I think the reason he says to get a classic analog watch is because you can't go wrong with it. The classic casio one he says to get is cheap and durable. The LSAT watches I guess are poorly made and, there's always a possibility your test proctor won't let you use the watch. I would say your safest best is to get a simple analog watch that has a rotating face. This will ensure that you are in the clear and won't have to worry about any stipulations in the rules.

@ You put a lot thought into your response, and I must say it's well written, and thank you for taking the time to respond.

So I'll give in on the low income/middle class premise, because I think you addressed that well and made some great points, but what about the whole idea of measuring a student on one particular day for taking this test? There have to have been days where you've taken the test and didn't feel great and consequently didn't do as well as you could do. I don't think this test should be completely done away with, but I do believe that it should not be weighted as heavily as it is in the admissions process. I think our low income student in this situation brings a lot more background and experience to his application than his wealthy counterpart. But on the flip side of that, I don't think a student should be discounted if they come from money. Quite frankly there probably isn't a perfect solution in this scenario, but I think LSAC and the law schools could make a better situation.

@ I totally agree with that. My grades from my freshman year of college bring my gpa down really hard, but still, to over come this issue, I think there's better way than a standardized test.

Also in 20 years, Google and Amazon will run the country and replace the United States government with a new shadow government that will rule by an authoritarian regime which will render any and all legal training useless. Stay woke everybody, Skynet is real, Biggie and Tupac are still alive, and Illuminati is at work.

I would like to see the test value to the admissions process be reevaluated. Like the Columbia articles states, standardized testing only show how a students performs on that specific testing day. So a student who can constantly score a 175 and clearly demonstrate that they know how formal logic works, then takes the test and freaks out, or gets the flu or a number of other variables and scores a 165 is now told, "because of your single poor performance you aren't good enough for our school any more". That doesn't seem right.

And what about the students who apply to schools with poor a GPA, but just spends hours and hours and even years studying for this test and score a 175? Their school performance would tell an admissions committee that they have a pattern of poor performance but just because they can recognize that when "A to B and B to C means A to C," that means they're fit to be at a good law school?

And this chart here shows that there is some sort of correlation to what major a student choose and how they will perform on this test. So now I have reason to suspect that this test is biased towards certain majors.

http://www.phil.ufl.edu/ugrad/whatis/LSATtable.html

I think the way the test is used currently lets a lot of poor performing students into law school and a lot of great performing students out. Lastly, what about the students who can't afford great LSAT prep material? A kid who comes from east LA who has penny to their name but is sharp as a tak can't afford great prep materials, but a kid who's parents makes seven figures, and may not be the brightest can now afford private tutors and spend thousands of dollars for prep. The kid from LA maybe an extreme, but a middle class family that can't afford tons or prep material for their student may be more common.

Yeah the analytics feature on here is really helpful on what you need to focus on. also the more PT you take the better. There are only so many ways the LSAT can tell you A before B

@ But just because the admissions process is better than other forms of graduate school doesn't mean it's good. I'll concede that what the LSAT test is more relevant to law school than the GRE is most masters programs.

I need to get on this filming myself thing! Also what does a great job of helping forget a bad PT is friends, and a fine bottle of cabernet sauvignon!

I'm an advocate of doing interviews. These law schools could easily afford to hire more people to interview applicants (maybe they take some money away from their sports programs and put towards all forms of education at the schools...) but money talks so oh well!

@ We're on the same wave length. I don't think the LSAT will ever be done away with. There's a whole industry for lsat prep (and standardized test in general)! 7 sage is great for offering the classes they do at the prices they have, but some one like kaplan who charges $2000 dollars plus for a six week course where you meet 6 hours a week????? That's a similar price to an undergrad class! Honestly writing about this is getting me a little antsy! DOWN WITH THE LSAT!!!!

steps of soap box

For the games, after you've finished the test, I would go through and and do them untimed (BR them) and then once you do that, watch the videos unless you're just so confident you don't need to watch, and then the following day do them again and then a week later look at some that gave you a lot of trouble. for RC @ has a pretty stellar method (it's long but if you have the time it's worth doing), and then for just BR in general, I would say take the test in the AM and then in the after noon BR one of the LR's and do another section (RC/LG) and then do the second LR section and other RC/LG the following day. At first it should take you about 10 hours to BR an entire test, so doing two test a week is very doable. I would say you'll probably be circling nearly half the test at first but as you progress you'll notice it takes less and less time to BR because you'll have less questions you've circled, and the ones you have circled you'll know the fundamentals well enough to catch any mistake.

