Self-paced
Hi guys!
I've been studying since February. I started with a 156 diagnostic and have a goal score of 172+, and I just took the June test (planning on taking it again in August).
I am just so stuck on these practice tests. I got a 170 in late April, so I thought I was on an upward trend, but the six PTs I've taken since have all been between 166-168 (175+ on the BR). I know it's good that I'm consistently in that range, but I can't seem to break the 170s and I'm starting to wonder if I've hit my limit for the August test.
I've been studying for about an hour a day with drills focused on my weakest question types and fixing my timing. I felt SO good this past week about my progress, was consistently getting perfect scores on untimed and timed drills, and it didn't translate at all to my PT. There's not really a consistent pattern to what I'm getting wrong.
Has anyone experienced this and been able to improve? Is there any change in study technique I should consider?
5
3 comments
Hi! First off, I want to reassure you that this definitely doesn’t mean you’ve hit your limit. Jumping from a 156 diagnostic to consistently scoring in the 166–168 range is a huge accomplishment! The fact that your Blind Review is 175+ is a really positive sign. That usually tells us your understanding is solid, and it’s just something about timing, endurance, confidence, or making decisions under pressure that’s holding your timed score back from your true potential.
One thing I’d watch out for is leaning too much on isolated drills. Drills are helpful, but they don’t always feel the same as a full practice test. When you’re drilling, you usually know what kind of question is coming, you’re ready for that specific skill, and you’re less likely to get tired. But a full PT throws everything at you at once, so it really tests your ability to recognize question types, manage your pacing, keep up your endurance, and bounce back after tough questions. If you’re finding that drills are going well but your PT scores aren’t moving, I’d recommend shifting some of your study time to reviewing full timed sections instead of just drilling your weak spots.
Since you mentioned there isn’t an obvious pattern to what you’re missing, I’d suggest tracking your mistakes by the type of error, not just by LSAT question type. For example, ask yourself: Did I misread the conclusion? Did I pick an answer that was too strong? Did I miss the gap in the argument? Did I rush through the last few questions? Did I spend too long on a tough question and lose focus after? Sometimes the real pattern isn’t “I’m bad at flaw questions,” but something like “I’m picking answers that are too extreme” or “I’m not resetting after a hard question.”
I’d also recommend reviewing questions you got right but weren’t totally confident about. At the 166–168 level, most improvement comes not from learning brand-new concepts, but from tightening up on the questions where you were between two answers, guessed correctly, or lost time.
I’d treat this plateau as a sign that your foundation is strong, and now it’s just about refining your timed process. The goal at this stage isn’t just to do more questions, but to use your PT review to pinpoint the exact moment your reasoning went off track.
I experienced this for a long time. Prioritizing rest days and changing up your routine are good non-study ways to try to shake a plateau. Sometimes when studying and drilling don’t help you break through, other processes can be adjusted!
I also support heavily investing time into wrong answer journaling to identify exactly what errors keep popping up for you. This can help tailor your study plan beyond just question types!
Have you tried journaling during blind review? I find it very helpful: during blind review, when you encounter a question that you suspect you got wrong on the first go or simply found trippy, jot down (somewhere like in the notes tab) why you think an answer is correct and the rest are wrong. Then, after submitting your blind review, regardless of if you got the question right or wrong, review the explanations provided and compare then to the ones you wrote.