Top Law Schools

Hey,

So I used blueprint last summer to prep for the LSAT and I got a 150 on my diagnostic and eventually peaked out at around a 161 but I had also not taken very many LSAT's and I work full time and take evening classes so my time isn't LSAT focused per se.

At any rate, I decided to take an additional year off and just take the exam in June and apply early for the next cycle. I plan to take 2 LSAT's per weekend until then (which is ~32 practice tests) as well as studying my answers and re-taking sections during the weekdays.

Does anyone have any advice for how best to get my score up between now and June other than what I plan on doing? I'd like to hit 170.

Thanks!

NatalieCourtman wrote:Hey,

So I used blueprint last summer to prep for the LSAT and I got a 150 on my diagnostic and eventually peaked out at around a 161 but I had also not taken very many LSAT's and I work full time and take evening classes so my time isn't LSAT focused per se.

At any rate, I decided to take an additional year off and just take the exam in June and apply early for the next cycle. I plan to take 2 LSAT's per weekend until then (which is ~32 practice tests) as well as studying my answers and re-taking sections during the weekdays.

Does anyone have any advice for how best to get my score up between now and June other than what I plan on doing? I'd like to hit 170.

Thanks!

It's kind of hard to give advice without knowing what your weaknesses are. I'm in a similar situation as you. But if your weaknesses are spread out pretty much evenly, what you are doing seems to make sense, and you should still get the LGB or MLG because LG should be at -0 or close to it by the time you take the actual exam. If LG is your weakness, even more so. If LR, then incorporate drilling by section. If RC, like me, then we're fucked.

If you peaked at 161, your time would be better spent targeting weak areas and developing technique. Do you have access to PTs you took last time? Use those to identify problem areas, find out how to fix them, and put it into practice via drills.

Take PTs more regularly when there is less low-hanging fruit and to solidify timing. (Say, March.)

That's not to say you can't PT every now and then this or next month to see where you're at.

I think my weaknesses are pretty evenly spread throughout. RC is probably my strongest section (though not always) and there have been times where I'll hit around 90% of my LR and times where I'm hovering closer to 60%.. so it's hit or miss to say the least. And I know how to do LG's but I just can't seem to do them fast enough.. I barely ever get past the first question of the last LG in a given section..

Grab the Manhattan LSAT LG Guide and fix that first. Their LR book is good, too.

If you have any questions specific to our methods (Blueprint) and prepping for June, shoot me a PM!

Many stratagies: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... ?f=6&t=396
Best guide (IMO): http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 6&t=195603
Hang out here: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 6&t=198695

Drill Drill Drill LR. I think it's the most consistent part of the test that's least likely to screw you with on test day like LG and RC can.

This is what I did to improve my score in LR over 5 months of moderate prep:

-Manhattan LR, read it twice then bought Cambridge Vol. 1 and 2 LR by type.
-Did all the problems and noted the ones I got wrong or guessed.
-Re-did every problem that I noted.
-Then PT LR sections from 41-44 un-timed.
-PT 45-53 LR sections timed, noted where I ran out of time but completed the sections for practice.
-PT 57-67 part of timed 5 sections with 54-56 in parts for the "experimental"
-4 days off before test day spent skiing to avoid burn out

In practice I was consistently going -0 to-1 on both sections up to the test.

On the December test I went -4 in the first LR and -0 in the second LR. (I made three careless mistakes in the first easy 10 questions of LR1 after the voicemail LG mind-screwed me).

I went from a 158 to a 167 even with -6 in RC and -6 in LG. Logic games might be easiest to improve in practice (I was also going -1 to -3) but one really hard or unusually worded game like Dinosaurs can easily throw you off balance during the real thing. Same with RC, Kung/Talk Story/Riddle Basins of Attraction. A difficult LR questions can be skipped and come back to with a fresh state of mind.

Thanks guys! I'll let ya know how it goes :X

I really appreciate all the effort in your responses

happyshapy wrote:Drill Drill Drill LR. I think it's the most consistent part of the test that's least likely to screw you with on test day like LG and RC can.

This is what I did to improve my score in LR over 5 months of moderate prep:

-Manhattan LR, read it twice then bought Cambridge Vol. 1 and 2 LR by type.
-Did all the problems and noted the ones I got wrong or guessed.
-Re-did every problem that I noted.
-Then PT LR sections from 41-44 un-timed.
-PT 45-53 LR sections timed, noted where I ran out of time but completed the sections for practice.
-PT 57-67 part of timed 5 sections with 54-56 in parts for the "experimental"
-4 days off before test day spent skiing to avoid burn out

In practice I was consistently going -0 to-1 on both sections up to the test.

On the December test I went -4 in the first LR and -0 in the second LR. (I made three careless mistakes in the first easy 10 questions of LR1 after the voicemail LG mind-screwed me).

I went from a 158 to a 167 even with -6 in RC and -6 in LG. Logic games might be easiest to improve in practice (I was also going -1 to -3) but one really hard or unusually worded game like Dinosaurs can easily throw you off balance during the real thing. Same with RC, Kung/Talk Story/Riddle Basins of Attraction. A difficult LR questions can be skipped and come back to with a fresh state of mind.

Thanks for relaying your strategy.