Top Law Schools

The course I signed up for offers an actual test to take before you begin the course. Should I take this? I know taking it will familiarize myself with the test format; but at the same time I do not want to discourage myself with a very poor score before the course even begins. Input?

gator89 wrote:The course I signed up for offers an actual test to take before you begin the course. Should I take this? I know taking it will familiarize myself with the test format; but at the same time I do not want to discourage myself with a very poor score before the course even begins. Input?

take. even if you mess up you know you will only go up from there. what do you have to lose

how else will you be able to gauge your progress?


It's not a bad idea to go back to that test periodically throughout your course and point out why you missed what you missed. It's those little details that will ultimately make a huge difference in the end.

Personally, I'm really glad I took a completely cold, properly timed, diagnostic. Now I know what I'm working with and I can see how much I've improved. Even if you do poorly, who cares? You'll improve in no time.

When you say 'actual' it conjures to my mind a real scored LSAT that will go on your official record. If that is the case, then study first and don't take the real thing cold. However, I am fairly certain you just mean a diagnostic, in which case I think 'the more the merrier' is the general rule. (I think the compilations of old tests do say 'actual' and 'official,' so for most or all other ppl maybe there wasn't the same perceived ambiguity about your post).

good luck

gator89 wrote:The course I signed up for offers an actual test to take before you begin the course. Should I take this? I know taking it will familiarize myself with the test format; but at the same time I do not want to discourage myself with a very poor score before the course even begins. Input?

then i'd reconsider law school altogether

Eichörnchen wrote:Personally, I'm really glad I took a completely cold, properly timed, diagnostic. Now I know what I'm working with and I can see how much I've improved. Even if you do poorly, who cares? You'll improve in no time.

I did this as well and I am so glad because it gives you a complete picture of where do you need the most work on and you will see a sudden improvement as soon as you familiarize yourself with the test and its format. I went from 148 to 154 in like 2 weeks. Currently on low-mid 160s after 10 weeks.

Alright, I took it and got a 153, 66 raw. Ten incorrect a answers were attributed to time constraints. Is it realistic for me to improve this up to a 165? It was the june 2007 test btw

gator89 wrote:Alright, I took it and got a 153, 66 raw. Ten incorrect a answers were attributed to time constraints. Is it realistic for me to improve this up to a 165? It was the june 2007 test btw

That is not a bad diagnostic at all. It's very realistic to improve to a 165 (you should shoot higher).

gator89 wrote:Alright, I took it and got a 153, 66 raw. Ten incorrect a answers were attributed to time constraints. Is it realistic for me to improve this up to a 165? It was the june 2007 test btw

yes.

gator89 wrote:Alright, I took it and got a 153, 66 raw. Ten incorrect a answers were attributed to time constraints. Is it realistic for me to improve this up to a 165? It was the june 2007 test btw

Put in the time to properly study and a 165 is well within reach.

153 -> 165 given adequate prep and time is a very on target goal imo