3.199/158-159 LSAT

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
Korlath
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 3:13 am

3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Korlath » Sun Sep 12, 2010 3:26 am

Hello,

I'm new to the forums. I read and visit a lot but this is my first time posting...(first time I registered too lol). I guess i'm here because i'm starting to get depressed. I took the December 2009 LSAT and scored a 147. I'm currently taking a Testmasters course and i've been consistently scoring around 157-159. Only once did I break into the 60s (162 with the December 2009 lsat lol...). I'm taking the LSAT in October and this is my last chance because I have a canceled score (September 2009).

My first choice was/is UC Davis. I love the Davis area and I plan on settling in Northern California. However, I'm beginning to wonder if I should start considering other plans. I figured since my GPA isn't high enough I need at least a 165 on the LSAT. It doesn't look like that's going to happen.

So, what do you guys think? Is it hopeless? Should I scratch off Davis?

I'm considering changing my test date to December. But i'm afraid I might get worse or not improve at all and ruin my chances by applying late in the game.

A little bit about me.

I'm from Mexican decent. First generation. Spanish was my first language until 4th grade. First person in my entire family to graduate from a 4 year university (yay...).

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5834
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby 2014 » Sun Sep 12, 2010 12:39 pm

You might be able to squeeze into Davis as a URM with 163, but I wouldn't count on it. 165 seems to be a good estimate.

Where are you missing questions on your practice LSATs? There is still almost a full month to prepare, and if you take it seriously, which obviously you should, I think a 5 point jump is reasonable.

Korlath
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 3:13 am

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Korlath » Sun Sep 12, 2010 12:55 pm

Well, on this last diagnostic I got weird results. LR is my strongest area. I usually miss 4-3 questions per section. LG is my weak point. However, I did really well on LG and RC except I missed too many in LR.

I think nerves might be part of it. When I sit down and do timed individual type 2N questions I do really well. I seem to have a hard time answering them during a test, though. I think it's because when im reading the stimulus I don't know what type of question im working on and it freaks me out. Testmasters tells us not to read the stem first, but im starting to wonder if they are wrong...

HeavenWood
Posts: 2915
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby HeavenWood » Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:46 pm

Testmasters tells us not to read the stem first, but im starting to wonder if they are wrong...


Kaplan says the exact opposite. Not to bash testmasters, but it's rare that a testprep company's strategy will completely conform with your individual strengths and weaknesses. Next time you take a pacing section of LR, try reading the stem first. See if it helps.

User avatar
Sh@keNb@ke
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:54 am

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Sh@keNb@ke » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:34 am

I'm also in a testmasters course. I've been doing stem first and it's helped me immensely. Knowing what to look for and paraphrasing the answer helps cut my time down alot, try it out.

User avatar
sundance95
Posts: 2123
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby sundance95 » Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:37 am

HeavenWood wrote:
Testmasters tells us not to read the stem first, but im starting to wonder if they are wrong...


Kaplan says the exact opposite.


So you know TM is right.

whymeohgodno
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby whymeohgodno » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:48 am

sundance95 wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
Testmasters tells us not to read the stem first, but im starting to wonder if they are wrong...


Kaplan says the exact opposite.


So you know TM is right.


Preptest courses are shitty in general.

I did find that reading stem first did help me. It really helped me to know what kind of question I was dealing with.

User avatar
artichoke
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby artichoke » Mon Sep 13, 2010 3:18 am

sundance95 wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
Testmasters tells us not to read the stem first, but im starting to wonder if they are wrong...


Kaplan says the exact opposite.


So you know TM is right.


Totally disagree. Read stem first. Seems obvious, but I guess it isn't.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18424
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby bk1 » Mon Sep 13, 2010 3:58 am

I don't think it is possible to categorically state whether stem or stim first is better for everyone. Different strokes for different folks.

To get this back on topic, OP I would of course broaden yourself past Davis. UCH would be a fine alternative, possibly UCI but I have no idea if that is parlayable in toa NorCal job . Also, if you manage to break 160 I think it would be good idea to fire off an ED app to UVa.

FWIW, I applied at deadline last cycle to UCD and got waitlisted as 166/sub3/URM.

Korlath
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 3:13 am

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Korlath » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:36 pm

Thanks for the helpful comments. I think I will try to read the stem first. I think it'll ease my nerves because I get really anxious not knowing what type of question i am dealing with, even though sometimes it's pretty obvious, but not all the time.

Korlath
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 3:13 am

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Korlath » Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:20 pm

bk1 wrote:I don't think it is possible to categorically state whether stem or stim first is better for everyone. Different strokes for different folks.

To get this back on topic, OP I would of course broaden yourself past Davis. UCH would be a fine alternative, possibly UCI but I have no idea if that is parlayable in toa NorCal job . Also, if you manage to break 160 I think it would be good idea to fire off an ED app to UVa.

