Top Law Schools

I got a 153. Time was the biggest issue for me. I had a really difficult time finishing any of the sections. My best section was the 'logic games.' I finished 19/23 questions and got 18 right. The other sections didn't go as well.

From what I've read, it seems that gains are made easier from the logic games then the other sections, so my results were a bit discouraging. I have a mediocre GPA, so I am really aiming for a 170+ on the real thing. Is this still attainable with my results?? Anything I should be doing that is particular to my situation?? Also, what should I be doing to increase my speed while still maintaining accuracy? I plan to take it in October. I am going to begin studying ASAP and can commit June-September entirely to studying.

Thanks

The first test doesn't mean much. Many, many people go from a 150 diagnostic to a 165+. I got a 150 diagnostic myself, and ended up scoring a 162 after scoring around 170 of many practice tests. (Despite my disappointment, I still made a big leap.)

My suggestion is to 1) take a course and 2) buy all of the real LSAT tests released by LSAC on their website (they're about 8 bucks each). If you take a pretty good course and do all of the old tests under testing conditions, you will likely see a huge increase in score! Best of luck!

I know this seems generic, but really the best thing to do is take TONS of practice tests, and then go over them and try to figure out why you missed the questions you missed. Eventually, you'll be able to identify the types of questions you're missing (for example, I had trouble with grouping games and "parallel-the-reasoning" questions,) and you can focus on those. I'd take a test a week, and don't get discouraged if your score drops a bit from week to week. I took about 15 practice tests, and my scores usually varied. My average PT score was 8 pts up from my diagnostic and my actual score (97th percentile) was 4 pts up from my average PT score.

Oh, and find a few extra tests that you can pull single sections from...practice tests will only give you 4 sections, and you'll take 5 on the real day. Throw in extra section in as 1, 2, or 3 (the experimental is always one of those.) The first time I took a 5 section test vs. a 4 section test, I was amazed by how much more tired I was at the end. And, of course, practice under real conditions....timed, not dead silence, etc.

I haven't reached your desired score, but I'll throw my two cents in anyway! =)

If finances are an issue and you aren't able to take a course, I recommend buying as many PowerScore materials as you can, especially the Bibles. I credit Powerscore materials for raising my score 5 points between the December '09 and Feb '10 administrations.

Also, purchase previous LSAT tests via amazon (they are about $8 each). Practice makes perfect! However, you MUST review your practice tests results to make true progress! Reviewing your incorrect and correct answers is essential in determining how to improve your performance. Know why you chose the wrong answer, look for traps that you may regularly fall prey to, etc.

Good luck, and happy studying.

Doesn't mean that much, but, as you noted, it's usually a better sign if a low first PT score comes with a low LG score, since that's the easiest place to improve (followed by LR and then RC).

What was your score breakdown in LR and RC?

It's hard to know what to make of a first diagnostic because most people don't improve more than 10-15 points from it, but some people improve 20+ points from it. You might be the former or the latter, and it's hard to tell which is which until you study for a couple of months.

I went from initial diag 154 to test day 180 using Princeton Review materials and methods.

I'm in the same boat as you. I scored a 154 (155 after I regraded). I'm currently working through the LG bible. It's great for setups and appears it will address speed toward the end. To me it's good news that you got a great LG score because all you'll need to work on is speed and some good fundamental strategies.

As for the other sections, I also have the bibles for them. I plan on tackling the LR first and then RC last. My biggest problem was the mental stamina of sitting and testing for 3 straight hours. I plan on taking 1 timed and 1 untimed PT every week until the final month, when I'll switch to all timed with the 5th section + reviews.

My advice is to stay patient, stay focused, and most importantly keep a good attitude. I've noticed the better my attitude when I approach a section, the better I do. Involve yourself in every game, every passage, every question so you don't lose focus.

Good luck and keep us posted!

tomwatts wrote:It's hard to know what to make of a first diagnostic because most people don't improve more than 10-15 points from it, but some people improve 20+ points from it. You might be the former or the latter, and it's hard to tell which is which until you study for a couple of months.

