Top Law Schools

Hey guys, I'm an undergrad and new to this forum. A couple months ago I decided on law school and began research. I set an LSAT goal of 170 and plan to take it in 2017 at some point so I'm a ways away. Yesterday I took a pratice LSAT cold and got a 150. I was wondering what my chances of getting my score up 20 points were and I just wanted to ask around and see what some people with more experience thought about it. I've got over a year and a half to study and I plan to hit the books hard and achieve my goal. Ultimately I guess it's all up to me. Maybe I'm just looking for encouragement.

vandencs wrote:Hey guys, I'm an undergrad and new to this forum. A couple months ago I decided on law school and began research. I set an LSAT goal of 170 and plan to take it in 2017 at some point so I'm a ways away. Yesterday I took a pratice LSAT cold and got a 150. I was wondering what my chances of getting my score up 20 points were and I just wanted to ask around and see what some people with more experience thought about it. I've got over a year and a half to study and I plan to hit the books hard and achieve my goal. Ultimately I guess it's all up to me. Maybe I'm just looking for encouragement.

You can certainly do this with some hard work. You have plenty of time. As a point of reference, I increased my score 19 points from my "cold" first take to my actual LSAT and I studied for 6 weeks while working a full time job. Just put the effort in and you will be rewarded on test day! Good luck.

I had the same exact diagnostic, my battle wasn't easy, but eventually I did it.
150 diagnostic, 164 first test, 165 retest (had been 170+ but choked), 175+ third take.

It can be done, just give yourself more time than you expect you'll need.

Had a 150 diagnostic in May last year. Studied while working full-time scored 173 on October test. Protested as high as 178. It's doable, just be prepared to study significantly and efficiently.

I went from high 140s to low 170s with six months of self study. 3-5 hours a day about 5-6 days a week.

You should definitely be able to score a 170+ on test day. A year and a half of studying will be good, but don't get too intense at the beginning or else you may get burnt out. Take it easy at the beginning and really try to understand the different concepts of each section.

TheMikey wrote:You should definitely be able to score a 170+ on test day. A year and a half of studying will be good, but don't get too intense at the beginning or else you may get burnt out. Take it easy at the beginning and really try to understand the different concepts of each section.

This. Take a look around at some of the prep books/materials available and see what you like. This far out, I'd suggest just casually introducing yourself to the basic concepts in your free time or whatever. Poor performance on initial diagnostics often come down to timing issues and a lack of familiarity with the concepts. Repetition and familiarity will be key. And, as the above poster said, don't burn yourself out by studying intensely this far away from the test. Good luck.

Removed.

TheMikey wrote:You should definitely be able to score a 170+ on test day. A year and a half of studying will be good, but don't get too intense at the beginning or else you may get burnt out. Take it easy at the beginning and really try to understand the different concepts of each section.

Lol I agree with the overall message of this post, not burning out, and the value of having this much time. But the first sentence is hysterical. "Should definitely" and improving from median to 98th percentile shouldn't be in the same thought haha

After 6 months of studying 8-10 hours a week I went from my initial diagnostic of a 146 to a 171. As you can see by many of the other examples posters have cited, you can definitely improve 20 points and even more if you're willing.

splitterswallow wrote:

TheMikey wrote:You should definitely be able to score a 170+ on test day. A year and a half of studying will be good, but don't get too intense at the beginning or else you may get burnt out. Take it easy at the beginning and really try to understand the different concepts of each section.

Lol I agree with the overall message of this post, not burning out, and the value of having this much time. But the first sentence is hysterical. "Should definitely" and improving from median to 98th percentile shouldn't be in the same thought haha

What are you talking about?? That "should definitely get a 170+" is my favorite part haha! Yeah but I totally agree, there's a reason it's the 98th percentile and just from taking it cold the first time I could see it will be hard as hell to get to the point where you're only missing 2-3 questions per section. That being said, I know I can get there if I put in the work, time, and energy.

Considering my cold diagnostic was 151 and 4 months later I'm still in the low 160s, I am definitely not studying enough or studying wrong, according to this thread.

I've only done about 15 realistic PTs, but still, I should be doing better, apparently.

It can be done like other's anecdotes indicate. Keep in mind it may feel like you have peaked out at times and will likely require some perseverance. Also the higher your score gets the more the returns on your effort diminish. For example I never was able to get over a 175 on a practice test and I never got a perfect score on an RC section. I believe I could increase my score, however I suspect I would have to work for many months at this point just to gain a few points.

What was your score breakdown? If most of your missed points were in Games, I think that's a different situation than if most of them were in LR/RC.

.

ScottRiqui wrote:What was your score breakdown? If most of your missed points were in Games, I think that's a different situation than if most of them were in LR/RC.

