely as possible. I hadn't anticipated the human dimension of testing centers: surly proctors, sneezing, underlining, etc...

As others have mentioned, don't give us yourself any extra time at all. It's easy when you're self-timing to fudge the time by 20-30 seconds. I would actually prep on 33-34 minutes and religiously adhere to that.

Read A Rulebook for Arguments (short paperback book) and A Concise Introduction to Logic by Patrick Hurley (an intro to logic textbook) then get to work on questions. Forming the base understanding of logic was the way I went from a 159 on my first test to a 180. As stupid as it sounds, if you become a student of the LSAT you will do well on it.

Score: 176
Books: Kaplan and many real practice tests

At first I had a lot of trouble with games, primarily timing and having space for my sketches. One thing I did that I would suggest to anyone who has these problems with games is to make your sketch using a highlighter along with any "permanent" constraints and then switch to a pencil for answering the problems. This way you can save time not having to keep re-drawing or trying to erase certain parts of a sketch between questions. Having one sketch also saves you a lot of space.

I work full-time and have two small children. My job includes long hours(9-7) and Saturdays, however it does afford me access to a computer and a good amount of personal time. Given these circumstances attending a regular prep course is not feasible, even driving to New Orleans for a 2day seminar would be tough.
Does anyone have insight on the Ace-the-lsat program by Grammatrix, or Outside the lsat? The Ace program uses an non-traditional approach to preperation; thier logic being it's a non-traditional test. Outside uses a matrix to moniter progression and is considerably cheaper than Kaplan, or Princeton. If I had to I could do a combination of two of the above three.
Any help on this matter would be greatly appreciated. I need to get enrolled soon, as I'm planning on taking the test in Dec. and probably again in Feb(it is not cumulative). I say this because time is the greatest consideration here.

Thanks,
Carter
PS Did Ken ever post his free video seminar?

1) *********

2) What books did you use? (Kaplan, Powerscore LRB, Powerscore LGB, etc)
Kaplan Course in 06 - Remaining Kaplan Book PTs from course + Princeton Review + Real LSATs

The course in 06 was helpful but I didn't invest the time I needed to and I knew it. Two years later I approached it much more ferociously, pulling from Kaplan and Princeton Review and thinking a lot about what would word best for me.

3) What prep courses did you take (if any)? Full length, weekend?
Kaplan Course in 06 (Full Regular Course but only 1 month long... I would not recommend beginning serious studying only a month before the test... I worked hard in that month, but it just wasn't enough time.

4) How long did you study for, and under what conditions? (during school, during the summer, etc)
On my second go... I studied at least 20 hours a week for two months. I was very lucky to have a job that not only allowed but insisted that I study as much as I needed to.

5) How many preptests did you do?
About 25... Averaging about 1 every other day reviewing on the off days and easing up a bit in the week leading up to the test.

6) What would you change if you were to do it again?
Well... I would have done what I did in 08 the first time around... I think the Kaplan course (or any course for that matter) was helpful, but I fell into the trap of thinking Kaplan would lay out everything I needed to do to get the best score I possibly could. They certainly did a lot for me... forcing me to take several practice tests and preparing me well for test day... but they didn't do everything. When I took ownership of my own studying, and started planning my own study regimen it took things to a new level. Following the prescribed method is a good start, but adding my own personal touch to my study habits made a big difference for me.

7) Any other misc comments/suggestions.

One very minor thing that I found helpful was to keep my pencil moving as I was taking the test. Your mind has to be able to keep up of course... but if you're always crossing something out, underlining, circling, etc. you're less likely to start staring at the page in a stupor.

The best approach to studying truly is to take lots of REAL LSATs... fake questions can be helpful at times, but are not the same as the real thing. When taking old tests... review the questions you missed. NEVER think it is good enough to just take the test without reviewing your questions. I got in the habit of circling any question I was iffy on as I was taking the Practice Test... I'd go back and review every question I missed and every iffy question. I wasn't just looking to see what the right answer was... I was looking to see why the answer I chose was wrong and to figure out why my approach to the problem didn't work. Every now and then the answer to that question would just be that the question was really hard and I wasn't smart enough to figure it out in the 2 minutes I had to do so. More often though it would be some systematic thing I could change: "I misread the stem" "I chose an answer that strengthens, not weakens" Doing this consistently I was able to improve my approach to the LSAT as a whole.

1) What score did you get?
First practice: 157
Real: 166. Oct, 08
I was aiming for 170, but my highest PT was 167.

2) What books did you use?
Kaplan 180: just read a few chapters on the LR. did not find it very helpful
LG Bible: very helpful. explains diagramming very well, and effectively categorizes the different problems with strategies for each.
Nova's: fairly helpful for LR explanations. good collection of drills. this was my general LSAT "textbook."
25 real LSATs. 2 books, 5 individual.

3) What prep courses did you take (if any)? Full length, weekend?
None

4) How long did you study for, and under what conditions? (during school, during the summer, etc)
Started studying in mid July. Was working full time, so I would study 2-3 times a week. Tried to do 1 diag every saturday morning at the library. As the test date approached, I started studying almost everyday for at least 1-2 hours, and at times would take a PT everyday.
I tried to study in foreign places, so that I would be uncomfortable. Public library was a good spot because there would be random paper shuffling, brief conversations, and other noises in the background that tested my focusing ability.

5) How many preptests did you do?
28. All real LSATs.

6) What would you change if you were to do it again?
Start earlier. I don't think this would have helped me too much but probably would have made me stress a lot less towards the end. Starting earlier also allows you to streamline your studying, so you're not doing intense studying for 2 months.

My problem was that my strategy was just brute force. I just did as many PTs as I could and figured I would internalize all the techniques. My progress was really slow and inconsistent. I'd score 167 one day, and 157 the next, which was very very frustrating. If I were to redo it, I'd figure out some study plan/strategy like cataloging my mistakes and really pinpointing my errors.

One big thing I didn't do was take an untimed test. This seemed counter-intuitive to me at the time but in retrospect I think it would have helped me a lot. Taking it untimed allows you to determine if your problem is speed or understanding. I never took an untimed test despite frequently running out of time on sections. I think doing a whole test untimed would allow me to hone my strategies and give me a better understanding of questions.

Finally I would've concentrated on my weakness, but not overlook my strengths. My weakest section was definitely games, and my strongest was reading comp. Towards the end of my studying these sections actually reversed. And on test day I received -3 games, -5 RC. This was probably because I did zero targeted studying for RC, but substantial targeted study for games. Make sure even if you're adept at a section keep your eyes and your mind open for new techniques/strategies. For the LSAT, you can never improve too much.

I think if you're not a natural LSATer and your goal is 170+ you really need that brute force mentality to give you the motivation to go through 20-30+ PTs and smart study skills to help you critically assess your mistakes.

1) What score did you get?
164 Oct 08. This was my first LSAT.

2) What books did you use? (Kaplan, Powerscore LRB, Powerscore LGB, etc)
LSAT Superprep
Princeton Review 2009
10 more actual LSATs

3) What prep courses did you take (if any)? Full length, weekend?
None

4) How long did you study for, and under what conditions? (during school, during the summer, etc)
Approximately 1-2 hours per day for 2 months

5) How many preptests did you do?
I only did 2 timed, sequenced preptests in a single sitting. However, I did many timed individual sections (approximately 40-50?)

6) What would you change if you were to do it again?

I got the result that I wanted. I would not change a thing.