Top Law Schools

I'm planning to take the June 2015 LSAT. I've been told that taking a cold diagnostic is useless because you haven't learned anything yet and all it does is crush your esteem with an embarrassingly low score that's your only baseline. This being said, where do I start studying if not the diagnostic?

Stylnator wrote:I'm planning to take the June 2015 LSAT. I've been told that taking a cold diagnostic is useless because you haven't learned anything yet and all it does is crush your esteem with an embarrassingly low score that's your only baseline. This being said, where do I start studying if not the diagnostic?

you take a diagnostic to help determine your weak areas. otherwise pick a topic and start from the beginning.

Its good for your self esteem later, when you get to say 'I'm scoring X points better!'.
Also it looks pretty in graphs.

I'd say so b/c someone who has a diag of 140 is going to have to study differently than someone who has a diag of 165

lolwut?

You know law school is right for you when you start contemplating the merits of taking a cold diagnostic before beginning "study."

When you start studying, it'll be cold studying anyway. So, unless you're intuitively comfortable with basic logic and reading arguments, you'd best be ready to feel a little crushed before LSAT becomes easier for you.

Insert obligatory proverb about thousand mile journey and one small step.

the test is based around breaking down the way you think and building it back up LSAT-style, so there's no need to do a cold diagnostic since through study you'll learn how to properly take the test.

for cosmetic reasons, i could see why you'd want to take one, but that's one less (probably) prep test you can take after you study.

Louis1127 wrote:I'd say so b/c someone who has a diag of 140 is going to have to study differently than someone who has a diag of 165

You're right. I think I'm going to go ahead with the diagnostic. Thanks for the input everyone!

Typhoon24 wrote:the test is based around breaking down the way you think and building it back up LSAT-style, so there's no need to do a cold diagnostic since through study you'll learn how to properly take the test.

for cosmetic reasons, i could see why you'd want to take one, but that's one less (probably) prep test you can take after you study.

That is true unless you have like 5+ months to study and you do the first test again as practice by the end, when you would have forgotten about almost all of it. Plus the merits for redoing old tests is not to estimate the score, but to figure out what still causes you trouble even after you are doing it a second time, and to improve on your LSAT skills.

fra wrote:Its good for your self esteem later, when you get to say 'I'm scoring X points better!'.
Also it looks pretty in graphs.

Not if you do 6 points worse on your actual test than your cold diagnostic.

.

The merits of a diagnostic are highly debated. The only time I think taking a diagnostic has any real merit is for those geniuses who score very well on their diagnostic. Then yes, the diagnostic is useful.

For the rest of us that don't kill it on your diagnostic, taking a diagnostic is, in my opinion, more of a mental thing. It's cool in that, as another poster said, it helps you so you have a point of reference: "I scored X points higher than my diagnostic, I'm making progress!" It doesn't show your weak areas because more times than not, you're probably shitty in all areas.

Just recognize that scoring a low diagnostic doesn't really mean much, unless it's absolutely abysmal. Like you scored 120. Then I would worry, because you have some other underlying issue at hand that may not be as easily dealt with by simply "studying the LSAT."

To touch upon a poster that talked about "using up the test." Yeah, you use a test, but redoing tests can be just as useful for learning the LSAT as is doing a new test. You will have plenty of PTs later on to use as "test" to where you are currently at. I wouldn't worry too much about "wasting" a PT on a diagnostic. But then again, I'm on the fence about the merits of doing a diagnostic. Do it, or don't, I don't think it really matters.

I would absolutely do a diagnostic test. Doesn't have to be a big deal, just find a PT (i recommend starting with older ones and working towards the newer ones) and time yourself and see what you get. I remember being disappointed with how poorly i did on my first practice, but more than anything it fired me up. Plus, if you end up doing well, then you can relax and study casually.