I'm also pretty late here, but I wanted to recommend Kurt Pitzer from 7Sage! Apart from being a tremendous editor, Kurt was very approachable, and easy to work with. He was genuinely interested in what I had to say and write, and he helped me find an appropriate voice for my essays. He responded promptly, and was always encouraging!

Hiring an admission consultant is expensive, and I understand that, for many people, it can be extremely difficult to budget-in. It's one of the many ways the admissions process disadvantages those of low-income backgrounds. But if you can find a way to afford it, I would highly recommend doing so. You owe it to yourself to create the best application you can create! Admission to a great law school, or receiving a huge scholarship can change your life, and I think that crafting a strong, cohesive narrative through your essays/resume is a large part of the admissions decision process.

With the help of Kurt, I was admitted to Stanford, Harvard, Chicago, NYU, and a few other phenomenal law schools. I suppose that there's no way to know if my cycle would have been different without an admissions consultant, but I have absolutely no regrets!

@ said:

Wow! Congrats on that score though! Would you be able to share your tips as to how you got consistently less than 5 wrong? I am struggling with LR so much right now and stuck in the 60s

Sure! I used to really struggle with LR when I was scoring in the mid 150s. I used to take section after section but inevitably score only a -9 or so. Then, my instructor (I was taking an in-person class with BP) told me that instead of speeding up, or focusing on timing at all, I need to slow down and instead aim to not finish the section. So instead of attempting 26 and getting 17 correct, I should attempt 20 or 21. I took his advice and my score literally jumped 8 points overnight (158 --> 166). After a little more practice to gain speed, I was probably consistently scoring -5 per section.

To get to where I am now, I focused in on the question types I was getting wrong, which for me were strengthens, weakens, sufficients, and necessaries. I drilled these question types untimed, really trying to focus in on the process of how to answer these questions. With more practice I was slowly able to answer them more and more accurately. But now I'm stuck at -3. If I ever break the plateau I'll be sure to let you know! I hope this helps!

@ said:

I think there are two things that really helped me.

Writing out the explanations for every LR question I got wrong, explaining why the correct answer was correct and why the others weren't (especially important when I was down to two answers and picked the wrong one like you're doing). I kept these all in a spreadsheet, organized by question type, which is important because...

Using the analytics tracker and becoming more aware of what question types I was consistently getting wrong was huge for me. I realized I was getting the same types of questions wrong over and over again. It allowed me to see patterns in my thinking that led to those errors and patterns in the questions that made it easier to catch the correct answer. I also started writing the question type (i.e. "Flaw") next to those questions when I came across them in my section practice, which helped me signal to my brain that I needed to pay extra attention to this question. Finally, I took screenshots/photos on my phone of every LR question I got wrong, grouped them by question type, and would scroll through them on my phone or computer when I had a spare minute and review the logic in my head.

That's amazing dedication! I've tried doing that before (writing out explanations for LR questions I got wrong). I did it for about 8 PTs, but then gave up, because I wasn't sure if it was helping. I found it really really difficult to do and to be positive about. When you were doing it, did you feel like it was actively helping you become better at LR? Were your explanations very detailed, or were they abstract? And when you did have an explanation, how did you make sure that you didn't make the same mistake again next time? I felt like I didn't know how to use the explanations I wrote out to help me correct the same mistakes.

@ said:

Seems like we may have different issues but my biggest problem was timing. If i finished a section i would get to -3 across two lrs easily. But i ran out of time. So i did what the folks at lsathacks suggested which was skim the acs first rather than diving into each one.

The lsat trainer has been the key to my success in lr though. I would use their methods and when i brd i would review the question type i got wrong in the book and in the CC

I also developed a strategy for what to do when i was down to two answer choices. I have a mapped out process that i execute in those situations, theres some contextual variability but it mostly stays the same. The key when you get down to two answer choices is to get down and dirty. Get into the specifics of the stimulus and see if you properly identified the conclusion or if you missed a key modifier. If the two acs are similiar find out what the difference is between them and how does that relate to the question stem and stimulus.

