Hi! My name is Jacqueline and I scored a 173 on the June 2026 LSAT.
I self-studied for the LSAT while having a full-time job, as well as a non-traditional background. Oh wait, did I forget to mention that English isn't my first language?
Getting that dream score can seem out of reach for many. I can help you see how the test is designed, what it is intended to do. Understanding the test itself is essential in cracking that 170+, and it can help the process be as painless--or even a bit enjoyable--as possible! And my goal is precisely that.
Based in Seoul :)
Discussions
JacquelineMoon
Independent Tutor173 Scorer | KST/Asia Time Zone | Free Consultation | $45/hr
Hi everyone! I'm Jacqueline, and I'm currently accepting new LSAT students.
A little about me—I earned a 173 on the official LSAT this June after studying for less than a year, entirely through self-studying. I took my first official test in April, scored just under 170, and improved to a 173 on my second attempt in June.
What makes my journey a little different is that I prepared for the LSAT while having a full-time job. I also graduated from art school several years ago, so I was returning to academic reading and logical reasoning after a long break. On top of that, English isn't my first language, so I know what it's like to spend extra time working through dense LR stimuli and RC passages before they start to feel natural.
Because of that, I especially enjoy working with students who:
are balancing a full-time job or other major commitments;
are coming from a "nontraditional" background;
haven't been in school for several years; or
simply aren't sure where to begin.
My Approach
The LSAT isn't just about doing more practice questions—it's about learning how to think like the test.
Rather than relying on generic study plans, I focus on helping students understand why the test works the way it does and build efficient study habits that fit their schedules. We'll work together to:
build a realistic study plan based on your timeline and commitments;
strengthen your Logical Reasoning fundamentals and develop a consistent approach to each question type;
review mistakes to identify patterns instead of simply checking the correct answer;
develop efficient review habits and study routines that maximize limited study time; and
build confidence so you know exactly what you're looking for on test day.
Since I self-studied while working full-time, I'm also happy to share the strategies, routines, and productivity tips that helped me stay consistent without burning out.
Availability
I'm based in Korea Standard Time (KST / UTC+9), making me a great fit for students in Korea, Singapore, Japan, Australia, and other Asia-Pacific time zones. I'm also happy to work with students in North America if our schedules align.
Free introductory consultation available.
If you think we'd be a good fit—or even if you just have questions about the LSAT—I'd love to hear from you. Feel free to send me a message!
AC (C) does make sense but it also requires you to know or infer that the virus will be passed down in the same location. And I used to think I simply won't be able to get this sort of questions right ("how the f am I supposed to know?!"), but I'm slowly getting the subtle hints and traps the LSAT writers make that I'm more capable of picking the right answer choice.
With this question specifically, AC (A) and (C) seem like what most people had narrowed down to. As mentioned above, picking (C) without outside knowledge can feel super uncomfortable; however, I can now kind of see how (A) is a typical trap answer choice. It sounds attractive and relevant, but if deciphered correctly, you can also realize that it isn't relevant. You have to think about what is the core substance of the author's argument. The author thinks hepadnavirus is at least as old as the mentioned species' divergence based on the fact that it is present in the same location for each species. So you need to look for an AC that adds to such premise and therefore strengthens the argument. If boiled down to that, I think it is much easier to spot the best AC.
Took a quick look at the ACs and made the erroneous judgement that (A) pointed to a local involvement (I think the last sentence stating "local involvement AT ALL LEVELS" made it even trickier to identify/remember that the 'local involvement' the author discussed in the passage was aspects like local manufacturing, production, etc.) and that (B) pointed to an example of foreign involvement.
Not sure how to avoid this type of mistake next time, definitely seems like one of those questions I only realize I had chosen the wrong answer after the answer is revealed...
@tsandin I agree! But I guess if you read further into the passage it doesn't say 'glass flowing downwards' itself is a myth but that glass flowing downwards is the reason that windows are ripply in old buildings.
@JacquelineMoon It's like, sometimes you have to scrutinize the wording super carefully, and sometimes you just can't overthink. :P
I was confused because the question asked for an essential characteristic of Western ontology, and I read the part of the passage like it was specifically talking A Western ontology of many Western ontologies, I did not know the definition of ontology, and how that specific one was based on self-expression. With that interpretation, it was hard to choose (C) as the correct answer.
they circled the question in the blind review but i trusted myself and chose the same correct answer again in the br. lets goooo
A couple months back when I started studying for the LSAT and first came across this section, my brain just rejected to comprehend the concept so I essentially just skimmed it.
Obviously, I got ripped apart by LR question types like MBT and Parallel so right now I'm revisiting this lesson to really learn it.
And WOW, I ACTUALLY understand everything. I can't wait to get back to my LR training and see how much better I can do. I literally hear things click in my brain remembering some LR questions I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND to save my life!!!
I saw some comments that were confused about how this actually applied to the LSAT questions. I get the confusion and how it's really easy to lose motivation/interest. So I'm leaving this comment to share my experience. Everyone who's going through this step in their LSAT studying journey, hang in there. I hope everyone gets the results they want in the end :)
@Jcruzmed Hey, so the second example is wrong. Being a Jedi is sufficient to use the force, but not necessary to use the force. Jedi is a subset in the superset of users of force. Hope this helps!
Was down to C and E.
Thought E wasn't good enough of an answer--I thought the argument failed to consider that having the best players DOES NOT guarantee your team will be the best, and so you don't know if your team is the most likely to win the championship. And the way I translated E into the stimulus was that it was pointing at the weakness of the premise that the best team is most likely to win and only at that weakness.
I thought C was better targeted at not only the weird premise but also the sub-conclusion of that team being the best team.
Truthfully, both sucked and I still don't think E is good enough of an answer :p
Oh this one did not click for me at all. Chose A and then B in BR.
@littlehoot Yup! (A) should be written the other way around to be correct. Written as is, if an individual's confidence level in their own economic situation affected how they perceive reports about the overall state of the economy, the economist could still be right.
Got this right but was like 2 minutes over time because of how horribly worded the answer choice was
oh this LR section....