Top Law Schools

This is just a curious question on my part. I'm not intending to cause a stir among people. I rarely post on these forums, but I do browse a lot. The one thing I notice a lot is that many people spend months of hard work on LSAT prep only to receive a low or mediocre score. Assuming, many of these people are actually putting in 110%(I feel that most are) then does that mean that certain people will never reach a 180 or near perfect score because the material at a certain degree cannot be taught? I would just like to hear some opinions on this subject, because it sounds very depressing that people put in so much effort, yet apparently hit a "score ceiling".

With unlimited time, I would say that the vast majority of people are capable of getting there. What holds a lot of people back are weak critical reading skills. And that's not something you can improve significantly in just a couple months. Scoring a 180 also has a fairly sizable luck component to it. Very bright people who study their tails off for months are capable of hitting 180, but you are bound to misread at least one question, and come up against a couple 50/50's.

And not to be a Negative Nancy, but "110% effort" for a lot of people is woefully inadequate. I've seen it some online, but even IRL I constantly hear people whining about how hard they work, only to find out that "working my ass off" means doing untimed LG while watching Netflix for an hour a day.

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:With unlimited time, I would say that the vast majority of people are capable of getting there. What holds a lot of people back are weak critical reading skills. And that's not something you can improve significantly in just a couple months. Scoring a 180 also has a fairly sizable luck component to it. Very bright people who study their tails off for months are capable of hitting 180, but you are bound to misread at least one question, and come up against a couple 50/50's.

And not to be a Negative Nancy, but "110% effort" for a lot of people is woefully inadequate. I've seen it some online, but even IRL I constantly hear people whining about how hard they work, only to find out that "working my ass off" means doing untimed LG while watching Netflix for an hour a day.

I bet that's big problem with a lot of people's prep. That sounds like how I studied in high school and some in undergrad. It's possible to study like that and even do well in some undergrad classes, but the LSAT is so different from the way a lot of people are used to thinking that you really need to cut out all distractions.

I started prep at 151, First official at 164, last official 176. I'm not alone either, plenty of people around here really put the work in and have the results to show for it.

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:With unlimited time, I would say that the vast majority of people are capable of getting there. What holds a lot of people back are weak critical reading skills. And that's not something you can improve significantly in just a couple months. Scoring a 180 also has a fairly sizable luck component to it. Very bright people who study their tails off for months are capable of hitting 180, but you are bound to misread at least one question, and come up against a couple 50/50's.

And not to be a Negative Nancy, but "110% effort" for a lot of people is woefully inadequate. I've seen it some online, but even IRL I constantly hear people whining about how hard they work, only to find out that "working my ass off" means doing untimed LG while watching Netflix for an hour a day.

lol this coming from the guy who just got 177

you're getting 180 in june buddy

lol, we'll see. A 180 is more of a bragging rights thing than anything else. A 178 or 179 is virtually worth the same thing (unless you are looking to maximize your tutoring fees). LSN has a fair number of 180ers who actually under-perform their numbers. There might be a bit of a "weirdo" stigma attached to it.

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:lol, we'll see. A 180 is more of a bragging rights thing than anything else. A 178 or 179 is virtually worth the same thing (unless you are looking to maximize your tutoring fees). LSN has a fair number of 180ers who actually under-perform their numbers. There might be a bit of a "weirdo" stigma attached to it.

egregious anti 177 trolling

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:And not to be a Negative Nancy, but "110% effort" for a lot of people is woefully inadequate. I've seen it some online, but even IRL I constantly hear people whining about how hard they work, only to find out that "working my ass off" means doing untimed LG while watching Netflix for an hour a day.

In my experience it's the people who whine about it the most that are actually getting the least work done.

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:I constantly hear people whining about how hard they work, only to find out that "working my ass off" means doing untimed LG while watching Netflix for an hour a day.

This is very true for not only the LSAT, but also in every facet of life. I had a boss who thought she spent around 60 hours a week at the office when in reality she was spending closer to 42 hours a week (if even that.) People always think they work harder than they do. The dirty little secret is few people are willing to put in the real level of work required to achieve the best results whether it is on the LSAT or in other areas of life so they just tell themselves that they've put in enough work regardless of reality.

Brixton wrote:

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:I constantly hear people whining about how hard they work, only to find out that "working my ass off" means doing untimed LG while watching Netflix for an hour a day.

This is very true for not only the LSAT, but also in every facet of life. I had a boss who thought she spent around 60 hours a week at the office when in reality she was spending closer to 42 hours a week (if even that.) People always think they work harder than they do. The dirty little secret is few people are willing to put in the real level of work required to achieve the best results whether it is on the LSAT or in other areas of life so they just tell themselves that they've put in enough work regardless of reality.

Great point. People will find that hard work and great attitude go along way. It's usually the people who are willing to work the hardest are successful. There are a lot of really smart people who just don't want to work very hard.

When people say they studied for 5-6 months for the LSAT for example, I don't automatically assume that they mean 5-6 months of 110% effort. But given enough time and motivation, I do think many people are capable of an official 180. "Anybody" is too extreme, and those are just the kind of answers you generally want to avoid in order to get that 180.

If everyone could hit 180, which is definitely not the case, then LSAC would just make a harder test.

Putting forth the work necessary to actually achieve something requires you to put yourself out there, and that's something that most people aren't willing to do. They'd much rather stay in their own bubble and constantly reassure themselves that IF they did choose to try, the results would be amazing. This is why we have so many special snowflakes. All these people who have convinced themselves that they would accomplish great things if they decided to, but are secretly too afraid to do anything because it might reveal how mediocre they really are.

