Disheartened by LSAC's Grade Conversion. Forum

[googlesearch]

You might want to reconsider the significance you place on your softs.

View Yale's class profile, which lists several softs. Very unique.
http://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/profile.htm

The WE of a 25 yo, that you so vaguely mention, doesn't compare.

LSAC did not do anything to your GPA that you didn't do.

We obviously aren't reading your PS, we would hope everyone would love their own PS, doesn't mean adcomms will. Plug your shit into Law School Predictor once you get your LSAT score back, apply, wait for decision, and stop looking for confirmation that you're gonna get in. You're far from a sure shot especially because you don't have your score yet.

[WhiskeynCoke]

Quote:
-------------------------
I take roughly three tests a day, sometimes two, and have scored no lower than a 176 for the past three weeks
----------------------------
How is it that you think taking 3 LSAT's in one day is a good idea? What an absolute disgusting waste of Practice Tests. Here, I'll let you in on a little secret. Try to take your practice tests under conditions AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE to the real thing. I have a strong inclination that you aren't doing this and you're gonna have a rude awakening come test day.

Here's what I mean:

- You should be starting your tests at around 9am with your last bathroom break at 8:30am
- Each test is 5 sections, 4 scored. Take 3 sections, 15min break where you can eat/drink/bathroom, last 2 sections
- For the 5th/exp section, use an older test and place it in random order. (alternate each test)
- Get used to small/limited desk space, only using an analog timer, and every other limitation you're given
- Take only 1 test per day, unless you plan on getting up at 3am and doing one before the real thing (which is retarded)
- For god sakes, review the hell out of your mistakes. 3 tests/day will give you no chance to do this, making your practice absolutely worthless.
- By taking 3 a day you're cheapening each test, lowering the pressure on yourself and also allowing for more warmup.

The more you recreate test-day condition for your practice tests, the closer your actual score will align with your practice scores. Don't take more than 3 tests per week max, you won't have time to thoroughly review and let that review sink in. Instead you will just be reinforcing your bad habits.

FWIW I Improved from 167 (1st time) -----> 179 (3rd time)

Doing what I described above is what made this possible. More is not always better. Have you ever heard the phrase: "study smarter not harder?" Do that.

[googlesearch]

Quote:
-------------------------
I take roughly three tests a day, sometimes two, and have scored no lower than a 176 for the past three weeks
----------------------------
How is it that you think taking 3 LSAT's in one day is a good idea? What an absolute disgusting waste of Practice Tests. Here, I'll let you in on a little secret. Try to take your practice tests under conditions AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE to the real thing. I have a strong inclination that you aren't doing this and you're gonna have a rude awakening come test day.

Here's what I mean:

- You should be starting your tests at around 9am with your last bathroom break at 8:30am
- Each test is 5 sections, 4 scored. Take 3 sections, 15min break where you can eat/drink/bathroom, last 2 sections
- For the 5th/exp section, use an older test and place it in random order. (alternate each test)
- Get used to small/limited desk space, only using an analog timer, and every other limitation you're given
- Take only 1 test per day, unless you plan on getting up at 3am and doing one before the real thing (which is retarded)
- For god sakes, review the hell out of your mistakes. 3 tests/day will give you no chance to do this, making your practice absolutely worthless.
- By taking 3 a day you're cheapening each test, lowering the pressure on yourself and also allowing for more warmup.

The more you recreate test-day condition for your practice tests, the closer your actual score will align with your practice scores. Don't take more than 3 tests per week max, you won't have time to thoroughly review and let that review sink in. Instead you will just be reinforcing your bad habits.

FWIW I Improved from 167 (1st time) -----> 179 (3rd time)

Doing what I described above is what made this possible. More is not always better. Have you ever heard the phrase: "study smarter not harder?" Do that.

There's no way in fuck she's doing 3 a day. She'd run out in 20 days. Also says she's doing 2 a day. Said she hasn't scored lower than a 174, then said she hasn't scored lower than a 176.. So which is it? Two or three? Not to mention two months of two a day? How?

In any event, I second everything. A test every other day is fine. And on your non-test days, study your previous tests, drill old games, do something. But three a day. Lol.

[bankruptedcasino]

Call me a d-bag, but I'm curious as to why OP's avatar is (ostensibly) the OP french kissing a cupcake.

Brotip: Don't put your face on TLS. Even TTTT students read TLS, so the chances of you being outed at any law school in the country are pretty high.

[googlesearch]

Call me a d-bag, but I'm curious as to why OP's avatar is (ostensibly) the OP french kissing a cupcake.

