One thing that I’ve done to deal with the stress of timed sections is getting really, really comfortable with the 35 minute time limit. I’ve done so many timed sections now that I know exactly where I should be at important time markers (which depend on what type of section I’m doing). I’ve even taken to studying and working in 35-minute “pomodoros” so I now almost don’t need a timer to know when 35 minutes is up.
For an example of important time markers, I glance at my watch after doing the 10th LR question, and I know that I should be around the 10-minute mark. Even being 1 minute over means I’ve got to push a little harder.
I learned a lot about how I was progressing through sections by keeping track of how long it took me to complete each game in LG, each passage in RC, and first 10/first 15 questions in LR. I do that every time I’m drilling sections, then when I take a real PT or on test day itself I have a very good feeling for where I should be in each section at any given time.
@ is asking some great questions.
I dropped in here because “am I deluding myself” is a question I’ve asked myself many, many times during my LSAT journey. I’m in a similar spot to you- non-traditional, lower than ideal GPA, working full time, wanting to move on in life.
What kept me going in the 12 months it took me to go from 163 (first post-CC diagnostic) to 175 (official score) was the incremental progress I saw along the way. I did my best to not allow variations from one section or one PT to the next to bring me down, instead always focusing on my rolling 5-PT average. Since that number slowly and consistently went up, I at least had hope that I was not deluding myself in reaching for a lofty goal.
If you’re not moving in the right direction, then you need to ask yourself if you’ve reached your limit or if you need to seriously re-think your approach.
It seems like K-JDs are getting hit particularly hard in this more competitive cycle. Schools have the option of increasing their medians, taking larger classes, and/or focusing on soft factors like work experience in composing their classes. I’m not K-JD, but I’m definitely modifying my expectations for when I apply next cycle after seeing the results of people with much better numbers than me this year.
Something that I rarely seen discussed when the question of when to sit the exam for the first time is brought up is the possibility that the experience of sitting the exam could have a positive influence on future takes.
Carlos is wondering whether he should take the exam in June or wait until September. I faced a similar choice, and I felt (this is totally subjective) that the process of going through the real test experience helped boost my eventual score. That was partly due to taking my studies more seriously because of the limited time frame, and also partly due to being more comfortable with test day logistics.
In my case, I think the experience I gained from taking the exam before I was fully prepared was worth at least one point on my last take. While there may be a slight advantage to having fewer takes rather than more, I think that only applies to comparing candidates with the exact same LSAT score (170 in 3 takes vs 170 in one take) and would never make up for even a 1 point difference (170 in 3 takes vs 169 in one take).
I will be 36, 14 years out of college with a variety of work experience having nothing to do with the law. I teach high school and my future classmates will be much closer in age to my students than to me. Awkward...
@ said:
I do agree that if you averaging in the low 170s on PTs, you should bring it up so that you can get a 175 plus on the exam. At least based on LSN, everyone who got a hamilton or near full tuition had 176 plus. 175 recieced aid from columbia but not as much as the 176 plus crowd.
This is one of the main reasons I'm retaking a 175. The potential boost in scholarship from hitting 176+ is enough to keep me grinding it out for another 2 months.
@ I was destroyed by RC on my first official LSAT, so I made it my main focus for a while and was able to make great progress.
I read the RC advice in both the LSAT Trainer and the Manhattan book. I think they both do a good job of highlighting the need to read for structure.
I used 7sage’s “memory method” while drilling individual passages. That involves reading the passage straight through, turning the page, writing out a brief summary of each paragraph (think a few words, not a few sentences), then returning to the passage and questions. It’s a little bit tedious, but I did a ton of passages where I didn’t worry much about time, just doing those summaries (so the structure is crystal clear before you hit the questions) and focusing on 100% accuracy.
When it came to doing full sections, I made sure to keep track of the time that I spent on each passage. I noticed that there was often just one question (or two) that was an incredible time sink, which would lead to serious time pressure later in the section. Being aware of this issue helped me recognize those questions and skip them, leaving them for the end if I have time. I’m comfortable with skipping 1 or 2 time sink questions because it means getting to all of the questions I have a good chance at answering correctly, and I almost always have time to at least take a crack at the question(s) I’ve skipped.
