Sophmore in college studying for the LSAT??? Forum

[osmlpz]

Studying is for the weak. Just do one practice test a week before to get your bearings.

+1

[Jack Smirks]

Next semester take a formal logic class, the semester after that take an advanced formal logic class and as many critical reasoning classes you can. In fact, switch your major to philosophy. Also, disregard all this "its too early" nonsense. If you've already taken an interest to law and have chosen it as a career path you have clearly accepted the fact that life is meaningless and should be spent indoors, consumed by long hours of reading tedious details and soul debilitating subject matter. Congrats and welcome to the club!

[katiem]

I took the LSAT the June after my sophomore year. I ended up with a really light school schedule and decided to take that opportunity to focus on the LSAT and get it over with. It worked out fine, and I'm looking forward to not worrying about it next summer.

I started studying in March and ended up feeling like I should have done a little bit more, but January or February would have been plenty. It's way too soon for you to start studying (other than reading the Economist and all like someone else mentioned).

[CaptainCrunch]

This is crazy. Spend max 4-6 weeks prepping for the LSAT right before you take it.

I totally disagree. Studying for only 4 weeks could be a disaster for some people. An absolute disaster.

Contrary to what many may say, I don't think you can "overstudy" for the LSAT. The LSAT is a huge deal and it's great that you're thinking about this already. I wish I had been so focused in my UG days.

I'm not saying study 3 hours a day this summer, but I would say there's nothing wrong with working through a Princeton Review book or maybe playing around with the Logic Games Bible. Besides, even if you "overdo it," your still keeping your mind engaged, learning to think analytically, etc.

I studied intensely for about 3 weeks before taking the LSAT. Big mistake. I did not train myself to focus well on the reading comprehension section* and ended up mismanaging my time on the test day. I guessed on seven questions. SEVEN. That's a big deal, and it kills me to think my 163 could be that much higher. Don't make my mistake, be ready.

There's nothing to lose by studying too much, and a lot to lose if you don't find the time to study later.


* Cue the haters to hate

[Moxie]

I disagree with the previous poster in that more than 4-6 weeks is not a ridiculous amount of time studying.

Keep in mind though, you're still just barely out of freshman year, so keep your options open. Don't put all your eggs in the law school basket just yet. Enjoy the liberal arts college experience, and keep an open mind to what other avenues of interest might come your way. If, 1-2 years down the road, you are still set on law school, dive in for some hardcore LSAT prep.

Most people on this board spend more than 4-6 weeks studying (usually 2-4 months)
But, I can't emphasize the bolded enough. I was one of those kids who knew he wanted to go to law school when he got into college, but I'm so glad I didn't tie myself down to it, and gave myself options to pursue other fields. If you have the time to study, then do it if you want, but remember that law school isn't the be all end all.

[takehold]

This is crazy. Spend max 4-6 weeks prepping for the LSAT right before you take it.

I totally disagree. Studying for only 4 weeks could be a disaster for some people. An absolute disaster.

Contrary to what many may say, I don't think you can "overstudy" for the LSAT. The LSAT is a huge deal and it's great that you're thinking about this already. I wish I had been so focused in my UG days.

I'm not saying study 3 hours a day this summer, but I would say there's nothing wrong with working through a Princeton Review book or maybe playing around with the Logic Games Bible. Besides, even if you "overdo it," your still keeping your mind engaged, learning to think analytically, etc.

I studied intensely for about 3 weeks before taking the LSAT. Big mistake. I did not train myself to focus well on the reading comprehension section* and ended up mismanaging my time on the test day. I guessed on seven questions. SEVEN. That's a big deal, and it kills me to think my 163 could be that much higher. Don't make my mistake, be ready.

There's nothing to lose by studying too much, and a lot to lose if you don't find the time to study later.


* Cue the haters to hate

Credited. OP, maybe start to do some research on law-related subjects or familiarize yourself with LSAT prep materials just to get a preliminary feel for it. The more comfortable you are when you begin to seriously prepare for it, the better. I don't see anything wrong with getting serious about preparing after sophomore year: I'm doing exactly that in anticipation for the October test. Good luck.