Brotip: Don't put your face on TLS. Even TTTT students read TLS, so the chances of you being outed at any law school in the country are pretty high.

but how will people know I'm cute AND love cupcakes?

[TheThriller]

Let her be, she's eating cupcakes because shes disheartened by LSAC's Grade Conversion. Therapeutic binge-eating.

[BigZuck]

I miss the OP, I wish she would come back and post some more.

[butyourhonor]

.

[2014]

Holy shit why can't more people just answer the guy's question and let him be on his way?

If you manage a 174+ you will get into Columbia fine and will be WLed by Harvard with a low but not zero chance of getting off of it.
Good luck on the real deal.

[yankihote]

Personally, I don't think that doing one section at a time instead of an entire simulated practice test is that bad of an idea. It's the way I did it. I think that taking the LSAT is more about honing your fullest ability for 30-35 minutes than maintaining a certain level of focus throughout all the sections. The switch from games to RC for instance is so dramatic that IMO doing them in succession at home doesn't give you much added benefit versus doing them at different times.

That being said, OP should still take a couple, preferably newer practice tests and give herself the best simulated conditions she can.

Also, go faster than 35 minutes per. It's always a little slower on real test day.

[BigZuck]

Bump for OP to come back and tell us about her LSAT triumphs. She was all over the waiting thread but never reported her score...

[Dr. Dre]

Bump for OP to come back and tell us about her LSAT triumphs. She was all over the waiting thread but never reported her score...

[seagan823]

It really doesn't matter. Just apply. You have an outside shot at Harvard. If you succeed on the LSAT, you will get at least one CCN, probably more, and with a few $. If this admissions cycle is like the last, you will have a better shot at better schools than you would have had a few years ago. Chill.

[BigZuck]

It really doesn't matter. Just apply. You have an outside shot at Harvard. If you succeed on the LSAT, you will get at least one CCN, probably more, and with a few $. If this admissions cycle is like the last, you will have a better shot at better schools than you would have had a few years ago. Chill.

Necro

Also, the OP scored less than a 163 and is now zeroed in on UCI

In b4 Dre

[Dr. Dre]

[sinfiery]

It really doesn't matter. Just apply. You have an outside shot at Harvard. If you succeed on the LSAT, you will get at least one CCN, probably more, and with a few $. If this admissions cycle is like the last, you will have a better shot at better schools than you would have had a few years ago. Chill.

Necro

Also, the OP scored less than a 163 and is now zeroed in on UCI

In b4 Dre

Wtf? How is such a score difference even possible?

[francesfarmer]

It really doesn't matter. Just apply. You have an outside shot at Harvard. If you succeed on the LSAT, you will get at least one CCN, probably more, and with a few $. If this admissions cycle is like the last, you will have a better shot at better schools than you would have had a few years ago. Chill.

Necro

Also, the OP scored less than a 163 and is now zeroed in on UCI

In b4 Dre

Wtf? How is such a score difference even possible?

Maybe she was using old tests, or lying. Or she has horrible test anxiety.

I really love that this thread was revived.

[BigZuck]

It really doesn't matter. Just apply. You have an outside shot at Harvard. If you succeed on the LSAT, you will get at least one CCN, probably more, and with a few $. If this admissions cycle is like the last, you will have a better shot at better schools than you would have had a few years ago. Chill.

Necro

Also, the OP scored less than a 163 and is now zeroed in on UCI

In b4 Dre

Wtf? How is such a score difference even possible?

Hubris?

[PRgradBYU]

I really love that this thread was revived.

+1. Nice necro, Dre.

[09042014]

Why should your first two years be wiped out just because you transferred.

[jbagelboy]

not sure yale and harvard would take kindly to 1/2 of your UG experience being at a california community college either way. Some CC's are legit, but I took an IVC class once as a junior in high school. If you didn't get an A, you were really trying not to.

it's a good way to save money and transfer into the UC system for most purposes, but the highest law schools look for more academic rigor than the CA cc system can offer on its current budget

not that it matters since this thread was from like 8 months ago

[philepistemer]

Hey op, it still isn't too late to retake. I almost didn't retake my 16x LSAT despite the fact that I did way better on practice tests, but I did retake, and now I won't be going to a shitty law school next year.

[CyanIdes Of March]

From not scoring less than a 174/176 in nearly a month, to a 164 on test day (after scoffing at the idea that her test day performance wasn't a concern like they were for mere mortals). I hope she comes and gives use some input on what the hell happened. Were those 174s with extra time? Did she have a mental break down on test day? Did her self admitted poor hygiene/test obsession reach a all-consuming distraction? I need to know!