Finally, I experimented a fair amount with strategy on this section. I went from fairly heavy notation to almost none, and all of the drilling that I did with 7sage’s method helped me automatically do a low-resolution summary of the passage while reading. For a while I kept track of how long it took to read the passage, and I found a balance between reading quickly while being able to build that summary in my head. Knowing whether I was taking 2:30 or 4:30 on my first read through the passage really helped me understand where my time issues were coming from. My natural reading pace is 4:30, but I realized I could glean all of the relevant information by pushing through in about 2:30 (but not less).
I now average -1 on timed PTs, and improvement on RC alone accounts for most of the difference between my first official score (169) and my most recent (175). I’ve heard plenty of people say that RC is tough to make progress on, but after all of those steps I took I was happy to see 2 RC sections on my last test day. The nightmare of my first test helped me achieve a dream outcome on my last one.
Going from your September 2016 score to your current average is already a fantastic achievement. I hope you keep pushing and reach your goal. Good luck!
@ I don’t see that having a significant impact, especially as soon as next year. It would also depend on what tier law school you’re looking at. The GRE is a big change because high ranking schools are accepting it, which in my opinion makes it more likely that there will be a “trickle down” effect of many more schools accepting it in the near future. It’s highly unlikely that any top schools will do away with tests altogether, so I don’t expect the same impact as the GRE has had.
@ I agree that the increase in the number of high scorers is not likely the result of a “Trump Bump” (apart from the normal increase in high scorers that would be expected from a larger applicant pool overall). Spivey mentions that the number of high scorers often oscillates year to year, though as far as I know he doesn’t give an explanation for that. Something that I could see magnifying that effect this year in particular is a few changes in the admissions process that may have motivated some people sitting on a high score to use it this cycle rather than wait. LSAT scores are good for 5 years, and applicants looking at the number of schools accepting the GRE and the switch to unlimited LSAT takes could reasonably decide that a high LSAT score should be used sooner rather than later.
It will be interesting to see how things turn out next cycle. I would not be surprised to see a significant number of applicants from this cycle with great numbers and disappointing results try their luck again, which ironically would only make next cycle more competitive.
@ said:
Hi @ !
Unfortunately, there isn’t a way to see it. You have to put a PT into the Analytics to see the section difficulty.
@ said:
You can just submit a blank scantron, go to your analytics to see the section difficulty, and then delete the exam off of your analytics.
This is what I do too!
I will do that, thank you!
@ Typo! I’m looking to see this info for individual sections that I haven’t taken as PTs or graded. So if I’ve taken PT68 and graded it, I see the difficulty of each section under LSAT Analytics. If I’m just using PT69 for individual section drilling (and don’t want to mess up my analytics), I’d like to be able to find that info.
In my LSAT analytics I’m able to see the difficulty (on a scale of one to five) of individual sections that I’ve taken as PTs and graded. Is there any way to see that information for individual sections that I have taken as PTs or graded?
I’ve benefited greatly from the 7sage course and community, so I’d like to contribute a few lessons learned from this all-too-often infuriating process.
I did minimal research before going all-in on 7sage in March 2017. The design of the course and the feedback from previous students just clicked instantly, so I didn’t hesitate.
I tried to use the June ‘07 test as a diagnostic, but I found that I was so lost when doing the logic games that I just gave up. I imagine I would have been in the 150s at best at that time.
I went through the vast majority of the CC from March-June before taking my first PT. I scored a 163 on PT 36 (timed, 4 sections). I was aiming for 175+ from the beginning to make up for a relatively low GPA (for top schools at least), so I knew I had a good deal of work ahead of me.
I studied an average of 20 hours per week (2-3 hours per work day and 5-10 hours on the weekend) from July through February. That was a combination of finishing the CC, consulting outside resources, drilling/foolproofing, and timed sections and PTs.