[pelmen74]

This is crazy. Spend max 4-6 weeks prepping for the LSAT right before you take it.

I totally disagree. Studying for only 4 weeks could be a disaster for some people. An absolute disaster.

Contrary to what many may say, I don't think you can "overstudy" for the LSAT. The LSAT is a huge deal and it's great that you're thinking about this already. I wish I had been so focused in my UG days.

I'm not saying study 3 hours a day this summer, but I would say there's nothing wrong with working through a Princeton Review book or maybe playing around with the Logic Games Bible. Besides, even if you "overdo it," your still keeping your mind engaged, learning to think analytically, etc.

I studied intensely for about 3 weeks before taking the LSAT. Big mistake. I did not train myself to focus well on the reading comprehension section* and ended up mismanaging my time on the test day. I guessed on seven questions. SEVEN. That's a big deal, and it kills me to think my 163 could be that much higher. Don't make my mistake, be ready.

There's nothing to lose by studying too much, and a lot to lose if you don't find the time to study later.


* Cue the haters to hate

Credited. OP, maybe start to do some research on law-related subjects or familiarize yourself with LSAT prep materials just to get a preliminary feel for it. The more comfortable you are when you begin to seriously prepare for it, the better. I don't see anything wrong with getting serious about preparing after sophomore year: I'm doing exactly that in anticipation for the October test. Good luck.

You CAN run out of practice tests. I ran into this problem and the second time around I remembered the answers to a high percentage of the questions.

[Veyron]

This is crazy. Spend max 4-6 weeks prepping for the LSAT right before you take it.

I totally disagree. Studying for only 4 weeks could be a disaster for some people. An absolute disaster.

Contrary to what many may say, I don't think you can "overstudy" for the LSAT. The LSAT is a huge deal and it's great that you're thinking about this already. I wish I had been so focused in my UG days.

I'm not saying study 3 hours a day this summer, but I would say there's nothing wrong with working through a Princeton Review book or maybe playing around with the Logic Games Bible. Besides, even if you "overdo it," your still keeping your mind engaged, learning to think analytically, etc.

I studied intensely for about 3 weeks before taking the LSAT. Big mistake. I did not train myself to focus well on the reading comprehension section* and ended up mismanaging my time on the test day. I guessed on seven questions. SEVEN. That's a big deal, and it kills me to think my 163 could be that much higher. Don't make my mistake, be ready.

There's nothing to lose by studying too much, and a lot to lose if you don't find the time to study later.


* Cue the haters to hate

Credited. OP, maybe start to do some research on law-related subjects or familiarize yourself with LSAT prep materials just to get a preliminary feel for it. The more comfortable you are when you begin to seriously prepare for it, the better. I don't see anything wrong with getting serious about preparing after sophomore year: I'm doing exactly that in anticipation for the October test. Good luck.

You CAN run out of practice tests. I ran into this problem and the second time around I remembered the answers to a high percentage of the questions.

I did as well, but it took a year.

[Rikkugrrl]

This is crazy. Spend max 4-6 weeks prepping for the LSAT right before you take it.

I totally disagree. Studying for only 4 weeks could be a disaster for some people. An absolute disaster.

Contrary to what many may say, I don't think you can "overstudy" for the LSAT. The LSAT is a huge deal and it's great that you're thinking about this already. I wish I had been so focused in my UG days.

I'm not saying study 3 hours a day this summer, but I would say there's nothing wrong with working through a Princeton Review book or maybe playing around with the Logic Games Bible. Besides, even if you "overdo it," your still keeping your mind engaged, learning to think analytically, etc.

I studied intensely for about 3 weeks before taking the LSAT. Big mistake. I did not train myself to focus well on the reading comprehension section* and ended up mismanaging my time on the test day. I guessed on seven questions. SEVEN. That's a big deal, and it kills me to think my 163 could be that much higher. Don't make my mistake, be ready.

There's nothing to lose by studying too much, and a lot to lose if you don't find the time to study later.