I went from initial diag 154 to test day 180 using Princeton Review materials and methods.

I envy you. I cold diag'd a 163, studied my ass off and only ended up with a 170

vva321 wrote:I got a 153. ... I have a mediocre GPA, so I am really aiming for a 170+ on the real thing. Is this still attainable with my results??

In my short time on this forum I see this all the time -- people who ask "I scored 1XX, can I score a 170+?" The answer is always yes, but it doesn't mean much.

Everything depends on how you study, what materials you use, how much time you're willing to spend, and ultimately on the vagaries of life as they impact you on test day.

Personally, I went from a diagnostic of 156 in July to PTing in the mid-170s by January through months of intensive studying.

vva321 wrote: Also, what should I be doing to increase my speed while still maintaining accuracy?

At the moment, I would ignore speed. That'll come with time. Read Pithypike's post at the top of this forum, order the Bibles online and start studying. The better you get the faster you'll go.

tomwatts wrote:I went from initial diag 154 to test day 180 using Princeton Review materials and methods.

I suppose that's technically true, but it's still a little disingenuous for you to phrase it this way.

It would, of course, be more accurate and complete for you to say that you went from an initial diag of 154 to a 180 on test-day after several years of teaching the PR materials and methods.

StirFry101 wrote:To me it's good news that you got a great LG score because all you'll need to work on is speed and some good fundamental strategies.

It's good news in that he/she probably won't have to study LG for months. It's potentially bad news in that someone with a 153 and a -12 or -14 on LG is generally going to have an easier time picking up points than someone who scored a 153 with a -4 in LG (which means around a combined -33 or -34 on LR and RC on your standard -11 curve test).

I think the taking tons of PT's and just reviewing the wrong answers is a poor way in itself to raise your score, I'll refer to pithypike's guide.

Get Kaplan mastery which has all the lsat questions from pt 1-44 or so sorted by type. Get the pscore bibles, go through the bibles and do all the questions in kaplan mastery corresponding with the pscore bibles. Just taking full PT's is a waste in itself if someone needs help on a certain area. My first diagnostic was, -3 LG, -5 RC -14 LR. I missed 10 questions in LR that were assumption, flaw, and strengthen/weaken questions (all the same types of questions in terms of answering them and strategically analyzing them). Sat for a week and did every LSAT question that was strengthen/weaken, assumption, flaw in the kaplan mastery book. Reviewed a few strategies for RC and my next diagnostic two weeks later was. -4 LG, -2 RC, -5LR. A net of 11 questions by focusing on weaknesses. Most people have weaknesses within a section with a specific type of question. Doing a ton of questions of concepts that are already solid is a waste of study hours. Not saying PT's aren't important, but save those PT's for the last month before the test to work on endurance and pacing.

Also diagnostics mean little unless if bomb out and can't motivate yourself to raise your score.

JasonR wrote:It would, of course, be more accurate and complete for you to say that you went from an initial diag of 154 to a 180 on test-day after several years of teaching the PR materials and methods.

I was PTing at high 170s after two months with Cracking the LSAT and a bunch of released tests before I ever got involved in the classroom course. I didn't take the test for real then, so we'll never know how I'd have done, but I tend to suspect that it wouldn't have been too far below my PT average.

Your 176 wasn't on a real test? Regardless, that's probably closer to how you would have fared if that was your score prior to becoming an instructor.

Perhaps I'm just picking nits. Your post seemed to leave out some fairly relevant information, IMO.

Doesn't mean anything. I scored a 170 and a 176 with the first two prep (and only two) tests I took in 2009. When I took the actual LSAT that February, I scored a 141.

Practice as much as possible. Learn why you missed questions, and why you got those correct answers, "correct." Often times I would realize that I would get those answers correct out of luck and that I truly didn't fully understand the question. Get the bibles, learn the styles of questions, and again, practice as much as possible.