I signed up for the September 2017 exam before I was PTing in my desired range because I thought I would make progress more quickly on games than I did. I was really struggling with games overall, but I ended up doing fine on games and getting MURDERED by RC for a 169.
I learned from that experience and dove right into prep for December. I made a lot of progress, but I was studying right up until test day on top of my full time job and ended up mis-bubbling (probably due to exhaustion) for a 167. I moped for a day before resolving to learn from that experience, too.
I kept on working on my weaknesses and focused more on realistic test-day conditions. My PT average slowly crept up to 174 by February, and after taking the whole week before the exam off from anything LSAT-related I lucked out a bit and scored 175, 1 point above my average.
Here are a few things I learned along the way:
Saying that you can do all the problems but just have trouble with timing is like a sprinter saying they would have won the race if they had just gone a bit faster.
There is plenty of value in doing untimed studying and drills when learning the fundamentals. However, it’s important to transition to strict timed conditions as soon as possible, because how you deal with the time constraint is just as important as how well you understand any of the concepts that are being tested.
For an 8 month period I put the LSAT before work, family, friends, fitness, and (especially) recreation.
Getting 20 hours of LSAT prep on top of a 40-hour work week and the rest of daily life was not easy. Everything else went into maintenance mode. I guarded my time religiously- no extra assignments at work, one night out with my partner per week, limited time at the gym, no television, and very little of the reading that I typically enjoy.
20 hours of LSAT prep is not the equivalent of a part-time job in terms of energy- it’s much, much more. After a 35-minute logic games section, especially when I was struggling with them more, I would practically be gasping for breath. That level of focus and concentration is required for me to perform at my best, but it’s also extremely draining.
I used toggl, an online time tracker, to track the amount of time I was actually spending on LSAT prep down to the minute. I also tracked other areas of my life so I could see where I could carve out more time for my #1 priority.
I’ve read that the LSAT is as much a test of emotions as it is of intelligence, and that strikes me as true in my case. Putting in hours and hours and hours of prep over weeks and months only to see miniscule improvement (or even regression like when I went from 169 to 167) will make you question your sanity.
Nothing in my life made it reasonable to presume that I would eventually hit 175. I didn’t score that high on the SAT, I did ok in college, and I’ve been out of school for more than a decade. I was just hoping that I could get there, and that took an awful lot of faith.
Rather than get hung up on any particular section or PT, I focused on slow, steady improvement. I took it on faith that if I put in the time and studied the right way, I would get better at the test. I paid particular attention to my PT average over my previous 5 PTs, and the analytics from 7sage made it easy to know where I should be focusing my time (both between LR, LG, and RC and even down to what question types).
I enjoyed the CC and benefited from it greatly. Once I had the basics down, I got the most benefit from taking full, timed sections and, especially, 5-section PTs under test day conditions, followed by Blind Review.
If I could change one thing about my approach, I would have taken more 5-section PTs using the 7sage proctor. Mental (and even physical) fatigue is a real barrier to performing your best on test day, and that didn’t really sink in for me until I was preparing for my 3rd take.
I think the teaching methodology employed by 7sage is absolutely fantastic. So many times during my study I chose to accept 7sage’s approach without fully understanding at the time why it was necessary. Blind Review, Foolproofing games, and the focus on language and grammar are 3 good examples.
At the same time, no group course will be perfect for any given individual. I supplemented 7sage’s course with a number of LSAT books, partly because I wanted to add a different learning modality but also to fill in some gaps in my understanding. I don’t know if I should mention those resources here, but they probably made up 10-20% of my study and 7sage the vast majority.
I also went against the typical advice of only signing up for the exam when you’re PTing at or above your goal score. I did so because I wanted to learn from the test experience itself, and also because there is a fairly significant range of scores that are possible at any given level of ability, and there’s always the chance that you’ll score at the top or bottom of that range.
I took the test 3 times. Once I was right on my PT average (169/169), once I was well below it (167/172), and once I was just above it (175/174). It’s possible that I could have hit the mark on my 2nd test, and it’s also possible that I could have missed the mark on my 3rd test. There’s no way to account for every single variable that determines your score on test day, so I chose to give myself more chances and that paid off.
