Hello all,
Me again. I'm starting PTs excessively early. I'm Blind Reviewing but not reviewing too intensively yet on incorrect questions. I'm a retaker so I have a base of knowledge and know my problem areas on the entirety of the LSAT but I'm not too far into my 7Sage course. I'm looking at October for a retake which is what I think will be honestly more than enough time to get to my target score of 170+. I work full-time and I know it will be very difficult for me to do 2-3 PTs a week when it gets close to game day. I took the June 2007 PT last month scored a 149 timed and 155 Blind review. I took PT 44-October 2004 this weekend. I got a 153 timed and 160 Blind Review. Now, that is higher than any of the PTs I took for preparing my first "real" LSAT in September and the September score was a 145 about average to what I was doing on PTs at the time. I never dreamed of seeing a 160 this early in my prep, even on BR. And I'm having a difficult time giving myself credit for improvement. Admittedly, its not huge but its an improvement nonetheless. Essentially what I am getting at is I've heard the older tests are easier and how indicative of improvement are the older tests? And furthermore, its just two tests that are better, should I consider consistency? I know I need more improvement but to see improvement is good I think, but I worry about giving myself any sense of false confidence. Any advice would be appreciated.