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.

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.

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?

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?