Top Law Schools

diagnostic?

I got a 154. I'm just now starting to study. Is this a bad score?

163.

It places you above half of the takers of the actual test. Your diagnostic is irrelevant. A perusal of these forums will reveal many people who started at or below 154 and achieved great scores. Some of those scored 154 or less on an actual administration. The LSAT is a peculiar test, but, once you learn the general rules, it becomes increasingly learn-able .

Diagnostic was a 153. Got a 174 on the actual test. It is definitely a test you can study for, though it will take a lot of work. Best of luck!

jonjon1324 wrote:diagnostic?

I got a 154. I'm just now starting to study. Is this a bad score?

That is a good starting point. It shows that you already have many of the critical reasoning and reading skills tested by the LSAT. Now you just need to refine and adapt them to the format of the LSAT, learn and get familiar with the section and question types and good strategies to apply to the test.

Increasing 20+ points is not easy though. It takes a lot of work, but is doable with dedication and proper preparation effort. Basically, you have to work hard and work smart to break the 170 barrier. Less than three percent of people that take the test hit or exceed 170.

On my first cold diagnostic, first time I ever saw an LSAT, and took it under timed proctored conditions, I scored 151.
My test day score = 177.

.

Some more people have answered your question in this thread from a couple weeks ago:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=178334

163 to a 174

158 --> 173

160s --->175+

160----> mid 170's

took roughly 3 months, the lsat is a very learnable test like others say

-

156 --> 171

Definitely a test you can study for if you want it bad enough

162---->175

took testmasters prep course

153-->170

Your diagnostic will almost always be low. Study hard, take lots of timed practice exams, and give yourself at least three months to do this, and you'll pull it up considerably.

159-171

155->174

.

^^^^^^^ Really!? I find those older tests much harder.

Probably mid 150s. Actually, I scored 155 on one of the three actual LSATs I took.

jonjon1324 wrote:diagnostic?

I got a 154. I'm just now starting to study. Is this a bad score?

You are starting in a very good place...already better than basically 2/3 of all test-takers on the real thing. That bodes well for you. I know people who have started in the 140's and acheived 170+, so don't pay too much attention to where you start.

148 - 170

Clearlynotstefan wrote:^^^^^^^ Really!? I find those older tests much harder.

It depends on what you're good at. The LG in the newer tests are generally easier, but newer LR is more challenging. These days you get one super tough game, one super easy one, one of medium difficulty and one slightly harder than that. The old tests gave you two hard games, one of medium to medium-hard difficulty, and one of medium to slightly easier difficulty. The LG in older tests were the separators, but now it's the LR and RC. One LG can still play a part in separation, but usually only for the highest scoring test-takers. Almost anyone who is reasonably good at games can do three of them without much trouble...and guess through the fourth.

The logic used in the older LR sections is easier to detect and break apart. The new LR involves much more subtlety, and the trap answers are now really good trap answers. One word can truly be a game-changer, and the test-makers bury that word. That's the difference. LR is now more important than ever.

RC hasn't really changed much other than the addition of the comparative reading passage. I suppose the RC passages are generally more challenging now than they were a long time ago, but not by much.

165----> 170

This is why I think I can do better with a retake! Surely I can improve 10 points from my initial score when others have gone up 20 points!!!

152--->171

1 month of treating studying like a job (9-5 week days at the library, light studying on the weekends)

171 --> 175