@pgv2013849 said:

Well about exactly what I thought it would be. Just good enough to make me want to forgo November's and just low enough to where I feel compelled to give it another shot (in part due to the LG section on Sep). I really want to get applications out. Especially to one school in particular in which they must receive an app before Nov 15 to be eligible for the in person interview, but my score is a couple of points below their median. Any suggestions on how to handle all of this going forward would be so appreciated.

I just posted something similar to this thread... I used the 7sage predictor and determined that if I delay apps and retake in November in exchange for a couple more points on the LSAT, my chances would only increase by about 3 percent. BUT if you're planning to ED the "boost" would probably be a lot more than if you forgo ED and delay apps in exchange for a few points. Try the 7Sage predictor to play out a few scenarios but keep in mind that it's not a crystal ball-- only meant to give you an idea of where you stand.

How's everyone feeling now that they've got their scores back?

I got the exact score I was anticipating... 164.

-10 on LR1, LR2, and RC combined and whopping -11 on LG alone :neutral:

I started at a 148 and promised myself I would not give up until I make it to the top 10 percentile. A 164 puts me at the 89th percentile, UGH!

I'm using the 7sage predictor to weigh my options. I can apply with my current numbers by the end of this month or apply with a 166 (my conservatively estimated Nov. retake score) in December. My chances only improve by 3% for most schools if I retake and apply later.

Is that 3% boost worth the stress of the retake? I'm leaning toward FUCKDAT but what would you guys do?

Would love to hear your post-score-release admissions dilemmas, too :)

I’m outside of the continental US (Hawaii) and we had digital tests... granted, we are a lot closer to the US than India.

I will say however, that I did NOT study in the digital format at all, even though I knew the test would be digital. I did all of my studying with pencil/paper because I don’t have access to a tablet. Paper and pencil is much more similar to a tablet than a traditional computer setup so paper was my next best option.

I found the digital format pretty easy to work with. If you continue to study with paper/pencil my advice would be to practice doing LR and RC with minimal markings. You don’t want to rely on the stylus and highlight/underline functions of the tablet on test day if you are not familiar with them.

Good luck!

@proudtexan17141-1

Ah... you must be law school bound because your analytical reasoning is on point, haha! First of all, why are you up at 3am? Are you suffering from late night LSAT blues like me?!

I’m in Hawaii :) so technically “in the states” but arguably not in the states. If I had more energy this would be my segway into an argument for the independence of the Kingdom of Hawaii but I’ll have to save that for another night LOL.

Gosh, 12 hours later and I still want to cry.

I’ve been studying for two years... worked my ass off while working full time to improve significantly in RC and LR, only for all those improvements to be masked by a completely shit LG section. I feel like all my grind was for nothing...

LG, you were supposed to stick with me through it all. It was love at first sight for us— we always had that chemistry. UNTIL TODAY :neutral: You were supposed to be my ride or die. But you abandoned me when I needed you most. I feel so betrayed. How could this happen?!

Yes, it’s 9pm and I’m three glasses of wine deep, but I can’t be the only one who feels so heartbroken by this LSAT (/3(/p)

My LSAT experience:

I had two LR sections. Felt extremely confident with both. -2 MAX. Then I had LG (usually -1/-0) and I guessed on about 4 questions and did not even ATTEMPT the flower game. Straight Cs all the way down for that one lol. After break, I came back to another LR section and let out a pretty audible ”fuuuck” exhale. Kittens and puppies was indeed real. And my score will surely suffer for it.

At first, I thought my strong start in LR caused me to overconfidently rush through the games, leading to my struggle. But it’s comforting to see that LG was a struggle for a lot of folks here. RC felt typical, perhaps easier than usual.

Praying to the LSAT gods and all higher powers for a forgiving curve. And hoping that my performance in LR & RC can carry me to at least 165. At this point, I have little hope. Is it too late to register for October? :(

"The fallacy of the converse" sounds so much more epic than "sufficient-necessary confusion" haha!

Also, I've been thinking about the bonus riddle at the end of the video for three minutes now :'(

Is it two maximum and one minimum? If you open the apple box and it has apples, then the other three are mixed up, obviously. But if you open apples and it has bananas, then you know that both apples and bananas box are mislabeled... so then you open dates or carrots. If you open carrots and it has carrots,you only had to open two boxes. But if you open carrots and it has apples, then you know that dates are correctly labeled. BUT if you open carrots and it has dates then you give up on life lol

@alenahluthens200 said:

They are referring to the curve for the 170 threshold. Example: You could miss 10 questions on the June exam to get a 170.

Ah, thank you for clarifying!

Okay and can I just say THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

This thread is really helping me cope right now and I think I’m finally approaching the stage of acceptance and inner peace lol.

WHAT DOESNT KILL YOU MAKES YOU STRONGER PEOPLE! You all rock :blush:

I had LG (super hard) LR LG (sigh of relief... jk this one’s experiment fool!) RC LR

Honestly, after the first LG I couldn’t even remember how to speak English ? it took me a solid 5 minutes to collect myself.

The LR is all a blur. I remember teddy bears, dinosaur/bird fossils, serious runners and their stupid running shoes, advertisements for auto dealerships, and something about type I and type II diabetes..

It all happened so fast!

Btw, when you guys say the curve is -12... what does that mean exactly? Because it’s highly likely that I got -12 on the LG fml hahaha (nervous laughter)

What a freakin shit show

@macklynking88 @lfernandez239752

Actually, thanks for reminding... I had better RC scores when I only focused on the three passages. Maybe I'll return to that strategy. Using the three passage strategy I would consistently get no more than -1/2 across the first three passages. Then on the last passage I would guess whatever letter choice appeared least in the other three passages, which would give me another couple of points. Usually with this method I would get -6/-7 but lately, now that I've been trying to rush through all four passages I've been getting -9 or more, with one or two wrong on EACH of the first three passages.

Of course, I had hoped by now that I would have developed stronger RC skills and a better strategy but I think just focusing on 3 passages might be the way to go on Monday. I'm going to do one more timed RC section tomorrow morning just to make sure :blush: thanks for reminding me!

Thanks @bsummers278 lol I've heard time and time again how important it is to track POV since many of the questions focus on this. Also, a friend of mines today just reminded me how critical it is to ANTICIPATE the types of questions that will be asked and make a mental note or marking next to areas of the passage that are "cookie-cutter"-ish. Of course, when I'm rushing to finish 4 passages, I never do any of this :neutral: I think if I slow down enough to anticipate and focus on totally nailing 3 passages, I'll be alright!

I love it! Hard work beats talent when talent doesn’t work hard— whether we’re talking about the LSAT, law school, or beyond!

The pessimist in me sometimes says that’s just a silly platitude, but your comments and stories have reminded me otherwise. Truly appreciate it!

Can’t respond to everyone but you all ROCK!!

I don't have a recommendation... Just here to say that I feel you!

I'm taking July and I've had my head in the books since April, though I've studied off and on for almost a year now. With the big day approaching I'm freaking. out. I'm striving for a high 160 but my scores have been stagnant in the low 160s for the past 6 PTs I've completed :neutral: My LR and LG are pretty stable but my RC has fluctuated wildly from -3 a couple weeks ago to -11 (WTF?!?!) a couple days ago.

I can't tell you how to increase your score by 6 points in a month but I can tell that I'll be trying my best to do the same. The only way that I see either of us pulling it off is by working really really hard. Every moment that I sit here thinking about whether such a jump is even possible, what my strategy should be, what scores will get me into what schools, contemplating life itself, etc.... is precious time wasted. I'd say there's a ~10% chance that such a large jump will happen for us. But more importantly, I'd say that 100% chance that it WON'T happen if we waste any time worrying about it.

Sorry, this has turned into a pep talk directed at myself haha.

We've already missed the deadline to change the date to September and our only option at this point would be to withdraw. I'm trying my best to look at July as an exciting challenge and opportunity. And if worse comes to worse, there is always September!

That said, I gotta get back to work! BR is calling my name :smiley: WE CAN DO THIS!!!

Yes, like @bsummers278 I used transparency pockets for fool proofing. However, directly on the page, at the top of each game I would write in ink the target time as suggested by JY, AFTER correcting the first time. You donʻt want to worry about the target time on your first go around. After every "round" of fool proofing, I pull the page out of the transparency pocket and write the following on the bottom: Date, time to complete, and score.

For example, there is a little box at the bottom of each of my games that looks something like this:

6/1 11:32 -1

6/1 7:59 -0

6/8 7:30 -0

Others have mentioned keeping track of their times and scores in a separate notebook or on a spreadsheet. That would probably be the best option. Personally, I donʻt find the markings at the bottom of each game distracting and I prefer having all the info I need available in a quick glance so this method works fine for me. Just write small so you donʻt take up too much work space.

On older games, the game rules and questions are all crammed on to one page so I also use a plain white paper in a transparency for drawing out my master game board and sub-game boards. Usually after the first and second round, I donʻt need the extra page since many of the inferences are ingrained in my memory. I believe in the newer test books, a game is spread out over two pages so I donʻt think there is any danger in using a blank sheet on the side while fool-proofing older games. Someone correct me if Iʻm wrong???

Of course, this method has a few drawbacks in comparison with JYʻs preferred method of printing 10 copies but it does work for those who donʻt have access to quality or affordable printing. For example, one draw back is the temptation to erase errors with your finger lol. Erasing is a big no no on logic games as stated in the CC. The focus should be on writing as small and neatly as possible WITHOUT any errors.

Hope that made sense and helps you make an informed decision on the best way to foolproof! Have fun!

Jokes aside, he sounds like a smart dude and I’m sure he has some valuable insight.. but like everyone else has said up above, you want some who motivates you and helps you achieve your goal... Not someone who distracts you from your goal with behavior that makes you feel uneasy! Also, you’re such a good sport for trying to make it work despite all the things you didn’t like about his teaching style. I pray for that kind of patience in my life!

FIRE HIS ASS!! I didn’t even read the whole thing and I’m done with him lol

@redentore3337783 Since I'm not Hispanic and I'm not an expert on the history of any Hispanic groups I can't really weigh in... But what you are saying makes total sense I can see how the exclusivity of Puerto Ricans as URM can be really frustrating for other Hispanic/minority groups.

My GUESS is that the special status of Puerto Rico (and Native Hawaiian for that matter) has to do with the complicated relationship between the US and both of the these places. The US seized control of PR in the Spanish American War and it overthrew Hawaii's monarchy in 1893. If I'm not mistaken, both of these places were internationally recognized as independent countries.

The US probably pissed off a lot of Puerto Ricans and Hawaiians when they invaded/seized/illegally annexed both of these place and now the US has somewhat of an obligation to right their wrongs by giving these ethnic groups special treatment. It's basically the same story for African American and Native American groups, who obviously suffered mass injustice within US borders and throughout US history.

Anyways, that's my politically incorrect crash course on why AA, NA, and PR groups are indisputably recognized as URM, and why native hawaiian occupies it's own ethnic category as well. There's definitely much more to it than that, but maybe someone else will swoop in to help me out on this??

Of course, many hispanic groups, southeast asian groups, middle eastern groups are under-represented in US law schools. And many of theses minority groups may have faced even greater adversity and oppression. But ultimately, the only ones that the US (and US organizations like the LSAC) will care to collect data on/make special accommodations for are the ones who they kinda sorta owe it to :neutral:

But I think a well written diversity statement has the potential to give you a similar boost to those groups above. Draw the parallel for them. Show them how the adversities faced by your family and your ethnic community have influenced you and made you a very valuable candidate! :blush:

According to TLS:

"Which groups are considered URMs?

American Indians/Alaskan Natives, African Americans/Blacks, Mexican Americans, and Puerto Ricans are typically considered URM’s. Please note that there is a difference between Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and other types of Hispanics in the admissions process. Additionally, I would like to offer a small caveat to international students, who fall into a separate category of their own.

Why are these groups (rather than others) considered URM’s?

There seems to be several reasons this distinction exists (cue speculation):

One of the primary reasons we believe applicants of the above races are considered URM’s is because they are the only groups for which the LSAC (Law School Admissions Council) regularly publishes data. When the minority enrollment for a particular group is unknown, law schools have little incentive to admit students from that specific group. (The following link contains the data published most recently). http://www.lsac.org/SpecialInterests/minorities-in-legal-education-min-enroll.asp

The two groups listed on the LSAC published data that aren’t (generally) considered minorities are Asian Americans and members of Hispanic groups not listed above. The reason for this is clear when we look again at the definition for an Underrepresented Minority. Both groups’ presence in the legal field and in law schools in general are close to or exceed their numbers in the general population. For example, Asians make up just 4.4% of the U.S. population, but according to LSAC’s estimates, they make up approximately 10% of legal students. By contrast, those groups who are considered URM’s have a much lower law school representation relative to their status in the U.S. population. Law schools (perhaps at the ABA’s prodding) have generally expressed that they would like their student body to be at least as diverse as the general population."

BUT like someone up above said, don't let the technical definition of a URM deter you from applying to your dream school schools, especially if you are able to get a fee waiver #yolo you know what I mean? I'm native hawaiian and we aren't considered URM but luckily there is a separate group for us which MAY imply schools have incentives to give us special consideration. So I'll be applying to schools that are out of my league as long as I can afford it.

But definitely write a diversity statement and you may be viewed by an admissions committee in a more favorable light!

I'm pretty much in the exact same situation as you. Stuck in the low-mid 160s, trying to hit high 160s by July. My RC and LG also trade off with each other depending on which one I have drilled that week. I have been off from work for over a month now, trying to get my shit together. I'm registered for July and I reeeeeally need to get back to work after the July exam. Of course I would love to put off until September again but I don't think it would be financially wise.

Thus, my plan is to stick with the July test and trust the process. Keep hitting the books and doing what you're doing. I've read a lot of stories about people who have breakthroughs a week before the exam. I'm hoping that will be us too, but only time will tell if our efforts have been fruitful... I have faith that they will be!

If July doesn't go as planned then I'll take September and still apply before thanksgiving. Yes, I'll be back at work, but at least with these 2+ months of intensive studying (in your case 2 weeks of intensive studying) I would have laid a firm foundation where I think I can continue making progress through August, even if I am studying only in the evenings. That's my theory at least lol!