LR I averaged around 18/25, LG I did bad at around 10/23, and RC I really sucked it up at 12/27. I was unable to answer around 5-6 questions on all the passages simply due to time constraints. I honestly left the test feeling really happy and seeing a lot of ways in which I could improve. What do you make of this score breakdown??

vandencs wrote:

ScottRiqui wrote:What was your score breakdown? If most of your missed points were in Games, I think that's a different situation than if most of them were in LR/RC.

LR I averaged around 18/25, LG I did bad at around 10/23, and RC I really sucked it up at 12/27. I was unable to answer around 5-6 questions on all the passages simply due to time constraints. I honestly left the test feeling really happy and seeing a lot of ways in which I could improve. What do you make of this score breakdown??

That's not bad at all! Logic games are the most learnable section, so you'll see a big improvement once you've started to master them. I got around the same score on my first LG section, but once I learned how to visually diagram games and make inferences, it quickly became my best section. Not only are there surefire ways to solve games, but they tend to repeat themselves, so if you've practiced enough games, you probably won't see anything new on the actual LSAT.

Your LR score is quite high for a first-timer, which is good news, considering that it's the most important section, and due to the number of different question types, the one that takes the longest to master.

Reading Comp can be pretty hit or miss until you've learned to apply a reliable strategy. Anticipation is key. There are certain aspects of each passage that you're very likely to be questioned on. If you struggled with timing on RC, my guess is that you did a lot of scanning back and forth between the questions and the passage. To reliably complete the section in 35 minutes, you'll need to cut down on this time. There are certain q.types for which you'll have to return to the passage, such as when they ask you to define a specific word in context, or locate a detail. But for the more abstract, big picture questions, like Main Point and Author Attitude, a good LSAT taker will have taken the time to locate and consider these things before even getting to the questions.

Your breakdown is looking good. As some of the other posters have said, don't rush yourself in the beginning of your prep. Take your time absorbing the concepts and following the strategies when you do questions. You'll be tempted to take shortcuts when you come across easier questions, but it's important to get used to following the strategies, until they become second nature.

Good luck!

.

Blueprint Mithun wrote:

vandencs wrote:

ScottRiqui wrote:What was your score breakdown? If most of your missed points were in Games, I think that's a different situation than if most of them were in LR/RC.

LR I averaged around 18/25, LG I did bad at around 10/23, and RC I really sucked it up at 12/27. I was unable to answer around 5-6 questions on all the passages simply due to time constraints. I honestly left the test feeling really happy and seeing a lot of ways in which I could improve. What do you make of this score breakdown??

That's not bad at all! Logic games are the most learnable section, so you'll see a big improvement once you've started to master them. I got around the same score on my first LG section, but once I learned how to visually diagram games and make inferences, it quickly became my best section. Not only are there surefire ways to solve games, but they tend to repeat themselves, so if you've practiced enough games, you probably won't see anything new on the actual LSAT.

Your LR score is quite high for a first-timer, which is good news, considering that it's the most important section, and due to the number of different question types, the one that takes the longest to master.

Reading Comp can be pretty hit or miss until you've learned to apply a reliable strategy. Anticipation is key. There are certain aspects of each passage that you're very likely to be questioned on. If you struggled with timing on RC, my guess is that you did a lot of scanning back and forth between the questions and the passage. To reliably complete the section in 35 minutes, you'll need to cut down on this time. There are certain q.types for which you'll have to return to the passage, such as when they ask you to define a specific word in context, or locate a detail. But for the more abstract, big picture questions, like Main Point and Author Attitude, a good LSAT taker will have taken the time to locate and consider these things before even getting to the questions.

Your breakdown is looking good. As some of the other posters have said, don't rush yourself in the beginning of your prep. Take your time absorbing the concepts and following the strategies when you do questions. You'll be tempted to take shortcuts when you come across easier questions, but it's important to get used to following the strategies, until they become second nature.

Good luck!

Hey thanks so much that is great advice! I just order the 3 powerscore bibles on amazon. So would you recommend I just start going through them now and slowly and methodically try to develop the strategies you spoke about?

Well, by strategies, I meant the strategies in the books. When you're studying LR, for example, any LSAT guide you use will first introduce the question type, show you an example or two, and explain how to approach it, usually in a step-by-step format. Students are sometimes tempted to skip over or deprioritize steps that are time-consuming, or don't seem useful at first. For easy questions, you might be able to find the answer without doing every single step, but if you get used to doing so, you might be screwed when it comes to harder questions. Take your time and follow the steps closely, until they become natural.

After you've done all the material and a fair bit of drilling, you might find that some of the strategies for specific q.types are too time-consuming, or just not reliably effective for you. In this case, I'd consider going online for help, or even using a different guide or prep resource. You're still a ways away from that point, though.