Top Law Schools

meadow201 wrote:Plan to take the real LSAT within the year.

1 year ago I took a PT without any previous exposure to the LSAT, but it was unofficial (from a test prep company's book) Got a 169.
Forgot about LSAT prep since then. Found some spare time recently, took an official PT (post20): 89 raw, 171. So I've taken 2 PT's.

Is that just a fluke, or is it too early to tell? I doubt I will have time to take another PT until a few weeks from now.

I hear of +15 score improvements from the diagnostic, but are those all something like 155->170?

If I already have ~170 on diag, can I increase it to 174-175?
Or is it hard to make improvements upon an already high diagnostic?

Oh, and both were untimed. I finished about 10min OT, but my time wasn't evenly spread (i.e., OT on one section, under on another. Wasn't keep track of time until the end, and I didn't revisit questions).

meadow201 wrote:not to defend anything, (and unsure whether this matters much), but when I say 10OT, i mean I finished the entire thing with 10min over--I probably went 2-3 min over on each individual section

meadow201 wrote:Hmmm the prevailing wisdom seems to be "take untimed until you get a feel"

I don't follow why I must deduct 8-10 correct answers--it's not like I would've never gotten to the last questions--I probably would've moved at a faster pace, and I wouldnt have gotten up to go to a fountain to drink water or something so often.

meadow201 wrote:Hmmm the prevailing wisdom seems to be "take untimed until you get a feel"

thestalkmore wrote:1. Yes
2. Above posters are correct. Your "diagnostic" wasnt a diagnostic.

shifty_eyed wrote:

thestalkmore wrote:1. Yes
2. Above posters are correct. Your "diagnostic" wasnt a diagnostic.

3. This is a dumb question anyway.

meadow201 wrote: If I already have ~170 on diag, can I increase it to 174-175?
Or is it hard to make improvements upon an already high diagnostic?

shifty_eyed wrote:3. This is a dumb question anyway.

meadow201 wrote:I was so disconcerted (nonetheless convinced) by everyone's assertion that neither was a true diagnostic that I made the time to take another PT (again official, post20).
It was timed and a true simulation in just about every respect imaginable.

I finished every section with enough time to double check 1 or 2 questions, except the LG section, where I had to skip 3 (whereas, before, under no time constraints, I would've spent lots of time on those 3). However on each of those 3, I spent a lot of time testing 2 of the choices, so with a minute left I guessed between the 2 choices--I got 2 of the 3 right.

Ended up with 175.

That narrative aside, some legitimate questions (i.e., not posed to brag, not even partly--I derive no satisfaction from advertising my PT scores to others):

1. This most recent one being the first timed one I've taken, does it sufficiently count as a diagnostic, or will no LSAT I ever take count as a diagnostic, because of the other 2 untimed ones' giving me some previous exposure (although I've still never consulted explanations or even a book--the book I had referred to was a supplemental collection of PT's)?

2. Is it unusual for one to score ~175 on the diagnostic? Could it still be a fluke? Is it safe to believe that I'm in good shape, and that, come test day, I won’t fall precipitously?

3. Finally, now that I have (or think I have) standing to ask this: can it be improved upon (i.e., to 177+)?

meadow201 wrote:Although I may have a decent intuitive grasp, I noted that I had felt less than confident on a handful of questions from which I moved on in the interest of time. From incomplete confidence, (i.e., inability to explain why something is unambiguously correct or incorrect), does it follow that I could have easily misplaced my faith in an answer? Or is that the nature of the first few tests one takes, and thus I can safely believe that I have established a reliable benchmark?