165 - - - -> 176 Forum

saintpaulJ · Post by **saintpaulJ** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:48 pm

It can happen. Five weeks apart. January 8th was the Minnesota retake date. Then Feb 12th.

Practice tests were 167-178 so needless to say the 165 was a huge letdown.

So glad I took it again.

Jack Smirks · Post by **Jack Smirks** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:50 pm

saintpaulJ wrote:It can happen. Five weeks apart. January 8th was the Minnesota retake date. Then Feb 12th.

Practice tests were 167-178 so needless to say the 165 was a huge letdown.

So glad I took it again.

Screen caps or you're lying.

saintpaulJ · Post by **saintpaulJ** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:17 pm

naterj wrote:
saintpaulJ wrote:It can happen. Five weeks apart. January 8th was the Minnesota retake date. Then Feb 12th.

Practice tests were 167-178 so needless to say the 165 was a huge letdown.

So glad I took it again.
Screen caps or you're lying.

How does that work for ya?

minnesotasam · Post by **minnesotasam** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:22 pm

That's.. weird

--ImageRemoved--

Congrats to us?

jtemp320 · Post by **jtemp320** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:22 pm

Congrats and I never thought you were lying I was 167->174 and know others who are 164->177

saintpaulJ · Post by **saintpaulJ** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:27 pm

Nice job guys!

Yep. Congrats to us.

minnesotasam · Post by **minnesotasam** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:28 pm

saintpaulJ wrote:Nice job guys!

Yep. Congrats to us.

Kinda weird that we both jumped a bunch at the same site taking the same administrations. I showed up ready to go in December, how about you?

saintpaulJ · Post by **saintpaulJ** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:32 pm

minnesotasam wrote:
saintpaulJ wrote:Nice job guys!

Yep. Congrats to us.
Kinda weird that we both jumped a bunch at the same site taking the same administrations. I showed up ready to go in December, how about you?

Yep, me too. I only live 2 miles from WM, so the drive in the blizzard wasn't too bad. I felt great and really prepared. In January I turned up a nervous wreck.

minnesotasam · Post by **minnesotasam** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:35 pm

saintpaulJ wrote:Yep, me too. I only live 2 miles from WM, so the drive in the blizzard wasn't too bad. I felt great and really prepared. In January I turned up a nervous wreck.

Yeah I grew up, uh, two miles from WM (maybe a little less?) in Mac-Groveland. Small world I guess.

saintpaulJ · Post by **saintpaulJ** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:40 pm

minnesotasam wrote:
saintpaulJ wrote:Yep, me too. I only live 2 miles from WM, so the drive in the blizzard wasn't too bad. I felt great and really prepared. In January I turned up a nervous wreck.
Yeah I grew up, uh, two miles from WM (maybe a little less?) in Mac-Groveland. Small world I guess.

Yep, that's where I live now.

nematoad · Post by **nematoad** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:42 pm

saintpaulJ wrote:
naterj wrote:
saintpaulJ wrote:It can happen. Five weeks apart. January 8th was the Minnesota retake date. Then Feb 12th.

Practice tests were 167-178 so needless to say the 165 was a huge letdown.

So glad I took it again.
Screen caps or you're lying.

How does that work for ya?

BOOM!

rebexness · Post by **rebexness** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 8:21 pm

suspicious android · Post by **suspicious android** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:13 pm

Wait, why don't the score e-mail dates match up?

minnbills · Post by **minnbills** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:43 pm

What did you guys do differently in your prep the 2nd time around?

Nulli Secundus · Post by **Nulli Secundus** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 3:21 pm

I see that there are still people that cannot adequately detect sarcasm on the Internet . Proof natural selection is a lie, imo.

polevaulter · Post by **polevaulter** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 3:41 pm

saintpaulJ wrote:
naterj wrote:
saintpaulJ wrote:It can happen. Five weeks apart. January 8th was the Minnesota retake date. Then Feb 12th.

Practice tests were 167-178 so needless to say the 165 was a huge letdown.

So glad I took it again.
Screen caps or you're lying.

How does that work for ya?

