Subscription pricing
I've been studying for about a year and my last few PTs (PTs 60s and 70s) have been 163-167. Do you guys think there's any value in the earlier PTs (other than LG, of course)? I really want to take in June, and use the Fall as my fallback just in case.
I just want to know if it's worth spending time doing the earlier PTs (other than LG), because I don't know whether the test has changed drastically since then.
After taking a month off I'm ready to get back to it, I plan to take two per week at minimum, three maximum while doing full BR. I do want to take in June and I'm afraid it may be cutting it close in terms of time.
1
8 comments
Agreed. OP, quality over quantity. Especially since your averaging 163-167, you need to put emphasis on your individual weaknesses and improve those weaknesses by analyzing the PT's you do A-Z and Z-A.
I think that's doing too much. 2 days isn't enough time to fully analyze and fix the weaknesses between tests and likely 3 isn't either. You need to account for time to BR, return to the CC, and drill and review any weaknesses. A wise man once told me to think of PTs as juicy oranges; you want to make sure you squeeze out every drop of juice. That's nearly impossible to do if you're doing them every 2 days.
As long as you've done the full curriculum and you're BR'ing every single PT, reviewing every single question you get wrong along the way, and spacing the PT's out every 2-3 days, I'd say go H.A.M.!! But save 3-5 most recent for one to two weeks before the exam.
Definitely agree with above posters, doing too much will only distract you from addressing the issues you need to be focusing on. I'd say 1-30 the LG would be worth doing as drills but tbh you're better off restricting your PTs and spending all your time mastering concepts.
Another piece of advice I would give is to mix up your PTs. If you go in consecutive order or even do like 40-45 in one shot, you end up getting used to a particular style of LSAT and that's not a good idea. I did all of the LSATs consecutively and really struggled later. I ended up mixing them up, like 50-60-70,51-61-71, and that's definitely a better approach.
It's not that there's no value in early PTs, the problem here is that's just way too many on way too strict a schedule. You'll burn out and you won't have time between tests to study much. All those tests you're taking are going to expose lots of weaknesses. It's important to take the time to address those. With a strict 2/week schedule, you'll frequently be forced to PT again before you've addressed the issues from the last PT.
It is a common misconception that the more practice tests you take the better you will do on the lsat. I would focus more on mastering the technique for all the question types rather than doing a bulk of practice tests. Also, burnout is a serious issue in many test takers and binding yourself to a hectic personal PT schedule might be counterproductive.
I don't know which PT's you have done but if you want to do as much PT's as possible I would do PT 50 - 81 (considering you're taking June 2017).
Start maybe at 20 instead of at 1 would be my suggestion, unless you also want to keep doing the LG sections from 1-20 in which case, I say go for it. Keep in mind that you might have some off-days or will need to slow down to do thorough review and let yourself have sick days and let your mind have time to digest all of the information you've been absorbing.
I might be in the minority here but I do think there's a value in drilling anything -- even if it's just to maintain your score or to review fundamental material. You have a lot of time to get to June, and to bring your score up as much as possible. I think the next logical step in your studying (since you've been at it for a year and I assume you are finished with the CC) that you start to PT and if youre taking it in June then why not PT all of those exams?
people will tell you to save PT at the end and review the CC.haha