I went from 148 to 161 (I also plan to take it again lol). My best advice is to identify your weaknesses and focus on them. Also, pay attention to the frequency of each question type on the exam and focus on the most frequent. Also, after every PT that I took, I went through and made a tally list of question types I got wrong. The following few days, I focused solely on those, running drills of increasing difficulty and reviewing the foundational lessons as needed. Also, try to make mental notes of common logical fallacies that are present in each question type. Not all of them have a set list, but there are definitely patterns. My last piece of advice is to take PTs under similar conditions to the real test. Don't pause, take the timed breaks, set up your work area like the real thing, and limit distractions. It helps calm nerves during the actual test because it just feels like another PT. I wish you the best of luck on your next test, and I hope these suggestions help at least a little!! You've got this!!

Im so bad at implied question. The "more fully" went right over my head

13/16 I'll take it! Just last week I probably would've gotten 50% of the questions correct (if that), so I'm pretty happy lol

@puddingeveryday that gives me some better perspective on the scores! Thank you!!

I've been curious about something and would like opinions. I've taken the LSAT once and didn't study at all and scored a 148. Do I have a good chance of scoring 160s after a rigorous study schedule for a couple of months? I take the LSAT for the 2nd time in April, and I'm really hoping for a mid to high 160 score for the school I'm aiming for.

Remember, y'all, if this section doesn't come easily to you, that is okay! Knowing where you struggle should give you confidence in your study path. You know where to work, you just gotta do it, and the ease will follow with time. Know thy enemy!

4/5 the phrasing in question 2 really tripped me up! Got so lost in the sauce. I'm also not the strongest in least supported, I think my brain is stuck trying to identify the most strongly supported.

I followed this section easier than the previous idk how many. Like I could've explained this concept before I got the explanation. I needed this win lol. My brain hurts after concept on concept on concept.

I thought of the Kumar example like this: since "only if" is a necessary indicator, then Kumar is in the superset. This means that he is not in the sufficient subset which would be indicated by "if". The subset here would be "students being cited as late". But since he is only in the superset, indicated by "only if", it is not explicitly known that he did in fact get cited.

5/5, we got this!! It's all just formula!

Hi everyone! My name is Helena and I'm from TN. I just recently got my BA in Criminal Justice and plan to take the LSAT in April to apply for law schools in the fall. If anyone in my area or time zone would like to be study buddies, please let me know!! :)

Wishing everyone the best!!