And if I'm being honest, I never looked back and reviewed my WAJ. But I do think the act of doing it was incredibly helpful. It forced me to think critically about how I take the test. Around that time, I decided to stop focusing on the data in the analytics and instead just focus on the questions I got wrong, why they were wrong, why I chose them, and then hoping that that level of engagement would lead to better judgment.

I think the analytics are amazing and can be very helpful, but if you are like me and have a significant gap between PT/section scores and BR scores, then overfocusing on analytics may detract from where your focus can be better used, which for me was just doing more timed sections. I spent a lot of time trying to increase the scores of individual tags, but really where my weakness was was just testing performance and time pressure leading to poorer choices. And so practicing the timing more was where I would better serve myself.

Again, not trying to be prescriptive in my advice. This is just what I did, and I think it served me. Feel free to message me if you relate to any of this and want to talk through anything! I'm not a tutor, but I'm happy to lend an ear.

For the 3 or so months leading up to June, I had an average PT of 170. I was doing more sections than anything else, averaging -2 on LR and -4 on RC.

Since June, my RC has improved slightly, I now average -2 LR and -3 RC. Because of this slight RC improvement, my average PT since June did improve slightly, at 171.

But I actually stopped drilling topics and just shifted to testing on sections. I felt like my topic-based comprehension level was really high. My BR PT scores were consistently 175-180, and -0 or 1 per section. Since my comprehension was really high, I realized drilling wasn't super helpful, and switched my approach around May to be exclusively doing timed sections and an occasional PT every 3ish weeks. That was very helpful for me! Instead of wasting time on content review, I was focused on just flexing the muscle of timed sections. I also always did a WAJ for every section/PT.

This may seem counterintuitive, but I actually took a good amount of time off between these two tests. I work full time and study both weekend days, and several nights after work. After doing that for the better part of a year, I was feeling really wiped out this summer and decided to start saying yes to plans, going on some weekend camping trips, taking better care of myself, and just giving myself time to fill up my non-LSAT cup. I can't say for sure whether that contributed to my September score, but I can say that I approached the September test in a much happier and well-rounded place. I continued to study during the week, but the 3 weekends before the exam, I was out of town, with friends, in nature. I felt so much lighter and more grounded. And my PTs/drilling accuracy were in the exact same place as before the June exam. I didn't know anything more. I have studied for over a year. My comprehension is very strong and hasn't wavered. I think that because those things are all true for me, allowing myself to instead just slow down and chill out really set me up for success for that last test.

That said, if your drilling accuracy isn't where it needs to be and your PTs are consistently lower than you want, then I would definitely focus on the content itself. But if you were like me and your stats were in a good place, but you underperformed on test day, you may benefit from going easy on yourself and investing time/energy into non-LSAT things that boost your mood and help you feel grounded.

Thank you! I'm sure you will. Just keep going. And if you lose steam, don't be hard on yourself, just start again.

Thank you! And hell yeah - you got this!!!

Thank you kind stranger!! Wishing you the best (:

I did the exact same thing!! Like exactly the same thing of suddenly taking the test differently and being overly cautious, wasting time.

I took the June test, got 6 below my average PT and thought it was just test day nerves. Then I took the September test and felt significantly less nervous, but I thought it still went the exact same way. It was not just nerves, I was actually taking the test differently. I am lucky to say that my September test went much better. But, I only found that out this morning.

Since the test, I changed my study approach to account for this. I categorize questions as Green, Yellow, or Red. When a I feel confident about the answer I chose and my ability to cross out the rest, it's green and I move on. I don't flag it, write anything down, or double check. I move on. If I can confidently elimiate three answer choices, but don't feel confident with my choice between the remaining two, then I chose one, leave the other answer choice open (not crossed out), I flag the question, and I write a "Y" column on my scatch paper, with the question number listed below it. When I feel completely stumped on a question, either between 3 answer choices, or worse case, any could be it, I make my best guess, flag it, and then write the number down below the "R" column. These are red.

Then, hopefully by being more decisive and not wasting time on the easy (green) questions, nor wasting too much time on the yellow and reds, I have some extra time at the end. With this extra time, I go first to the yellow questions. These are the highest value quesitons, the ones I have the most likely chance to get right. I give extra time to those and hopefully get through them all. If I have any extra time, that is when I go to red.

I've put this method to practice for a few weeks and it has helped so much. Even though this method is responding to my test day taking, which is different than my practice test taking at home, the goal is that the usefulness of the method will carry over and prevent me from wasting time on test day by approaching the test with too much caution.

I hope this helps!

I had the exact same gut. I was between C and D, liked C better, but the word "significant" ultimately threw me off and I chose D.

@LSATTAKER for real

@IvonneRosario Thanks for hearing me out and for your thoughtful response. I hope to see the feature as I continue studying.

"Recent past" really through me off; it is so vague. We are interested specifically in change in income over 5 years time. It is not clear that recent past includes only last 5 years. I selected D and than unselected it because I thought well, if recent past could mean 7 years, then their income could have dropped again by 5 years ago and then increased in that time. Hate how vague this is.

Lol, I got this one wrong because I made the same error as Alex. This was a really good question.

This one really bothered me. We are told that if it is cultivated, than people using it discovered agriculture before anyone else did. And we are told if not cultivated (wild), than people using it ate a wider variety of wild plants than any other people did. The correct AC is B which says "The people who occupied the site used some plants in ways that no other people did at that time." This is not necessarily true. Sure, if cultivated they used it in a way noone else did, by cultivating. But if uncultivated (wild), we don't know that no other people used plants in the way these people did. We just know they ate a wider variety than others, but that doesn't mean there is a single plant they ate that wasn't also being eaten by other people at the time. I really don't understand how that is correct... ugh

@SirHarvey I completely agree. This one pisses me off so much. Same reason AC C is wrong would make AC E wrong.

Hey! I am currently scoring in mid-160s and hoping to get to mid-170s. I am based in socal, but would love to join virtually!(:

@StevenShan Thank you! I completely agree. I really hated this one

@MaxThompson Super helpful! Thank you. I chose C but felt like D also worked, just a bit weaker. This explanation helped me shake that doubt.

@twolfson This is by far the most helpful comment, more than the video explanations. Thank you fr