19 + 3 months to study= bad idea? Forum

[boaltlaw]

I'm 19 (turning 20 in August), and my blueprint test prep starts exactly 3 months before the lsat. looking through the forums, it seems that everyone has studied for 6months, 9 months, 1 year, etc. Will I not be able to do all the necessary work to get a 170+ in 3months? I wont have a job/internship and I would study on average 4-5 hours a day (so 28-35 hours a week, including prep tests/class) and I was thinking that may be enough.

I basically have everything ready for my app that a K-JD could have (on campus WE, tutor experience, leadership experience, research experience, and above a 4.0, which isn't going anywhere).

I don't want to waste my 4.0-4.1 by getting like a 162, so can experienced LSAT takers give me some advice?

[t-14orbust]

I got a 170+ with 2.5 months prep. You'll know based on how quickly you're improving. By my second diagnostic I hit 171. I had a 158 cold. Take that as you will.

There's a reason the test-prep companies design their classes to start 3 months before the lsat and end the week prior.

[unodostres]

its possible. depends on how good you can grasp the material and apply it to timed pt's. i started in the 130's and it's taken me about a year to get into the high 160's/random 170's.

edit: i also have a 4.0 so good job on shooting high. dont reverse split and get $$$$

[boaltlaw]

T14 or bust what prep company did you use?

[boaltlaw]

Also, does anyone have a comprehensive list of which law schools prefer what (i.e boalt prefers gpa, nw prefers we,etc.)? I have the fragmented info by looking at the law school pages on tls and through browsing the forums, but I want a single list if anyone has it, or something close to it!

[t-14orbust]

T14 or bust what prep company did you use?

testmasters, though I don't think it really matters. Also testmasters are assholes for not letting you retain access to the online webportal after your test.

[unodostres]

Also, does anyone have a comprehensive list of which law schools prefer what (i.e boalt prefers gpa, nw prefers we,etc.)? I have the fragmented info by looking at the law school pages on tls and through browsing the forums, but I want a single list if anyone has it, or something close to it!

lawschoolnumbers.com

mylsn.info to play with your numbers

[t-14orbust]

Schools want you to beat their medians. CA schools prefer high GPAs. Your GPA is locked. All you need to do is beast the LSAT

[boaltlaw]

the reason why i dont like lsn is because I feel like with the exception of schools like NYU and Columbia, a lot of the data is inaccurate. Like if i put in certain numbers, it'll tell me you have "XX%" of getting in, and it is usually too high, because it just looks at the quantitative data of admitted students, ignoring schools like stanford and berkeley that look for well-rounded applicants, or NW that looks for older/more experienced applicants.

and t14 or bust, whaat? such jerks lol

[boaltlaw]

Schools want you to beat their medians. CA schools prefer high GPAs. Your GPA is locked. All you need to do is beast the LSAT

i know, the pressure is high for one test, which i don't mind, i just want to make sure i optimize my lsat score

[t-14orbust]

Schools want you to beat their medians. CA schools prefer high GPAs. Your GPA is locked. All you need to do is beast the LSAT

i know, the pressure is high for one test, which i don't mind, i just want to make sure i optimize my lsat score

Just retake if you don't do as well as you'd like. Most people improve on a retake even without practice.

[unodostres]

the reason why i dont like lsn is because I feel like with the exception of schools like NYU and Columbia, a lot of the data is inaccurate. Like if i put in certain numbers, it'll tell me you have "XX%" of getting in, and it is usually too high, because it just looks at the quantitative data of admitted students, ignoring schools like stanford and berkeley that look for well-rounded applicants, or NW that looks for older/more experienced applicants.

and t14 or bust, whaat? such jerks lol

thats lawschoolpredicator, which is not credited

lawschoolnumbers give you data points of people that have applied with your numbers from a large range of applicants. these user's usually put in their profiles of how long they've been out of school/urm/cured cancer whatever