I think I’m also going against conventional wisdom by re-taking the exam for a 4th time in June. Most of what I’ve read online says that being at or above a school’s 75th (as 175 is for every school) is all that matters, but I see a material difference in outcomes for people with my GPA and a 175 vs 176-180, so I’m giving it one more shot. No ragrets and all that.
Well, I’ve got a PT to review so I’ll wrap things up here. Sorry if I rambled a bit, I’m still coming to grips with a life-changing score. Happy to answer any questions. Best of luck to everyone just starting out or still grinding away!
@ Thank you! I gave up on my real diagnostic because I just couldn't do the games. After going through the core curriculum my first PT was a 163, then it took me 8 months of studying 20 hours per week and 28 more PTs to reach a 174 PT average.
I think it depends on how much value you place on Yale vs other options. If Yale is clearly your top choice, then a first-take 173 is golden (congrats on a great score, btw). If you would be tempted by something like a Hamilton then there is a good argument for trying for a higher score.
I feel like I’m just waking up from a fever dream (probably because I have a pretty bad fever right now). After scoring below my PT average in September and December and not feeling great coming out of the February exam, I actually scored 1 point above my PT average and reached the goal I set for myself when I signed up for 7sage one year ago: 175!
@ I signed up for my LSAC account in December 2005 and just achieved my goal score in February 2018. Good luck!
To answer the question, I took it in September and December 2017, February 2018, and will take one more crack at it in June (4 times in total).
I’m in SW China so I chose to travel to Thailand instead of the centers located in China, but I haven’t heard anything negative about taking the LSAT in China. The entire experience is very standardized and I’m sure China is no exception. I would recommend focusing on your own logistics- where will you be the most comfortable, where can you find a decent place to stay, etc. Also, make sure you look at the test dates carefully- some centers only offer the LSAT twice per year. I made sure to reserve a spot early since it’s not like there’s another location in the next town over.
@ I'm in a pretty similar situation to yours. I'm signed up for September knowing that I still have a lot of room for improvement, and I'm already signed up for the December exam.
I understand the argument that a law school has access to all of your scores and, ceteris paribus, a 170 in one take may well be favorable to a 170 on a retake with a previous lower score.
However, I think this argument leaves out an important part of the equation: will there be any impact on your final LSAT score by taking in September?
Does anyone dispute that a 171 (no matter how many takes required to get there) is better than a 170 in one take? Is it possible that taking in September will boost your December score by one point or more?
In making my own decision, I came to the conclusion that taking in September will likely have a positive impact on my score in December. This is due to a combination of gaining familiarity with the test-day conditions (I'm also traveling to another country to take the exam) and the added pressure of studying for an exam that's 2 weeks away as opposed to 3+ months away.
Best of luck whatever you decide!
@ said:
Anyone else read about "Ivy Day" yesterday? I know it's for those little undergrads, but their numbers that were released were very interesting. I also read the WSJ this morning & noticed that although the % admitted was small, the generous grants/money awarded also hit some all time highs. Hmmm, I could be the only one thinking this, but maybe a lot of these Universities in general are having a harder time than we think overall?? I can post the link of the article, if anyone cares. Probably not. But I found it interesting anyway, since being analytical is what we all are masters of...
I don't think it's the case that they're having a harder time. I'm quite far removed from the college admissions process, but I imagine the record highs of grants come from programs designed to benefit applicants of lower SES. For example, Harvard offers free tuition to students who come from families with income below $65,000 per year.
All else being equal, I’m sure a disclosed test is better than an undisclosed test because of the additional feedback you have in terms of what you got wrong and what you need to work on if re-taking.
However, in this case all else is not equal. As long as it’s not an undue financial or logistical burden, you almost certainly improve your chances at getting the highest possible score by taking both July and September as opposed to just September.
I had to take the exam in a foreign country, so I’ve taken 3 non-disclosed exams. The LSAT is so consistent that it really is just like taking another PT. As long as you’re using 7sage’s excellent analytics, you’ll know exactly what you need to work on for September if you don’t hit your goal in July.