Top Law Schools

Hi-

I'm pretty far along in my LSAT studying. Took the June LSAT and probably scored in the 163-169 range. Took a brief hiatus after the June LSAT.

Need a 168+ for the scholarship I would like at my preferred school due to my splitter status, but my goal is to get a 173+.

My theoretical max would be a 176 if I hit my PR on each section, but I have not scored above a 168 on any individual timed practice test prior to the June LSAT. (Have taken a break to refresh my mind since the June LSAT, but about to get back into it again).

Logic games is done. Routinely getting 23/23.

Reading Comp: PR: 25/27, average: 23/27
Logical Reasoning: PR: 46/51, average 41/51

Science related material in LR and RC is where most of my errors occur as well as inference questions in RC. I usually clear the first 15 LR questions without a mistake and then miss questions in the 18-23 range where they put all the hard questions.

I only have 11 full PT's left, of which I will take all in timed test scenarios with an experimental section, but a decent number of older RC and LR sections. Are the older sections of RC radically different in terms of question selection and not worth my time or are they still useful (at the very least for stamina purposes)?

Any class is not an option. A tutor is probably financially prohibitive, but potentially worth it.

Anything innovative that you can suggest? Or do I just keep taking sections and reviewing? Should I re-read the Bible books? Is there another book I should be reading?

Thanks in advance.

You should be fine practicing with the older RC passages. There are some trends toward more subtle author's attitude in recent years but I don't think you need to worry too much about the practice being less useful except for the lack of comparative reading passages.

As far as the science goes, I'd just say this: it doesn't matter in LG whether you are talking about clowns getting out of a car or toy dinosaurs on a shelf. It doesn't actually matter in LR or RC either. Try your best to treat the science material the same way you treat anything else. For the purposes of the LSAT it is just another series of moving parts.

Examples and definitions exist to help support claims. If there is a long and complex scientific process described, ask yourself what claim it supports and how? The answers to those questions will be what is important most of the time. Occasionally you will get a very specific and technical question: (for example the nerve impulses in the Platypus passage (October 1999, passage 3, Q18) but at that point you just have to go back and read it again anyway. As long as you mark where the dense science language is and understand what it is there to support you can often get away with skimming it a bit.

The exception to this are the big, conceptual moving parts. If there is a whole long paragraph describing in intricate detail the structure of two different types of bug wings, or chemicals, or anything else "sciencey," you probably don't need to know every detail, but you will need to know the substantive differences and similarities between the two things being described. If one wing is delicate and easily broken by strong winds while the other is strong and durable that difference is likely to be important. Focus on those similarities and differences the same way your would if two styles of painting or two historical or legal theories varied in a substantive way.

Your biggest point miss is in LR, right?

So! There are different types of LR questions. Have you conducted triage to figure out which LR question types you are missing the most? Then I'd suggest you prioritize study and focus efforts on those weak areas. Sounds like that's inference questions. You should also just drill the hardest questions. Have you tried a recursive study method where you drill questions, read the answers, then redo the ones you missed later and practice the logical approach from memory? That really helped me, if I dimly recall...

RC- in this now middle aged dude's opinion- is about taking notes as you read... although with 1 month to go I'm nervous about telling you to adopt a whole new approach for it.