[boaltlaw]

the reason why i dont like lsn is because I feel like with the exception of schools like NYU and Columbia, a lot of the data is inaccurate. Like if i put in certain numbers, it'll tell me you have "XX%" of getting in, and it is usually too high, because it just looks at the quantitative data of admitted students, ignoring schools like stanford and berkeley that look for well-rounded applicants, or NW that looks for older/more experienced applicants.

and t14 or bust, whaat? such jerks lol

thats lawschoolpredicator, which is not credited

lawschoolnumbers give you data points of people that have applied with your numbers from a large range of applicants. these user's usually put in their profiles of how long they've been out of school/urm/cured cancer whatever

my mistake i got them mixed up. lsn is even worse because the data could be made up easily. it's not hard to make up a fake account and im sure people do that, especially with high numbers and rejected to scare others away.

[politibro44]

the reason why i dont like lsn is because I feel like with the exception of schools like NYU and Columbia, a lot of the data is inaccurate. Like if i put in certain numbers, it'll tell me you have "XX%" of getting in, and it is usually too high, because it just looks at the quantitative data of admitted students, ignoring schools like stanford and berkeley that look for well-rounded applicants, or NW that looks for older/more experienced applicants.

and t14 or bust, whaat? such jerks lol

thats lawschoolpredicator, which is not credited

lawschoolnumbers give you data points of people that have applied with your numbers from a large range of applicants. these user's usually put in their profiles of how long they've been out of school/urm/cured cancer whatever

my mistake i got them mixed up. lsn is even worse because the data could be made up easily. it's not hard to make up a fake account and im sure people do that, especially with high numbers and rejected to scare others away.

Just because it could be the case does not mean that it is (sorry, LSAT mindset). It is usually possible to decipher which ones are flames, or which ones to at least be suspicious of. For the most part though, LSN is credited and is better than law school predictor. But really most law schools are the same, except for HYS, Berk, and I guess NW. They all want high numbers. That is the most predictive of your admission's success.

In terms of studying, I'm just finishing Blueprint in Berkeley. It's a very good course with an excellent instructor, but I think it would have been better to complete the course and then have a month to study on my own before taking the test. In the class you are still learning new material with a few weeks to go. Although I recommend the course, 3 months was not long enough for me to reach 170+. However, it could be for you.

[redsox]

Have you taken a diagnostic yet? Do that before you pay anyone for a course. If you're starting from 170s or high 160s, it might be a waste of time/money.

[Splitter1415]

I studied for 5 months while working 40+ hours a week and taking 9 credits in school. I got a 176 (maybe I just got lucky). You can definitely prepare for the test over the summer. I've only used the Powerscore Bibles and the official PTs, but now I wish I had used the Manhattan LSAT books. I'm tutoring a few classmates next semester and the Manhattan books definitely helped me understand LR better.

[03152016]

Everyone's different. Pick a date on which you'll assess your performance and decide whether you're ready to write the test. Anecdotes can help you get a ballpark idea, but the truth is that some people need a month and some people need a year.

[Flanker1067]

Just to add to the general consensus, three months is more than enough time if you can concentrate on it. I studied for 1.5 months and went from 158 diagnostic to getting a 171 because I was able to study ~8 hours a day (you could do even more, but my brain burnt out around 8 hours). Obviously, if you were working, you would need a lot more time. I didn't feel like more time would have helped me much, since I had done a ton of practice exams and read all the material.

[PDX4343]

I was 19 and studied for 3 months. Got a 173. Just make sure that you get to a point where you've maxed out your score before taking the test. For some it takes 3 months to get there for others it might take 6.

[boaltlaw]

I will have no job or internship so yes, i can dedicate a lot of time to it a day. ill basically treat it like my job

also, should i get bibles in addition to Blueprint work?

[boaltlaw]

bump for bible question?

[BaberhamLincoln]

Boalt,
I got bibles for LG and LR and liked them.
I got Manhattan for LR and RC and liked them better. Love Manhattan's simplicity and drilling.

If I could go back, I would do LG Bible and Manhattan LR and RC. And drilling like CRAZY and taking more PTs.

Everyone is diff in books they recommend. But Manhattan and LSAT trainer seem to be the top on TLS