Texas gives in-state tuition and a living stipend for out of state ED applicants, equivalent to a $54,408 total scholarship. I think they also give a $10k/year stipend for TX residents who apply ED.

Berkeley guarantees $60k total in scholarships for ED applicants.

The passages are not really all that different (other than lack of the newer comparative reading passages). The main difference lies in what the questions are testing for. Current LSATs tend to test a high-level, broader understanding of the passage, requiring inferences and less available certainty on correct ACs. Older ones test more for recognition of what the author stated (fewer inferences, more able to check factual accuracy of your answers). This leads to a lot of people claiming modern RC is harder. I actually like modern RC better, as it doesn't hold you accountable for minutiae that you may have passed over on your first read.

With that said, I think that using pre-50 PTs for drilling can be very useful! Approach it as a reading exercise. Also, being able to attack factual understanding type questions (which there are still plenty of on modern RC) with high confidence will give you much more time to consider the harder inference-based questions you'll encounter on the modern LSAT.

I suggest at least reading every single one of the old RC passages. There is no better practice for RC that using old RC passages. They are the perfect opportunity to practice JY's memory method, even if you don't want to do the questions.

That will be a very tough jump to make in this time frame. It may be doable, but you would be doing yourself a huge favor by delaying for September or November. For what it's worth, I made a 7 point increase between my December and February tests last year (though I had 6+ months of full-time study under my belt).

Looks like your best bet would be to foolproof LG hard and do intense BR for LR. You might be able to get games down to - 0 before July and make a dent in your LR weakness, if you take it seriously. That could get you to 166.

It will be harder to improve LR and especially RC in such a short time. Is your issue on LR timing or accuracy? Also, was your diagnostic test a modern one? This can have some impact on perceived LR/RC difficulty for some people.

Finally, why shoot for just 166? If your diagnostic was 160, you could (and should) be shooting for 170+ easily. Even if you don't want T14, a 170+ score could buy you a free education...

Started with the Bible and saw my RC average drop from -2/-3 before down to -4/-5 after reading it.

Transitioned to 7Sage + Trainer and saw my RC average on PTs go up to -0/-1, which held true on the real test.

Powerscore just promotes an unrealistic strategy that is a major waste of time. Low resolution summary is the way to go. Don't bother trying to turn RC passages into a diagramming exercise like Powerscore would have you believe is the best approach. RC is about reading...so spend your time on the passage doing only that.

.

While the example you've given is clearly the most fundamental form of conditional logic you will encounter, I think you'll find that it's well worth it to invest in making the more complex formal logic phrases seem like second nature too. It gets way more complicated than if/then statements, and being extremely familiar with contra-positives, validity, existential and universal quantifiers, etc. will not only be worth it but also necessary to your LSAT success.

There is probably no better time investment you can make in the LSAT than studying these cookie cutter phrases so you can distill a paragraph of absolute nonsense in a complex LR MBT/MBF/MSS/Parallel Flaw/Parallel Reasoning stimulus or LG with a ton of overlapping complex conditional rules into a simple chain of easy to read representations.

I definitely found that not having to think about how to diagram this sort of language (after long, long hours of drilling formal logic questions) saved me at least five minutes on most LG and LR sections on PTs and the real test—the exact boost I needed to achieve my goal score.

Sorry I haven't been able to join in on the first two meetings. I'll see you all next week!

It won't hurt you to keep the score on record, especially if it ends up being higher than your first attempt, which sounds likely anyway, given your PT improvement. You can establish a clear upward trend with your third take, which will hopefully be the 170+ you're shooting for (totally doable with BR scores like those).

I faced the same issue of not getting hung up on difficult questions. It caused me to score almost 10 points lower than my PT average. I worked on just learning to take it one question at a time though, blocking prior questions from my mind entirely after moving on. I attribute the vast improvement on my retake entirely to this change in thought process. You might want to drill specifically with this strategy in mind—it definitely helped me.

Just FYI, though, there is no October LSAT this year—there will only be a September and November administration.

You're on an LSAT forum. I have a feeling you know what the resounding answer here will be...

With that said, take the LSAT. It's still the status quo. Almost everyone matriculating at top schools is relying on the LSAT even though a few schools are accepting the GRE.

If you're going to take the LSAT, don't bother with the GRE. Just put all of your time into getting an above median LSAT. If you can pull a 99th percentile GRE, you can pull a 99th percentile LSAT. It's a very learnable test

I come from a mixed STEM/humanities background and didn't find STEM to be a handicap on the LSAT—in fact, it was probably a positive factor in being able to grasp the formal logic at the core of the arguments in LR and the setup for LG.

