What's the highest LSAT score increase you've had/seen? Forum

[KingJames6]

Ok so the question that would logically follow for anyone with a huge improvement...how much time did you spend studying? Hours/day for how many months? Also any suggested study materials (Bibles, a course, etc.)?

[TOMaHULK]

Ok so the question that would logically follow for anyone with a huge improvement...how much time did you spend studying? Hours/day for how many months? Also any suggested study materials (Bibles, a course, etc.)?

INb4 someone says "oh I didn't study for my improvement at all, just walked in and took it. The first time I was drunk..."

[tomwatts]

I was on the lower end as far as time spent, because I was doing 2-3 hours a day for a little under 2 months (but 6-7 days a week). I had Cracking the LSAT for technique (which I re-read a couple of time) and a bunch of released tests (basically, the most recent 10 Actuals and a few tests after that, which at the time — four years ago — were among the most recent).

But I was already an SAT teacher for Princeton Review, and I knew how to study for a standardized test. I didn't make the same mistakes twice. That's the most crucial thing: always improve from one sitting to the next by doing something slightly different or focusing on something new every time.

[TOMaHULK]

I was on the lower end as far as time spent, because I was doing 2-3 hours a day for a little under 2 months (but 6-7 days a week). I had Cracking the LSAT for technique (which I re-read a couple of time) and a bunch of released tests (basically, the most recent 10 Actuals and a few tests after that, which at the time — four years ago — were among the most recent).

But I was already an SAT teacher for Princeton Review, and I knew how to study for a standardized test. I didn't make the same mistakes twice. That's the most crucial thing: always improve from one sitting to the next by doing something slightly different or focusing on something new every time.

Examples of something new?

[i need to study]

Diag: 149
LSAT 1: 160
LSAT II: 170

[Merr]

I had a 15pt increase, so rather modest compared to much of what has been posted.

Diagnostic 148
Real thing 163

[TOMaHULK]

I had a 15pt increase, so rather modest compared to much of what has been posted.

Diagnostic 148
Real thing 163

That's not modest, that's good man.

Especially considering the fact that I've read some crap LSAT books before that hint at the fact that you should just accept your score because it's generally consistent. Major crap. The LSAT is a test of how well you can take the LSAT, and IMHO nothing more.

[tomwatts]

I was on the lower end as far as time spent, because I was doing 2-3 hours a day for a little under 2 months (but 6-7 days a week). I had Cracking the LSAT for technique (which I re-read a couple of time) and a bunch of released tests (basically, the most recent 10 Actuals and a few tests after that, which at the time — four years ago — were among the most recent).

But I was already an SAT teacher for Princeton Review, and I knew how to study for a standardized test. I didn't make the same mistakes twice. That's the most crucial thing: always improve from one sitting to the next by doing something slightly different or focusing on something new every time.

Examples of something new?

"In this section, I chose an answer that said 'always' on an Inference question, but it was stronger than what I was told; I was only told that this was true 'most of the time.' I'm going to pay attention to language strength more on Inference questions on the next section."

"In this section, a bunch of my time got sucked up diagramming things weirdly on a Parallel question when it turned out that the wrong answers weren't even close. Next time, I'm going to try eliminating answers that have terribly dissimilar conclusions first on Parallel questions and see if that saves me some time so that I only have to draw things out for a couple of answer choices, not all five."

"I didn't recognize that this game should be set up as an In/Out game. I made it way weirder than it needed to be. I'm going to ask myself if I'm dealing with an In/Out game if I feel inclined to draw a strange-looking diagram on my next few sections."

That kind of thing.

[TOMaHULK]

I was on the lower end as far as time spent, because I was doing 2-3 hours a day for a little under 2 months (but 6-7 days a week). I had Cracking the LSAT for technique (which I re-read a couple of time) and a bunch of released tests (basically, the most recent 10 Actuals and a few tests after that, which at the time — four years ago — were among the most recent).

But I was already an SAT teacher for Princeton Review, and I knew how to study for a standardized test. I didn't make the same mistakes twice. That's the most crucial thing: always improve from one sitting to the next by doing something slightly different or focusing on something new every time.

Examples of something new?

"In this section, I chose an answer that said 'always' on an Inference question, but it was stronger than what I was told; I was only told that this was true 'most of the time.' I'm going to pay attention to language strength more on Inference questions on the next section."

"In this section, a bunch of my time got sucked up diagramming things weirdly on a Parallel question when it turned out that the wrong answers weren't even close. Next time, I'm going to try eliminating answers that have terribly dissimilar conclusions first on Parallel questions and see if that saves me some time so that I only have to draw things out for a couple of answer choices, not all five."

"I didn't recognize that this game should be set up as an In/Out game. I made it way weirder than it needed to be. I'm going to ask myself if I'm dealing with an In/Out game if I feel inclined to draw a strange-looking diagram on my next few sections."

That kind of thing.

Sounds good. Thanks.

[stintez]

Diag: 149
LSAT 1: 160
LSAT II: 170

what did you do differently between lsat I and lsat II

[lawduder]

diagnostic - 146
final score - 167

[TOMaHULK]

^^Niiiiiice....^^

[risktaker]

These threads make me realize that I had a pretty decent jump from diagnostic. I thought I could pass it but pretty much hit a wall. Went from diag of 140 to 157 on the LSAT. I was scoring in the low 160s towards the end, but I ended up getting a 157 4 times! Guess that shows you that sometimes you just hit a wall. I think nerves always player a factor on the real test. Could not help it.

[rezbama]

Powerscore's greatest documented increase is 29 points (From a 140 diagnostic to a 169 on the test, or something close to that). The person hit in the 170s on their last prep test before the real thing.

I don't know this guy personally, but I am a Powerscore instructor. I see 15-20 point increases fairly often in my classes.

Heck, I'd take a 15-20 increase on the real test for sure.

You guys ever get people that are Raw in the 170's (on their first ever diagnostic?) If so, do you pretty much shiat bricks and think "you little bastard, you're going to a T14...)

No, I think the highest diagnostic in my classes was a 156 or so. I actually tend to feel bad for those people, because gains come much harder for them. If you diagnose at a 130, learning just a few basic concepts can make your score jump dramatically. People who diagnose high have to take the time to learn the nuances of the test, and it tends to be fairly frustrating for them.

I did have someone come in and miss 0-1 in logic games of the bat with no previous exposure, which was pretty surprising. Just had a natural aptitude for it. However, he would miss 10-15 in the RC, and had a real difficult time improving.

that sounds like someone like me, how did they end up improving RC?

[youarereadingthis]

Diagnostic: 148
Real LSAT I: 164
Real LSAT II: (Forthcoming in June)

I definitely did much better on the test day than my first pt exam, but I still feel like I could do better. I was working long hours and never took enough time to study. Now, I'm completely focused without any interruptions.