What test to get a baseline LSAT score? Forum

[abphotog]

Good morning everyone. I'm new here and just learning the ins and outs of the LSAT. I'm working towards the October LSAT to apply for Fall 2016. I'd like to take an LSAT before I start studying, just to see how much I improve. I have plenty of prep books with practice tests. Should I just choose one of those to take? I'm not sure if those were true to the actual tests or not. Maybe past tests would be better? I know this is an extremely basic question, and for a while I'll have a bunch of those. Thanks in advance for any advice!

[WaltGrace83]

I would say PT41. It is a recent enough test that it is more or less indicative of what you'd see on test day but it is old enough so that it won't be TOO indicative (save those for when you've been practicing awhile). Plus, Cambridge packets - PDFs that split question by type - now go to PT40 so this test seems to make a lot of sense. Absolutely nothing 60 and up would be a good idea though and I would also strongly advise against the 50s. The reason being is that you definitely want to save these for later PTs

[foamborn]

I started w/ PT41 as well for the same reasoning. You just want to make sure that you have enough tests to spread out pretty well over the course of your study, working up to the most recent ones. I think it's better to space it in such a way that you run the risk of having tests left over rather than running the risk of having to retake tests near your official test. If you're going to take around 30 tests, 41 is a good choice. If you're going to take only 10, it doesn't matter so much, though I might be starting in the 50s then. People claim the newer tests are more alike.

[LSA2014]

June 2007 (no number) is free on the LSAC site and can be printed right off the web without ordering anything. I think it's a good option for that simple fact.

[WaltGrace83]

June 2007 (no number) is free on the LSAC site and can be printed right off the web without ordering anything. I think it's a good option for that simple fact.

I think that is okay. The only thing I would say is that June 07 has one of the worst curves I have ever seen. I would think more about the raw score than the curved score. Sure, the test is supposedly "easier," as demonstrated by the curve, but I personally think it is a slightly odd test for that reason...just my opinion though.

[Jeffort]

Since it's just a first cold diagnostic test to get a general idea of your starting RANGE, it really doesn't matter which PrepTest you use. It's not important that your very first PT before prep be a really precise/exact measurement of your current LSAT ability level since the only useful purpose is to get a general idea of your relative range (130s vs 140s vs 150s vs 160s range) just to get a ballpark estimate of your preexisting aptitude with the basic types of logic tested before learning LSAT tactics about what you're specifically supposed to focus on with each question type to handle them more efficiently.

Like WaltGrace said, it's better to just use an older one since it's better to save recent tests for assessments leading up to test day when determining your score level with precision is important.

Don't put too much weight on the score in terms of predicting your potential, a lot of things can change with quality prep and determination.

[WaltGrace83]

Since it's just a first cold diagnostic test to get a general idea of your starting RANGE, it really doesn't matter which PrepTest you use. It's not important that your very first PT before prep be a really precise/exact measurement of your current LSAT ability level since the only useful purpose is to get a general idea of your relative range (130s vs 140s vs 150s vs 160s range) just to get a ballpark estimate of your preexisting aptitude with the basic types of logic tested before learning LSAT tactics about what you're specifically supposed to focus on with each question type to handle them more efficiently.

Like WaltGrace said, it's better to just use an older one since it's better to save recent tests for assessments leading up to test day when determining your score level with precision is important.

Don't put too much weight on the score in terms of predicting your potential, a lot of things can change with quality prep and determination.

This is also very credited. I think that people take diagnostics too seriously. I personally never really took one. I did one of those free Kaplan tests and scored a 151....about two years before I started prepping so I don't really count that. The point is that a high diagnostic tends to give people too much confidence when breaking into 160 is cake for some people while getting into 170 is absolutely treacherous for that same group. Meanwhile, (a self-selected group of) people have routinely gone from high 140s to 170s, showing that even a mediocre diagnostic can produce fantastic results.

TL;DR: take a diagnostic if you absolutely must. However, it is by no means necessary and won't give you that much other than just a very basic idea of how you would do if you took the test today. Keep in mind though, your "diagnostic" is not written on your LSAC record and no one cares about the beginning score - the end score is where it is at!

[abphotog]

Thanks everyone for all your advice. I've ordered a bunch of books and practice tests so we'll see how it goes!

[Lightworks]

I took PT38, but anything in that range is good. The only problem with the older tests is that you might get a horrendous LG that throws your score way off.