CONGRATULATIONS

polevaulter · Post by **polevaulter** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 3:41 pm

minnesotasam wrote:That's.. weird

--ImageRemoved--

Congrats to us?

CONGRATS to you as well

What kind of prep did you do to do this well? My diag was a 165. Thanks.

mac35352 · Post by **mac35352** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 6:27 pm

Great Job!

Firework11 · Post by **Firework11** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:13 pm

nematoad wrote:
saintpaulJ wrote:
naterj wrote:
saintpaulJ wrote:It can happen. Five weeks apart. January 8th was the Minnesota retake date. Then Feb 12th.

Practice tests were 167-178 so needless to say the 165 was a huge letdown.

So glad I took it again.
Screen caps or you're lying.

How does that work for ya?
Congrats! Job well DONE

BOOM!

jim-green · Post by **jim-green** » Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:15 pm

Your experience is very inspiring. Did you reuse a lot of PTs?
I am kinda in the same boat with a 165 on Feb 2011 LSAT and was PTing at average 168. Wondering about retake.
I did all 62 PTs, so anything I use again for June 2011 will be a reuse. Worried if reusing PTs will hurt me, since I may go into the June 2011 test thinking it'll be easier than it will actually be.
Did you reuse PTs to re-study?

aquyenl · Post by **aquyenl** » Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:04 pm

i'm wondering the same thing as jim-green. what did you do the second time around for studying? how did you improve that much in just a few weeks? what was your studying routine like?

HarlandBassett · Post by **HarlandBassett** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:42 pm

minnesotasam wrote:That's.. weird

--ImageRemoved--

Congrats to us?

impressive

rotaxkarter · Post by **rotaxkarter** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:50 pm

jim-green wrote:Your experience is very inspiring. Did you reuse a lot of PTs?
I am kinda in the same boat with a 165 on Feb 2011 LSAT and was PTing at average 168. Wondering about retake.
I did all 62 PTs, so anything I use again for June 2011 will be a reuse. Worried if reusing PTs will hurt me, since I may go into the June 2011 test thinking it'll be easier than it will actually be.
Did you reuse PTs to re-study?

I reused PTs during my studies, it did not hurt me at all. It helps solidify the easier Qs and ensures you've corrected your mistakes on the harder ones. When I started recycling PTs(The latest 15 or so), I started with the ones I did earliest and worked from there.

minnesotasam · Post by **minnesotasam** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:23 pm

Its all about adapting to your weaknesses. The first thing is to figure out why you're testing lower than you want to.. Is it an issue of timing, endurance, a specific section (RC vs LG vs LR), test-day mentality, confidence? All of these things can factor in when we're talking about very thin margins. In my case I knew walking out that I didn't do as well as I was capable of because I was catching an international flight later that day, I hadn't specifically perfected my reading comprehension timing, and I didn't prepare myself nutritionally for the entirety of the test (and crashed a bit on the last section).

When it came to re-preparing for the Feb administration (which I had about 3 weeks to do since we, saintpaulj and myself, were snowed out of the Dec administration and took it in January) I slowed down the PT-binges and instead focused on single, timed sections in my weakest areas. Then I veeeery slowly and methodically went back over each one. Talking through the reasons that certain answers are wrong is easily as crucial as figuring out why certain ones are right (in my case, probably moreso) and I bet that a lot of people here don't take the time to figure that out. When you do so you develop a sense for what to look for in an incorrect answer and you're a lot less likely to get hung up on a tough LR or RC question.

Lastly, for me, it was completely sacrilegious to leave any question unanswered. Having that mental timer that tells you to move on, put down your gut instinct, star it for later if you have the time, and continue with the test unaffected is crucial to scoring well. Not every answer is going to pop out at you right away (even if a lot do); you have to know how to handle that when it occurs.

aquyenl · Post by **aquyenl** » Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:08 pm

it seems like most of your fine tuning was on the RC and LR parts of the test. what did you do to ace the LG part?

165 - - - -> 176 Forum

165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Register for access!

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Register now!

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Register now, it's still FREE!

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Re: 165 - - - -> 176

Seriously? What are you waiting for?