* Cue the haters to hate

Credited. OP, maybe start to do some research on law-related subjects or familiarize yourself with LSAT prep materials just to get a preliminary feel for it. The more comfortable you are when you begin to seriously prepare for it, the better. I don't see anything wrong with getting serious about preparing after sophomore year: I'm doing exactly that in anticipation for the October test. Good luck.

Ehhhh, I disagree. I think three months is a good number, but I wouldn't go over that. I studied for the June 2010 LSAT from October 2009 to the weekend before. I was having nightmares and panic attacks. On test day, I ran out of the room crying and canceled even though in retrospect (after looking at the answers online and remembering what I selected) I probably would have done fine. This is coming from someone with no history of test anxiety and who breezed into the SAT with no studying.

I'm reataking in October. My tutor told me I studied too much and I needed to hide my LSAT books until the end of July at the earliest. I ordered more PTs, but haven't touched them yet, and I think that's been a good decision.

Of course, you might not have that problem and studying since sophomore year might work for you. Find out what works best for you and go do it. Personally though, I think there are more important things to worry about in college than the LSAT. Like having fun.

[takehold]

This is crazy. Spend max 4-6 weeks prepping for the LSAT right before you take it.

I totally disagree. Studying for only 4 weeks could be a disaster for some people. An absolute disaster.

Contrary to what many may say, I don't think you can "overstudy" for the LSAT. The LSAT is a huge deal and it's great that you're thinking about this already. I wish I had been so focused in my UG days.

I'm not saying study 3 hours a day this summer, but I would say there's nothing wrong with working through a Princeton Review book or maybe playing around with the Logic Games Bible. Besides, even if you "overdo it," your still keeping your mind engaged, learning to think analytically, etc.

I studied intensely for about 3 weeks before taking the LSAT. Big mistake. I did not train myself to focus well on the reading comprehension section* and ended up mismanaging my time on the test day. I guessed on seven questions. SEVEN. That's a big deal, and it kills me to think my 163 could be that much higher. Don't make my mistake, be ready.

There's nothing to lose by studying too much, and a lot to lose if you don't find the time to study later.


* Cue the haters to hate

Credited. OP, maybe start to do some research on law-related subjects or familiarize yourself with LSAT prep materials just to get a preliminary feel for it. The more comfortable you are when you begin to seriously prepare for it, the better. I don't see anything wrong with getting serious about preparing after sophomore year: I'm doing exactly that in anticipation for the October test. Good luck.

Ehhhh, I disagree. I think three months is a good number, but I wouldn't go over that. I studied for the June 2010 LSAT from October 2009 to the weekend before. I was having nightmares and panic attacks. On test day, I ran out of the room crying and canceled even though in retrospect (after looking at the answers online and remembering what I selected) I probably would have done fine. This is coming from someone with no history of test anxiety and who breezed into the SAT with no studying.

I'm reataking in October. My tutor told me I studied too much and I needed to hide my LSAT books until the end of July at the earliest. I ordered more PTs, but haven't touched them yet, and I think that's been a good decision.

Of course, you might not have that problem and studying since sophomore year might work for you. Find out what works best for you and go do it. Personally though, I think there are more important things to worry about in college than the LSAT. Like having fun.

Completely agree, Rikku. Maybe I should clarify, I meant that it probably wouldn't hurt to begin getting familiar with what kinds of preparation one would be doing. But definitely it would be useless or perhaps even counter-productive to start seriously preparing way ahead of time. While I haven't experienced the entirety of the preparation cycle, three months sounds like a good timeframe.

[osmlpz]

Rikku talk about MAJOR anxiety attack. That must have been horrible.

[Rikkugrrl]

Rikku talk about MAJOR anxiety attack. That must have been horrible.

It was. I guess I learned that just because a test is important doesn't mean you need to significantly change your study habits (unless you just plain don't study at all). In fact I think it's even more important that you stick to your habits more or less so you don't get unhinged. I've taken on an lol attitude since the test. Not even going to score my practice tests. Who cares about the exact number? I'll have a general idea of where I stand by the time I finish and what I need to improve on, that's good enough for me!

