@ Do you know when medians/student profiles will be released? the fall?

I think you're a competitive applicant for T6-T14, as I think your 170 puts you at the median for most if not all of them, and same with your GPA. If you can get it up to a 3.9 that will put you in an even better position. I know that undergrad ranking doesn't matter that much, but from what I've seen at my own school and from what I've heard, it provides important context for your GPA i.e. they know you're likely surrounded by other high-achieving, competitive students (not that other students aren't, but obviously T20s are incredibly difficult to get into, and AOs know this).

If you want to focus on expanding your softs, it's important to prioritize depth over breadth i.e. you should focus on deepening and expanding your involvement and achievements vis-a-vis your current ECs, as opposed to making a laundry list of activities. Awards and achievements, such as published research, scholarships, making a difference in student orgs, on campus, etc. are great ways to improve your softs.

I don't think I'm qualified to give advice regarding whether or not your should retake the LSAT, so take this with a grain of salt, but if you're not aiming for the T5 then I don't think you need to retake. If you are aiming for Chicago or Columbia, then it might help to retake if you're confident you can get at least a 172-3. If you're really hoping to go to HYS then you would want to work to get around a 175+. The best way to gauge whether or not you should retake is to look up the 509 report for your top choices. You should aim to at least be at the 50% for both GPA and LSAT. Statistically, it's even better if you're at the 75%.

If you don't mind sharing, I'd also love to see the Quizlet! Thanks!

Also, obviously it sounds like you have a had a very positive experience using both 7sage and Loophole, but how well do they complement each other? I know some people don't mind juggling different approaches, but I'm not sure if I want to delve into something that will push me to alter the way in which I have learned to approach LR through 7sage.

Same! My progress was at 21/215 hours yesterday and now I'm at 16/208. Something is definitely going on.

I use PTs 1-35 for problem sets especially since that's where the CC problems come from. I will likely use the 40s and 50s for problem sets because I know I definitely won't have time to take every single PT before my test date. DEFINITELY save the 70s+ for full PTs because the language in the more modern tests change a bit and your test will most likely be more similar to the 80s than earlier tests.

@ Agreed! Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes it just comes down to a little bit of luck:)

@ If June has a "harder curve" that would indicate the content likely isn't as difficult as those with "easier" curves

Don't take the June LSAT. You shouldn't take it if you're not scoring where you want to be scoring

I understand the question, but I still think it requires that you make too many outside assumptions

.

Maybe before this cycle, but I think it's worth it after seeing the results this year, especially since your average PT was so high going into it. Maybe you can practice in a less uncomfortable environment to try to simulate test day nerves? Especially if you didn't feel like the exam was any more difficult than your recent PTs.

This is so irrelevant, but I thought'd I clarify erasing on LG. I don't mean to erase whole board, as obviously they're incredibly helpful to look back at. I just meant if there are few inferences and you kind of have to do trial and error, instead of scratching out or having to draw a whole new board because it gets messy and confusing, I erase

If you just started studying and this is your diagnostic, I think June is definitely realistic depending on how much time you have to study, and I'd aim to take at least one PT/week and 2 if you have time. How much time is enough time? This really depends on the person. Some people can get away with 8 hours/week, while other do 4-6 hours/day. To determine this, I think you'll need to reflect on how much you've done so far, how far you've come, etc.

However, if you've been studying for awhile, and you're still around a 160 then I think August is more realistic.

I'll say that the people who have scored a 175+ that I've spoken to have spent at last 3 months studying around 4 hours most if not every day of the week. Obviously this is anecdotal, but it's the plan that I intend on following based on what I've heard/read. Ultimately, what's most important is that you're studying effectively. How long you study won't really matter unless you're doing it correctly. Again, this also depends on the individual. For example, if you spend a week drilling a certain question type and you're not improving then you might need to change your approach.

Personally, I was struggling with LG because I was specifically told not to spend time erasing, so I kept redrawing boards. However, after about 2 weeks of struggling with time, I started erasing and found that this was a significantly better strategy for me, and it has allowed me to pretty consistently go -0/-1 (still working on that 1) and finish on time. Sometimes it's super small things

If you're struggling with LR, try Loophole if you haven't. I've heard great things, but I'm only on the first few chapters, so I can't say much yet. It's super straight forward, conversational, and I think it's only about 12 chapter, which take about 45 min-1 hour to reach if you're really taking your time and taking notes, so you'd only have to read 1-2 ch/day and you'd be done in no time. My only other advice for LR is the pretty standard stuff like seeing if there's a certain question type that you're struggling with, slowing down, skipping time sinks then coming back later.