FWIW, I applied at deadline last cycle to UCD and got waitlisted as 166/sub3/URM.



UCI, really? I thought about it but I heard they are even more selective than Yale. I don't think I have a chance.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18424
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby bk1 » Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:56 pm

I think UCI is worth the application at least. And it isn't more selective than Yale. For $12 plus postage it is easily worth even a negligible shot to apply to UCI. Heck I feel that at a 1% chance I would still spend an app fee of $100.

trudat15
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:57 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby trudat15 » Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:38 am

bk1 wrote:I think UCI is worth the application at least. And it isn't more selective than Yale. For $12 plus postage it is easily worth even a negligible shot to apply to UCI. Heck I feel that at a 1% chance I would still spend an app fee of $100.


It was only more selective when they offered everyone free tuition for three years (2 years ago). Everyone applied given the economy. I'm sure a lot of people that had really low numbers (auto rejects) applied as well, since there were no statistics on their medians/25th/75th, so no one knew what it would take until they established their first class.
It'll settle down as they have made no promises to this years class (last year's class was 1/2 tuition) that I am aware of as of yet.

Plus it's free, besides the LSAC $12 and the time it takes the fill out the app and mail it in. Why not throw one their way? With their great faculty, small class sizes, $$ spent on students, it may be a t20 by the time they are ranked (I know this is their goal).

User avatar
Spoonmanners
Posts: 407
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Spoonmanners » Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:57 am

I can only give so much advice.

1. Check with Davis, and see what type of URM's they are looking for. My undergrad was at a college that had a statistically huge number of African Americans, and their law school didn't really are about increasing those already huge numbers. Just check.

2. UC Davis with a 163 wouldn't be too far off if you are a URM.

3. I haven't taken Kaplan, but from every single person I have ever known to have taken Kaplan, along with law student who alleges to teach Kaplan, don't listen to a damn piece of advice anyone from Kaplan has to give you.

I saw some gibberish about each person has a different system. No. (Well, sort of). Each testing company has their own system. Each system is copyrighted. I remember my LSAT learnings, where they weren't allowed to throw in things like ">" and such in logic games. Anyone with any damn sense would put it in. No offense to Kaplan people, or the mentally retarded people they get to teach their classes who can manage to scribble out a 165 untimed.

Is UC Davis the new one run by that Conlaw guy who rights unnecessary long books? Chemerinsky? If so, thanks for your 1400 page explanation of my 700 page text book.

Good luck, but you should bump up whatever you can.

___

Edit: Different Cali school. Thought someone else was talking about the new Cali law school that had the free tuition thing a few years back.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby beachbum » Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:12 am

Spoonmanners wrote:I can only give so much advice.

1. Check with Davis, and see what type of URM's they are looking for. My undergrad was at a college that had a statistically huge number of African Americans, and their law school didn't really are about increasing those already huge numbers. Just check.

2. UC Davis with a 163 wouldn't be too far off if you are a URM.

3. I haven't taken Kaplan, but from every single person I have ever known to have taken Kaplan, along with law student who alleges to teach Kaplan, don't listen to a damn piece of advice anyone from Kaplan has to give you.

I saw some gibberish about each person has a different system. No. (Well, sort of). Each testing company has their own system. Each system is copyrighted. I remember my LSAT learnings, where they weren't allowed to throw in things like ">" and such in logic games. Anyone with any damn sense would put it in. No offense to Kaplan people, or the mentally retarded people they get to teach their classes who can manage to scribble out a 165 untimed.

Is UC Davis the new one run by that Conlaw guy who rights unnecessary long books? Chemerinsky? If so, thanks for your 1400 page explanation of my 700 page text book.

Good luck, but you should bump up whatever you can.

___

Edit: Different Cali school. Thought someone else was talking about the new Cali law school that had the free tuition thing a few years back.


Wow, lot of unnecessary hate towards Kaplan. For what it's worth, OP, I took a Kaplan Advanced class and had a great experience. My teacher was fantastic (and had scored well into the 170's), the methods (minus RC) worked well, and there were plenty of supplementary resources available. I also worked through the Powerscore LGB and didn't notice any difference in quality between it and Kaplan. And, most importantly, I ended up doing well on the LSAT. So I guess take that for what it's worth. It seems to me that, between the major prep companies, the quality of your instructor will make the biggest difference in your experience.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Grizz » Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:14 am

beachbum wrote:It seems to me that, between the major prep companies, the quality of your instructor will make the biggest difference in your experience.


This.