[CaptainCrunch]

Ehhhh, I disagree. I think three months is a good number, but I wouldn't go over that. I studied for the June 2010 LSAT from October 2009 to the weekend before. I was having nightmares and panic attacks. On test day, I ran out of the room crying and canceled even though in retrospect (after looking at the answers online and remembering what I selected) I probably would have done fine. This is coming from someone with no history of test anxiety and who breezed into the SAT with no studying.

Yikes. To be fair (and no offense), this sounds like a personality thing. There is something to be said for mental prep as well. I.e., relaxation techniques, cognitive therapy (e.g., "I can do this, life and death do not hang in the balance here"), etc.

There's a difference between studying with a relaxed, confident poise and obsessive, frenzied study.

Sounds like you were letting the outcome of the test dictate your value as a person or something... At the risk of sounding patronizing, there is no shame in not making it to Harvard. You can find your way into a satisfying law career at a lot of schools.

[/rant]

(Again, not to sound patronizing)

[D-ROCCA]

Just wing it dude, what's the worst that'll happen

[rejectmaster]

Not to be a taintmuncher, but how is it that people find it acceptable to dismiss science gen ed courses as gpa detriments and still claim to be capable

i have never met an intelligent person who didn't ace calc I or general chemistry

[TommyK]

Not to be a taintmuncher, but how is it that people find it acceptable to dismiss science gen ed courses as gpa detriments and still claim to be capable

i have never met an intelligent person who didn't ace calc I or general chemistry

Maybe that's more of a reflection on how you define intelligence? People tend to define intelligence in the ways the best characterize themselves as intelligent. Ever notice somebody who feels like they're not "booksmart", but "streetsmart" says things that imply that formal institutional learning is overvalued?

Same thing for some people who have a knack for mathematics, oftentimes disregarding literary prowess and ability to analyze an author's arguments, motifs, and symbolism as trivial. I don't mean to come off as a hippy or say everybody's smart in their own way, but I know plenty of people who are incredibly intelligent who didn't do well in chem or calc.

[rejectmaster]

Not to be a taintmuncher, but how is it that people find it acceptable to dismiss science gen ed courses as gpa detriments and still claim to be capable

i have never met an intelligent person who didn't ace calc I or general chemistry

Maybe that's more of a reflection on how you define intelligence? People tend to define intelligence in the ways the best characterize themselves as intelligent. Ever notice somebody who feels like they're not "booksmart", but "streetsmart" says things that imply that formal institutional learning is overvalued?

Same thing for some people who have a knack for mathematics, oftentimes disregarding literary prowess and ability to analyze an author's arguments, motifs, and symbolism as trivial. I don't mean to come off as a hippy or say everybody's smart in their own way, but I know plenty of people who are incredibly intelligent who didn't do well in chem or calc.

I disagree, and I've never met anyone who was incredibly intelligent and tried at calc I or gen chem and didn't do well.

Obviously it gets harder at the higher levels, I got shat on on every class above organic (chem major) but these are gen ed requirements because everyone should know them and be able to do them!

[TommyK]

Not to be a taintmuncher, but how is it that people find it acceptable to dismiss science gen ed courses as gpa detriments and still claim to be capable

i have never met an intelligent person who didn't ace calc I or general chemistry

Maybe that's more of a reflection on how you define intelligence? People tend to define intelligence in the ways the best characterize themselves as intelligent. Ever notice somebody who feels like they're not "booksmart", but "streetsmart" says things that imply that formal institutional learning is overvalued?

Same thing for some people who have a knack for mathematics, oftentimes disregarding literary prowess and ability to analyze an author's arguments, motifs, and symbolism as trivial. I don't mean to come off as a hippy or say everybody's smart in their own way, but I know plenty of people who are incredibly intelligent who didn't do well in chem or calc.

I disagree, and I've never met anyone who was incredibly intelligent and tried at calc I or gen chem and didn't do well.

