Page 1 of 1
3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:35 pm
by cphtexas
Hi all,
First time posting and long time browser... I'm planning on retaking the LSAT for a third time in October, but I'm not sure how much improvement on my LSAT I can expect. I've been consistently scoring 164-168 on practice tests but I'm trying to get over that hurdle into the 170s
Realistically, what are my chances at a T-14? If I can't improve much further, is a 167-168 v. 165 really going to make the difference? I'm not much interested in any schools outside the Top 20.
Also I'm working full-time...wondering if I should cut back on hours and dedicate this next month to studying as much as I can.
Any advice is greatly appreciated (be brutal)
Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:42 pm
by 180orRetake
do not retake unless you're consistently scoring >169.
these people are going to tell you to retake regardless lol. if you're pting in the range you mentioned, you're unlikely to add more than a point on test day. the difference between a 166 and a 165 is probably negligible in your case.
Post removed.
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:00 am
by Generally
Post removed.
Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 2:51 am
by Dcc617
cphtexas wrote:Hi all,
First time posting and long time browser... I'm planning on retaking the LSAT for a third time in October, but I'm not sure how much improvement on my LSAT I can expect. I've been consistently scoring 164-168 on practice tests but I'm trying to get over that hurdle into the 170s
Realistically, what are my chances at a T-14? If I can't improve much further, is a 167-168 v. 165 really going to make the difference? I'm not much interested in any schools outside the Top 20.
Also I'm working full-time...wondering if I should cut back on hours and dedicate this next month to studying as much as I can.
Any advice is greatly appreciated (be brutal)
168 is the median for several T14s. If you' can hit that you're at a way stronger position than 165, trust me. Of course, do the best you can, but hitting near the top of your PT range would be a big deal for you.
Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 4:38 pm
by Well Hung Jury
As DCC said, and to reiterate, yes those few points are worth it. However you should focus on PTing in the 170 range before retaking. Don't waste that last attempt. You have a shot at some of the T-14 if you can get a 168 on test day.
Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:05 pm
by Dcc617
I just noticed that the person telling you not to retake was 180orretake. Don't listen to anything that poster says. That poster is awful, and a troll.
Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 9:36 pm
by 180orRetake
Dcc617 wrote:I just noticed that the person telling you not to retake was 180orretake. Don't listen to anything that poster says. That poster is awful, and a troll.
and yet it looks like we gave the exact same advice, ya fucking retard

Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 11:39 pm
by Tiddlywinks
How big of a set back is it taking it in Dec instead of Oct? I'm pretty much in the same situation and wondering how much that late application will hurt me. I get having a better score will ultimately win out but I always thought late dec/early Jan is a big hit.
Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 11:58 pm
by Dcc617
Tiddlywinks wrote:How big of a set back is it taking it in Dec instead of Oct? I'm pretty much in the same situation and wondering how much that late application will hurt me. I get having a better score will ultimately win out but I always thought late dec/early Jan is a big hit.
Top 20 schools were accepting apps for this fall a few weeks ago. T14 medians are falling. Hold off for the best score you can get. Any bump you'd get from applying earlier is trumped by a higher score.
Re: 3.67/165 LSAT 2nd Take non-URM
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 12:11 pm
by cphtexas
Thanks for all the advice!! I am definitely aiming for October and I think that would be enough time to get to where I need to be... I just need to focus on fine tuning my LR and RC sections to get into that 170 range