User avatar
Spoonmanners
Posts: 407
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Spoonmanners » Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:19 am

beachbum wrote:Wow, lot of unnecessary hate towards Kaplan. For what it's worth, OP, I took a Kaplan Advanced class and had a great experience. My teacher was fantastic (and had scored well into the 170's), the methods (minus RC) worked well, and there were plenty of supplementary resources available. I also worked through the Powerscore LGB and didn't notice any difference in quality between it and Kaplan. And, most importantly, I ended up doing well on the LSAT. So I guess take that for what it's worth. It seems to me that, between the major prep companies, the quality of your instructor will make the biggest difference in your experience.


I don't give a fuck. Either way. I just know that 100% of the people that I have met who took Kaplan regretted it, and the people who I know who teach for Kaplan are people I wouldn't trust with a butter knife. It's been two years since I took the LSAT, so perhaps they have improved their class, but I didn't personally take it and I don't give a fuck if you did. I'm just mentioning that every person I have ever met who took Kaplan has regretted the shit out of it. I'm not recommending other options for people or anything, so you can probably figure I'm not a competitor.

I'm glad you did well on your LSAT. Every person I know who took Kaplan did exactly the same or worse. Maybe I just don't know enough people for me to form a representative sample?

User avatar
Spoonmanners
Posts: 407
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Spoonmanners » Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:23 am

rad law wrote:
beachbum wrote:It seems to me that, between the major prep companies, the quality of your instructor will make the biggest difference in your experience.


This.


Then fuck sake, don't take Kaplan.

And really, if my teacher set my limits, I wouldn't be worth much of shit. It's just practice with some analysis.

Guess what: anyone will do better by going through 200 questions and my analysis of what they should do in that particular type of question.

I didn't necessarily rely on that type of person to define what I would get on the LSAT.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby Grizz » Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:32 am

Spoonmanners wrote:
beachbum wrote:Wow, lot of unnecessary hate towards Kaplan. For what it's worth, OP, I took a Kaplan Advanced class and had a great experience. My teacher was fantastic (and had scored well into the 170's), the methods (minus RC) worked well, and there were plenty of supplementary resources available. I also worked through the Powerscore LGB and didn't notice any difference in quality between it and Kaplan. And, most importantly, I ended up doing well on the LSAT. So I guess take that for what it's worth. It seems to me that, between the major prep companies, the quality of your instructor will make the biggest difference in your experience.


I don't give a fuck. Either way. I just know that 100% of the people that I have met who took Kaplan regretted it, and the people who I know who teach for Kaplan are people I wouldn't trust with a butter knife. It's been two years since I took the LSAT, so perhaps they have improved their class, but I didn't personally take it and I don't give a fuck if you did. I'm just mentioning that every person I have ever met who took Kaplan has regretted the shit out of it. I'm not recommending other options for people or anything, so you can probably figure I'm not a competitor.

I'm glad you did well on your LSAT. Every person I know who took Kaplan did exactly the same or worse. Maybe I just don't know enough people for me to form a representative sample?


Calm down dude. The internet is not srs bzns.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: 3.199/158-159 LSAT

Postby beachbum » Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:07 am

rad law wrote:
Spoonmanners wrote:
beachbum wrote:Wow, lot of unnecessary hate towards Kaplan. For what it's worth, OP, I took a Kaplan Advanced class and had a great experience. My teacher was fantastic (and had scored well into the 170's), the methods (minus RC) worked well, and there were plenty of supplementary resources available. I also worked through the Powerscore LGB and didn't notice any difference in quality between it and Kaplan. And, most importantly, I ended up doing well on the LSAT. So I guess take that for what it's worth. It seems to me that, between the major prep companies, the quality of your instructor will make the biggest difference in your experience.


I don't give a fuck. Either way. I just know that 100% of the people that I have met who took Kaplan regretted it, and the people who I know who teach for Kaplan are people I wouldn't trust with a butter knife. It's been two years since I took the LSAT, so perhaps they have improved their class, but I didn't personally take it and I don't give a fuck if you did. I'm just mentioning that every person I have ever met who took Kaplan has regretted the shit out of it. I'm not recommending other options for people or anything, so you can probably figure I'm not a competitor.

I'm glad you did well on your LSAT. Every person I know who took Kaplan did exactly the same or worse. Maybe I just don't know enough people for me to form a representative sample?


Calm down dude. The internet is not srs bzns.


+1. Dude needs to chill. Your experience (or lack thereof?) with Kaplan might've been terrible, but mine was good. And everyone I know who took Kaplan had mostly positive things to say. Their system isn't perfect (RC didn't do much for me), but it worked well enough to get me a 10+ point improvement over a 2-month course.

And yes, like any class in just about anything, the quality of your instructor is going to make a big difference in your experience. Is it going to determine your score or define how well you learn? No. And I never said it would. But it's going to help you learn the material faster and more efficiently and generally improve the quality of the time you spend in class.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest