- Joined
- Mar 2026
- Subscription
- Core
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
I just don't get it. I study so hard, do everything everyone says to do, and it is now my second test where I completely and utterly underperformed. I approach the LSAT PTs just as the actual exam. I don't take extra breaks, I don't do anything that I am not allowed to do when I walk into the test center on test day. But I have now underperformed from my avg PT for two times in a row - both by like the full 4 points of the score band.
It is so disheartening, because everyone else I see gets their PT average score or gets an even higher score on test day. Like am I just weak in certain question types that are more prevalent on the most recent exams? If that is so, shouldn't other people also be seeing this variance? Idk. It has been my dream for most of my life at this point to go to a top 14 school and really help people that need it through the law, and I feel like I may not even get top 50 now, it feels like my dream is just slipping further away each day.
I think it depends when are are planning to apply and based off of that when you would need to retest (as well as how close you think you were to your target score)
@Rani at the same time, sources show that some schools did not even read apps submitted in January. There is a risk to applying later in a cycle when more people are applying and they do not have capacity to read all the apps
@lockedin this is great these are the exact types of things I'm looking for! Like you said it can be pretty obvious but sometimes it just slips the mind with other concerns when looking at questions, I will be sure to try and think about this more going forward and use it as a bit of a check like you said
Hi all, one of my remaining weak spots for LR is phenomenon hypothesis. I have watched the videos walking through the approach to these questions, and also feel confident in my ability to identify the phenomenon/hypothesis when doing the questions, but I still have some of my lowest accuracy in these questions. Does anyone have some tips for Phenomenon Hypothesis that go beyond being able to identify the phenomenon/hypothesis and any potential alternative hypotheses?
I feel like I have heard varying input on this question which is why I am asking here. Does the fact that someone comes from a first gen (whether first in family to go to undergrad or to law school) or low income background have any sizeable impact on the admissions process? I don't expect it to have that heavy of an effect - obviously LSAT and GPA still rule - but does it say have more or less than soft factors? While I would expect schools to be a little more open to first gen/low income students to bolster the diversity of their classes, do they ever "punish" the group on the thought that low income students may request more aid/scholarships?
I like the question analytics feature where it shows your accuracy with certain question types and will also show you what the level of accuracy for that question type is for those who achieve your goal score. I am wondering if there can be a feature added that will calculate out an estimate LSAT score for someone based on their accuracy with each question type.
I feel this feature would allow people to see in real time what increases in accuracy with certain question types is doing for them. Maybe someone in the course of a week only increase some question types by 3-5% and feel discouraged if the suggested accuracy is still 15% away, but this feature could hopefully counteract that by showing the affect on someone's predicted score - something that all of us care about greatly due to the consequences the score can have for us.
Obviously a disclaimer regarding the accuracy of such a feature would be important, since the only real way to be confident in reaching that score is to take PTs to simulate the actual exam and built mental endurance, but I still think this would have its uses as a motivation for people.
I think this may also just be a feature of the arg writing section that it tells you when something seems to be misspelled, but I could be wrong. But either way, I think the worse thing that can happen is they just cancel that arg writing and ask you to redo it, which I don't think is the worst thing in the world
Personally, I recommend not including a resume, transcript, and brag sheet. You can do what you want, but I think adding those materials allows a professor to write a generic LOR rather than a stronger LOR which goes into deeper detail with your experience in that professor’s class(es). I would exclude those and rather offer to set up a meeting to discuss what you are looking for and what the professor is willing to write for you. They may ask for those materials anyway, but if you can avoid it I think you should likely be able to get a better LOR from what I have heard
Hi all, after taking PT 128, I am wondering whether the earlier tests (120s) are as representative of/difficult as the actual LSAT compared to the newest tests (140-150s). Does anyone have any knowledge about this?
Hi all, I just got a 175 on PT 128. While I am so happy with this result, there is also a bit of confusion. For context, I was studying and PTing a lot earlier in the year from January to April before taking the April LSAT, and was averaging around 166/167 near the end of the studying. Then I had a bit of a break and came back to drilling, and just now took my first PT since then. I was surprised to get this score, and even more surprised to get a blind review of 180 given my avg PT score from before. I am wondering if the earlier PTs (120-130) are different in difficulty from the newer ones (140-159)? Do the emphasize different problem types more?
Essentially, I am wondering how I should make sense of this higher score now, and, through I obviously need to take more PTs to get a better grasp of my current skill set, whether scores for these older PTs tend to translate to the current administrations of the LSAT.
@JacobBaska Thank you! One question: when you say higher LSAT here, what do you mean by "higher?" Do you mean higher than the median for a given school? Do you mean above a certain score (say, above 170)? Obviously the plan is to maximize my score, but I guess I am wondering out of curiosity of whether there is an LSAT score guideline for a situation like mine where the strength of any resume, LORs, written statements would not really save me (also understanding that every school is different, and this may not be something with a black and white answer).
Hi all, I have a question on how law schools consider undergrad GPA based on hearing various takes in the past. Starting college, I initially performed not as well as I would have hoped, as college was a big adjustment for me (first gen student). My GPA was lower for freshman and sophomore year (probably in the 3.6 -3.7 range), although I eventually was able to adjust and I would estimate my GPA throughout my last two years of undergrad to be in the 3.9 area. Ultimately, my final GPA ended up being 3.79. I am wondering how law schools (especially T14s) react to situations like these. Is the GPA improvement not really that beneficial? Or will law schools (without a better way of describing it), largely interpret my stats based on my latter performance as opposed to the former two years? Somewhere in the middle?
Nice! How much do you study each day, if you don't mind me asking? And where do you focus your study time?
@Optimusbladerunner Ahh got it yeah I didn't realize that is the way to approach BR, that makes sense in that case if someone is approaching it like that, thanks for clarifying!
Unless I misunderstand BR, I would be weary of thinking of it as an accurate representation of your current scoring on a full untimed test, since as far as I am aware it is a representation of your ability to take a second look at questions and identify the correct answer after originally getting it wrong (maybe a lot of questions had 2 seemingly possible answers, and the questions became much easier once you knew one of those was wrong). If you do want to see what your score looks like with no timing, you could take a test untimed to get a better grasp of it if this is a good sign of potential. Not saying this to discourage you, I just know that while confidence is good, getting too complacent with your ability to improve/quickly reach a score you want during your studying can wreak havoc down the line.
With that said, I think the best way to improve timing really is drilling and practicing. The way a resource I use puts it is that you need to develop certain skills and processes, like identifying flaws, eliminating answers, etc., and those may take longer early on. However, once you practice them over and over, doing things like eliminating wrong answers will take less time allowing you to not feel as rushed and spending more time on understanding the stimulus. IMO, concepts can be good to go back to as you notice themes in your scores. If a certain type of problem causes more trouble, maybe you are shaky on those concepts. If you are getting certain types right all the time, even the hardest questions, it would be less important and a less efficient use of your time to review those concepts.
I work full-time and can be quite tired at the end of a long day, and my work especially is the type that can be draining. From prior experience, I kind of feel that studying for as long as I should each day can end up getting to a point where I am too tired to focus on my studying; sometimes it is fine but others I just kind of go through the motions. Do any other people who have tried studying while working have any tips or strategies that worked for them?
@koi I highly recommend not doing this unless you have a specific score in mind and you think you will hit that score while not answering 2-3 questions per section and considering there is still room for error in whether you get other questions right. If you go with this method, you are guaranteeing you will be losing 6-9 points per test. That takes you out of 170 scoring capabilities. If you still get other questions wrong, you will probably max be able to get 160s. If that it what you want to aim for, then go ahead, but it would probably be better to build up the stamina with more frequent sections and tests, and perhaps training yourself to understand confusing sentence and passage structures rather than setting a max on your score