Skill Game wrote:When people say they studied for 5-6 months for the LSAT for example, I don't automatically assume that they mean 5-6 months of 110% effort. But given enough time and motivation, I do think many people are capable of an official 180. "Anybody" is too extreme, and those are just the kind of answers you generally want to avoid in order to get that 180.

I follow the guidelines by Noodlyone and plithypike
I study long term (6-7 months) but only for 3-4 hours a day with off days built into my schedule

Im following what they told me to do

No. I don't think anyone can get a 180. ( accordibg to some posts ive read here by LSAt instructors, im not sure a 170 is possible for everyone.) I think retaking a 177 is not going to improve a person's chances at admission. In my opinion, if a person isn't getting accepted with a 177 or 178 I don't think it is the LSAT holding them back. Focusing on improving the LSAT may make them overlook the real problem with their application.

I am ashamed to say I waste a ton of time messing with my hobbies and could do better. I might be mediocre, I might be better than that, I can only say that based on what I have done so far and the effort I have put in so far, it leads me to believe I am mediocre with some potential...

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:Putting forth the work necessary to actually achieve something requires you to put yourself out there, and that's something that most people aren't willing to do. They'd much rather stay in their own bubble and constantly reassure themselves that IF they did choose to try, the results would be amazing. This is why we have so many special snowflakes. All these people who have convinced themselves that they would accomplish great things if they decided to, but are secretly too afraid to do anything because it might reveal how mediocre they really are.

This, a million times this. I don't know how many times I've heard a variation of, "Oh, well I only got 50% of the questions right on this test, but I didn't even study at ALL, so 50% is actually pretty good when you think about it." Yeah, if we're all competing in the Not Giving a Shit Olympics.

There seems to be this bizarre idea that hard work is for chumps, and that all the kool kids are just so extremely talented that they don't have to lift a finger. It's especially common in the arts, where people think that if they're not making waves once they've turned 21, they might as well give up.

Iroh wrote:

RhymesLikeDimes wrote:Putting forth the work necessary to actually achieve something requires you to put yourself out there, and that's something that most people aren't willing to do. They'd much rather stay in their own bubble and constantly reassure themselves that IF they did choose to try, the results would be amazing. This is why we have so many special snowflakes. All these people who have convinced themselves that they would accomplish great things if they decided to, but are secretly too afraid to do anything because it might reveal how mediocre they really are.

This, a million times this. I don't know how many times I've heard a variation of, "Oh, well I only got 50% of the questions right on this test, but I didn't even study at ALL, so 50% is actually pretty good when you think about it." Yeah, if we're all competing in the Not Giving a Shit Olympics.

There seems to be this bizarre idea that hard work is for chumps, and that all the kool kids are just so extremely talented that they don't have to lift a finger. It's especially common in the arts, where people think that if they're not making waves once they've turned 21, they might as well give up.

This is incredibly accurate, if you want to find some interesting analysis on this subject (and waste valuable LSAT study time ) look up Carol Dweck fixed vs. growth mindsets.

That's pretty interesting! Once I'm done with the LSAT I'll have to actually read her book.

Of course, this also raises a question about willpower (maybe she answers it in the book). It's safe to say that the people who study harder to improve themselves have greater willpower than the people who give up right way. But is willpower something that can be improved with hard work, or is it an innate gift itself? It seems like in order to improve you willpower, you would have to have the will to increase your will in the first place...which seems like you wouldn't even have the problem in the first place. Or maybe I'm just writing gibberish.

Iroh wrote:That's pretty interesting! Once I'm done with the LSAT I'll have to actually read her book.

Of course, this also raises a question about willpower (maybe she answers it in the book). It's safe to say that the people who study harder to improve themselves have greater willpower than the people who give up right way. But is willpower something that can be improved with hard work, or is it an innate gift itself? It seems like in order to improve you willpower, you would have to have the will to increase your will in the first place...which seems like you wouldn't even have the problem in the first place. Or maybe I'm just writing gibberish.

All this talk of improving willpower or intelligence is making me feel like the LSAT is the worst RPG ever designed.

Iroh wrote:That's pretty interesting! Once I'm done with the LSAT I'll have to actually read her book.

Of course, this also raises a question about willpower (maybe she answers it in the book). It's safe to say that the people who study harder to improve themselves have greater willpower than the people who give up right way. But is willpower something that can be improved with hard work, or is it an innate gift itself? It seems like in order to improve you willpower, you would have to have the will to increase your will in the first place...which seems like you wouldn't even have the problem in the first place. Or maybe I'm just writing gibberish.

That is a good point, I haven't read her entire book, not until after the LSAT, but I would think willpower can be improved since you can recognize yourself as being lazy and then choose whether or not to give in to the laziness. I would argue that her point is that someone who has a fixed mindset is unwilling to put the work in because they feel like it will not result in any good. In LSAT terms, you score a cold 170 or your just an idiot and there is no real reason to keep on trying.

From a content perspective, yes. If you study for 6 months you will know the test well enough to answer questions correctly in a timed manner.

From a test taking perspective, luck and keeping it together on game day play a major role. Getting 2 RC sections back to back might be a death blow for some. Getting agitated by the sound of someone's pencil (while they are working on their LG section) or your proctor's incessant typing will screw you up real bad. Reaction to difficult questions is also crucial.

Performance on game day is not just hard work and blood, sweat, and guts (unfortunately)

dkb17xzx wrote:From a content perspective, yes. If you study for 6 months you will know the test well enough to answer questions correctly in a timed manner.

I can assure you from experience, that is not universally true.

bp shinners wrote:

dkb17xzx wrote:From a content perspective, yes. If you study for 6 months you will know the test well enough to answer questions correctly in a timed manner.

I can assure you from experience, that is not universally true.

i should have added reasonable intelligence + smart/hard prep.

just curious bpshiners - what are the traits of the 180 students you've talked to / tutored?

This thread motivates.