- Joined
- Jan 2026
- Subscription
- Core
I would rather be canoeing
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
I have done the same, as I am sure many others have. I went down to a 154 from averaging a 160s and have been stuck at that plateau since. It is a part of the process everyone bombs it eventually. Can't win em all, just don't dwell on the stress, learn from the mistakes! You got this
Hey Everyone!
I'm hoping to hear from some people on how to break out of a plateau in the 160 range. I have done like 5 full lengths over the past month and a bit and I keep hovering in the 160-161 range despite me reviewing my mistakes and drilling my weaknesses. Is this a common occurrence? Is there any general advice that can be provided, or is it really dependent on me personally?
I've signed up for the August and October test dates. I am going to use my August attempt as a test run for the format and getting comfortable in the testing centre, and then hopefully my score will closer to 164-165 by the October date. I thought I would be able to hit 165 by August, but this plateau is holding me back and I just can't seem to shake it!
Any help or tips or comments are greatly appreciated. Goodluck to all the other August test takers this week!!!
I don't have a ton of great advice, mostly following so I can learn from others too. Hopefully it is some consolation that I among many others also are wondering the same things!
@nr I have August and October booked. Currently consistently getting a 160-161, and I hope to take the August one as a practice and get a feel for the environment, and then hopefully close my gap to 165 by October!
Hey Everyone!
I'm hoping to hear from some others who have gone through a similar plateau as me and provide some advice on what got them over the hurdle. I have been plateaued at the 160-161 range for about a month at this point, and I am looking for some tips to get over the hurdle to my goal of 165.
Recently, I have spent a lot of work on my LR scores, and have gone through the Loophole book as well as the 7sage content, and have transitioned to doing targeted drills on my highest priority and reviewing all my misses.
This is all fine and dandy, however, my RC scores seems to be lacking and I feel some improvement in this area would provide the best effort to return ratio. While my LR seems to hover from the -4 to -6 range, my RC is still around the -8 to -10 mark. It is where the misses come from that makes me think it is a good point to improve on.
What I mean by this, is that my RC scores tend to fluctuate greatly from passage to passage. Some passages that I read and understand well I do close to perfect if not perfect, but when the content is unfamiliar and difficult to understand in the heat of timed situations, I consistently get like half the questions right. The difference seems to be purely based on my comfort of the passage. Does anyone have advice, tips, or resources that helped improve this reading and understanding side of the LSAT? I went through the Mike Kim trainer RC sections, and it heavily focuses on structure and points of view, but I still end up bogged down wasting time on details that I need to understand for questions but don't. Does this naturally improve through repetition, or should I be targeting this weakness somehow?
Any tips would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!
I'm not sure how others are tolerating the studying, but for me personally, I feel like I am stuck in a perpetual "exam mode". During uni I got into this routine of during exams just locking in and doing nothing but studying for the few weeks during finals, and the stress of the LSAT has turned that mindset on for me kind of all the time. If I am doing things or taking time away for the LSAT it often feels like I am wasting precious study time. I have yet to hit my goal score, and have attempts in August and October booked. I am hoping the sacrifice of a few more months of not the greatest work-life-lsat balance will pay off, but who knows!
This is not meant to constitute as advice, as I hope others can maintain a more healthy balance, but I do want to show the non-perfect side of LSAT studying. There is often a bias in people who reply online and we don't often get the full picture from Internet forums
i'm having a hard time seeing how B is correct. the second half, "criminal law should not assign blame for any action", makes sense. it is the first half that is throwing me off and resulted in me crossing off this answer in a timed situation. i can loosely see how passage A author would think that free will does not exist (from the comments about how no part is independent and therefore free), but what about passage B? i can't seem to identify how passage B relates to the first part about "if free will does not exist". any help on other people's thought processes would be great thanks!
Hello LSAT community!
I am writing to inquire about the accuracy and reliability of the "PT equivalent" calculation that is shown for drills and sections. Obviously if the sample size is larger it'll be more accurate and representative, and so the full lengths are more accurate, but how accurate is the ratings for during individual PT sections done in drills?
I ask because it would be nice to know whether I can be using these a guide for my progress. If I am averaging these PT equivalent scores around 160 with the range usually between 155-165, are these to be taken as progress indicators where I can expect to score around a 160?
For context, I am aiming for a 165 in the August LSAT, had a diagnostic of 149, and did my first real PT this week and got a 159. I understand I need to do more PT to get a good idea of my progress, but that is also why I am curious if I can put any weight into the PT equivalent scores during drills as I get those scores more frequently than the full PT scores.
Any tips or comments on how you use this metric would be helpful!
For starters I'd like to resist the false dichotomy of focusing on improving speed OR accuracy. If your LSAT knowledge increase, and hence your accuracy, you will be able to identify and predict correct/wrong answers in less time. Generally people are recommended to focus on understanding first, and once accuracy is achieved, then speed can be prioritized. You can't really work on speed if you can't find the right answer even going slow.
Secondly, I'd like to inquire into your method of doing your practice tests. If you are rushing to get through the last few questions in a section because of timing, you are probably missing some points at the end that you could have gotten. What I mean by this is that you probably spent time on questions that were way beyond your reach of getting right, and that cost you the chance to work on a question later that you could've solved. For example, if a question has a difficulty where 170 scorers only have a 50% chance to get it correct, and you are scoring 155, then its probably best to just move past this question right from the second you see it. This allows you the time to attempt ALL of the questions, then once you have answered all the questions you think are reasonable, you can go back and work on the hard/possibly out of reach questions with the remaining time. This will help to not leave any points on the table. It is hard sometimes to identify what questions are these hard ones, but generally it is the passages that make you go "uhhh what are you even talking about". Just skip 'em and come back when you have time. This saves you potentially wasting time attempting questions that you didn't have good odds of answering in the first place.
For me personally, there's usually 1-2 questions that I flag as time wasters, and I deal with those at the end with the remaining time, knowing my odds of correctly answering is not great. Hope that helps!
@Aubrey.Raile hey there, it's my understanding typically people use the one by Ellen Cassidy (the green one), but I can't guarantee I'm correct. If you find out that the Cassidy one is the book you wish to use, she's currently in the final stages of creating her LR focused online course. I'm not sure if it is open for everyone yet, but as someone who purchased the book, I have been getting emails about her course opening in beta, so it may be something for you to look into more!
Take my advice with a grain of salt, as I probably have the same personal statement writing experience as you. To me, admissions probably sees to many applications that are along the lines of well I have law experience so law school here I come. It's not super unique and many people have it. That doesn't mean the experience is bad, I just would not recommend basing your whole PS on it. Admissions often openly express that the want unique PS, and you gave a second option for a PS that would be creative and personal to you specifically. That is miles ahead of your other idea imo. You can sprinkle in the fact you have law field experience, but it is not THE reason you are going to law school. Tell your story, not the story of a job you've had.