Obviously it gets harder at the higher levels, I got shat on on every class above organic (chem major) but these are gen ed requirements because everyone should know them and be able to do them!

Of course you disagree. Doesn't make you right, though. I'm struggling to see the relevance to the OP's original question, though.

[rejectmaster]

Not to be a taintmuncher, but how is it that people find it acceptable to dismiss science gen ed courses as gpa detriments and still claim to be capable

i have never met an intelligent person who didn't ace calc I or general chemistry

Maybe that's more of a reflection on how you define intelligence? People tend to define intelligence in the ways the best characterize themselves as intelligent. Ever notice somebody who feels like they're not "booksmart", but "streetsmart" says things that imply that formal institutional learning is overvalued?

Same thing for some people who have a knack for mathematics, oftentimes disregarding literary prowess and ability to analyze an author's arguments, motifs, and symbolism as trivial. I don't mean to come off as a hippy or say everybody's smart in their own way, but I know plenty of people who are incredibly intelligent who didn't do well in chem or calc.

I disagree, and I've never met anyone who was incredibly intelligent and tried at calc I or gen chem and didn't do well.

Obviously it gets harder at the higher levels, I got shat on on every class above organic (chem major) but these are gen ed requirements because everyone should know them and be able to do them!

Of course you disagree. Doesn't make you right, though. I'm struggling to see the relevance to the OP's original question, though.

None at all, but in my experience I don't know of anyone who did better after freshman year based on taking less rigorous classes as an upperclassman, mostly it was due to developing better study habits/time management/decreased substance abuse.

[DC_Sportsfan21]

hey man im in the same boat as you, I should be a sophomore right now but did 2 years of coursework in 1 so I will have junior standing. MY gpa is solid as well and just started to prep for the december test.

I don't know about you but I am shooting for 170+ ideally 175+ but I have a long way to go(working through the LG bible right now then have the LR one to do)

Good luck man it is nice to know there are other younger people going through similar things as me.

[itsfine]

The only thing that you would need to study this early for is reading comp...and by that i mean, just read a lot.... reading comp is hard to improve upon during lsat studying bc the only real way to get much much better at reading comp is to be a really good reader...so start now...read things! dont just drink and booze around all day as most sophmores....then when its time to take the lsat...and you start your real studying...maybe 6 months before AT MOST...then begin to study hard for games and log. reasoning....for now...just read read read.

[northwood]

start studying the summer after your sophomore/ junior year and take it in october ( start in may when you have no classes- and can learn some techniques and approaches- then do prep tests when you go back to school). If you want to go to law school, make sure you keep your grades up and stay out of trouble.


Since you are only 30 credit hours or so into your college career- I would say that its still a bit early to decide on life after UG. Have fun, look into what you like to do, and what you Can Do and enjoy it. in 2 or 3 years, you may change your mind and want to do something else- before you spend any time make sure you have a good idea this is for you.

cheers

[TTH]

2-3 months studying for the LSAT is the absolute max. The best plan is to take the Sept/Oct exam the year you'll graduate UG and spend the summer before studying for it.

[lawls]

The only thing that you would need to study this early for is reading comp...and by that i mean, just read a lot.... reading comp is hard to improve upon during lsat studying bc the only real way to get much much better at reading comp is to be a really good reader...so start now...read things! dont just drink and booze around all day as most sophmores....then when its time to take the lsat...and you start your real studying...maybe 6 months before AT MOST...then begin to study hard for games and log. reasoning....for now...just read read read.

Credited. The logic of the test is very simple and can be mastered (not just knowing it theoretically, but being able to apply it quickly) in 3-4 months. LG games took me a month to get perfect, and LR took me 3 months. But what you can barely study for is reading speed and the like. I never improved on my RC scores from when I started studying and I studied 4 months. I hit a 178, almost all mistakes on RC.

[LS2013]

Thanks everyone for the great advice!

I have decided that I am just going to informally get comfortable with the test via dense reading, playing sudoku (heh), and glancing over certain questions when I feel like I'm not busy.