Thanks for your response Michael! I tend to struggle with timing too, though I finish all questions on almost every LR section. My problem with timing is more the mental panic it gives me halfway through the section. Like if Q13 takes me 2 mins, I'll panic and check the watch, and I'll rush through the next 5 questions and end up unnecessarily dropping 2 points. I've used the LSAT trainer before, and it did help me get in that critical thinking mindset. And I'm definitely going to try your strategy for 2 appealing answer choices. I suspect I'm too hesitant to get down to small details because of my fear of running out of time, but that's probably the way to the get the Q correct. Thanks again for the advice!

Hi! I'm not sure if I can offer much more other than encouraging you not to feel disheartened! 152 after just 2 months of studying is not cause for concern at all. Just so you can relate -- on my first PT I got a 154, then after 2 months of studying I dropped to a 152! Yesterday I found out that I got a 173 on the June LSAT. However, I remember feeling so dejected and hopeless on days when I didn't score what I wanted on my PTs, so I really do empathize with you. I just wanted to comment to say that you're not in a bad place, and that over time it will definitely improve.

Concerning specific study techniques, here are 2 pieces of advice that helped me jump from mid-150s to mid-160s. (1) Unless you are getting everything correct, don't try to answer every single question. If you're getting 16/25 on LR, stop attempting 25; try 19 and try to get 18/19 correct; once you've got that down, try 20, then 22, and so on. This applies to games and passages too! (2) Take the earlier PTs (1-35) and do them untimed. I really underestimated the benefit of doing full sections untimed until I forced myself to do them!

I hope this helps at least a little! You got this!

I think it depends on whether you find it difficult to get going at 8:30 in the morning. I personally do, so I did 1 easy passage, 1 easy game, and about 5 or 6 easier LR questions before leaving for the test center. But if you are the type who can hit the ground running in section 1, I don't think it's a big deal. I agree with MIT_2017 - it's more important to try and feel relaxed.

@.Y. Ping - thank you very much! It would have been very difficult without 7Sage!

@ Hey! Thanks for your comment. Well I hope to get into a T6 school, and of course HLS has been a dream since like day 1 of undergrad.

@ Hi! I think @ attached the appropriate link to the memory method. But what in particular really helped me was doing the memory method untimed over and over again. Being able to abstract and identify what's going on structurally is invaluable for RC success, and it's easier to hone those skills without time pressure.

@ Thanks so much for your comment! I guess my LSAT journey was kind of weird -- I started at Blueprint, took the class once and improved like 1 point (154 to 155). I then basically ignored the LSAT for a full year before taking the Blueprint class again, but this time I increased from 154 to a 166. I then got stuck in the high 160s for so long, probably for 7 months. But in the last 3 months of my study stuff clicked I was able to constantly score over 173. So I guess technically it took me around 2 years of studying, but with like a 1 year hiatus in between.

@ Thank you for your message! Your BR scores on those 2 recent tests suggest that you understand a lot of the content, which is great! I think your plan makes sense, assuming that you are okay reporting a cancelled score to those T14 schools. Completing the CC is probably essential (though I can't say for certain because my LG approach came from Blueprint) and drilling is a good idea. However, I think it's important to review intensively after drilling. For every game that didn't go how I wanted, I would review my process for that game ASAP and also print out an extra copy or two to do again 3 or 4 days later. As for how long it may take to reach your 170 goal -- it's really really hard to say. It took a long time for me. I was stuck in the high 150s for more than a year (though to be fair during most of that year I wasn't actively studying the LSAT). Then again a plateau at around 165, then again at 168. My jump to the 170s only came around 2 months before the June LSAT. But I also know other people who were getting 170 scores after only 4 months of study. It really depends. Sorry I can't provide a better answer!