Also that flight game was huge pain in the ass and I haven't seen any like it in a while. Those awkward misc. games seem to stop showing up as often come PT 45 or so.

@ I totally agree we need something to evaluate students, I just wish the least bad option wasn't bad at all :/

I'm also aware this thread won't change anything about the application process, but I'm curious what everyone thinks :smile:

Well it sounds like you got one bad egg score out of the other good scores, but I like to think regardless of how the test went there is always something that can be learned, whether that be readjusting your testing conditions a bit, or that really hard RC are actually impossible RCs or anything like that! 30 a week hours is a lot of time to be working your brain on this crap! My suggestion is to take this weekend off starting Friday at 5pm until Monday at 9am, and go outside (nature has healing properties); read a book by a large tree, watch some squirrels play, go swimming, have an evening fire and use past LSAT's as fuel for the fire, or. I think some much needed time off would be really beneficial. I totally get the frustration of doing stellar and then dropping the ball and having a bad test, that pit in your stomach and the frustration and feeling like you won't get into law school, but don't beat yourself up! At the end of the day all this test is are words on a paper. Take it on the chin and pick yourself up and get ready to kick some ass!!! :smile:

@ I've given thought to being a teacher. But I do concede that point! going in with the sole intentions to boost my law school admissions would not only be selfish but also a disservices to these kids. I was involved in an organization in college (Younglife) where a college student was placed at a high school and would form relationships with kids and basically be a mentor. I did it at an incredibly low income school and dealt with a lot of kids who had experienced lots of adversity. I also work at a church as a youth pastor, so I have had some experiences with mentoring and teaching kids, but I would imagine TFA being a whole different task all together.

@ said:

Reading it 4 times, and trying to memorize every individual rule seems like a burden. Especially for 4 games during a section.

I agree with @ . Reading the rules that many times does seem like a lot, maybe do it for a harder game, but for something like an easy one layer sequencing game I would save my time. It may be worth reading them all before writing anything down, and then reread/write down the rules. After you've written them down, I would say try to memorize your visual representation of the rule as opposed to the convoluted/poorly written/trap/stupid English the LSAT uses.

Fair enough

This is also a decent website. You can click on the schools, and review them more in detail, and each one there has a cool table that shows lsat ranges and GPA ranges and how many applications each school has had, and how many admits they have for that range and applicants.

https://officialguide.lsac.org/release/ugpalsat/ugpalsat.aspx

@ I saw that for a lot of top law schools they have some benefits, so that was cool and reassuring to see. I'm limited to only Texas schools because of what my financial aid will pay for, but maybe the benefits they have also extend into the admissions process.

@ I guess my next hesitation is how this would affect my undergrad letters of rec? Do you think after doing TFA I should still use mostly my undergrad profs for letters of recs, or use more employer's letter of rec?

For some it does, especially SA MBT and Flaw questions, but for weakening questions the biggest thing is to weaken the support of the argument. This is done by casting doubt on the conclusion based on the premises.

"It's clear JY is an LSAT superhero of some sort." @ has perhaps stumbled upon the greatest lsat mystery that has plagued us.

This is all too real. No one man can have a full mastery of the logic that is required for the reasoning on this forsaken test. My view of JY is similar to that of Arnold Schwarzenegger from Terminator three. The good Terminator (JY Schwarzenegger) has been sent back in time by the resistance (Dillon Wright) to fight against the evils of Sky Net (all other LSAT prep which represent the evil terminator). He has been charged with the mission to protect young John Connor (all of us planning on taking the lsat), in an attempt to show the LSAC (humanity in this analogy) that mere men will not be taken down without a final stand. Viva La Resistance!!!

usually questions 15-23 are where the really hard questions hang out at. It may be worth taking some of the older test (PT 20-30) and looking at those.