Maybe a little too cliché, but it's definitely Thurgood Marshall for me.

I'm currently reading Devil in the Grove, and it is astounding to hear the kind of extreme personal danger and systematic adversity he had to knowingly confront every single day in his early career as an attorney for the NAACP to set the precedent for affecting the kind of change he ultimately did later with his landmark cases and as a Supreme Court Justice.

Funny enough, I first got interested in reading more about him from LSAT RC passages haha.

@ said:

Ink and paper are more expensive than the real thing haha>

@ in my situation, I've actually got free ink and paper at my disposal so I think I'll print it. I think I recall J.Y saying doing the problems on paper is more beneficial than doing them off the screen just because it's more congruent with the way we'll actually take the test

Great! If you can print them for free, why not? I'd do all the PTs I could in your case!

And yeah, I totally agree that it's best to PT on real printed tests! I was just commenting on using PT 1-35 for drilling. I just wasn't as strict on sticking to printed copies when FPing or practicing individual sections.

I skipped straight to the LG and RC sections, but I already had a good background in LR from the Trainer and Powerscore prior to 7Sage. In retrospect, I wish I had done it in order (and only used 7Sage). It didn't hurt me since I already had solid diagramming and formal logic background, but it definitely wasn't ideal. I'm probably going to review the LG section as I get ready for a retake.

I didn't print anything other than answer sheets (I just bought the official LSAC test books). Ink and paper are more expensive than the real thing haha.

When foolproofing PT 1-35 LGs, I just wrote everything down in regular notebooks and kept track of my data in an excel sheet.

Every once in a while, I'd try to do a PT from 1-35 by just looking at the screen and recording my answers on the scantron.

.

.

.

@ That seems like a really great strategy...I think I'm going to do the same and just start studying now with the intention to retake only if the schools I've been admitted/WLed at give me the green light on a better LSAT = more $$$ or being admitted off the WL. Thanks for the idea, and good luck with your cycle!

@ Sorry, I didn't mean to be unclear. I meant scholarship by "$$$" — no one is paying me to take the LSAT haha. I'm employed full-time right now. I'm just trying to put myself in the best possible position to be able to afford law school by decreasing the amount of loans I'll need to take on tuition. I didn't know if a higher score late in the game would help secure additional merit aid.

.

.

@ said:

Has anyone taken essential oils, crystals, etc into the test center? It's not prohibited but I feel like the list I'm looking at is pretty short...

Please don't take highly scented items (does this apply to essential oils?) into the test center, just out of consideration for other testers. I had to sit behind someone with some heavy cologne/perfume on during one of my attempts. It can be a huge (and suffocating) distraction.

Go to the test centers themselves and scout them out. It varies big time, dependent on the location.

I made the mistake of not checking out my test room in person the 1st time (at my undergrad campus), assuming that LSAC would standardize desk space etc., and got stuck with an arm-desk that was smaller than the test booklet.

The 2nd time, I switched test centers after scouting out a neighboring university and finding out that each student got like 6 ft of desk space to themselves.

I can't speak to hotels, but I'm sure that the set-up varies largely between test centers in that situation too. Just go to the places you can sign up at (on the same day of the week you'd be testing) and ask where the test is given. Make sure it's quiet and that you have ample desk space.

Taking 1 PT a day is definitely counterproductive. I did that for months before my 1st attempt, averaging ~174, and got mid-160s on test day. Why? Burn-out, plain and simple.

I only took 1 more PT total between my 1st and 2nd attempt, but ended up much closer to my PT average on test day that time.

Your drop in score doesn't indicate a drop in your ability or an increase in test difficulty—it is simply a sign that you need to lay off the PTs and take a break from studying. If you're scoring 170-175 on PTs, you're ready for the real thing. Maybe plan to do 1 or 2 more PTs total before your June attempt and just do light drills to solidify your skills and strategy in between.

Good luck! Take it easy and you'll live up to your expectations. You've got this!

@ Congrats on managing to balance so much in undergrad and in your career! That will definitely help you out, but sounds like you're right to step back and focus on the LSAT for a while. Get your score up to your target schools' medians and I'm sure you'll get great offers and be glad you took the time to retake and reapply.

I agree that rolling admissions can be frustrating, but unfortunately it's just part of the game. I think it's best to view our previous cycles as learning experiences. I've had the opportunity to talk with a former T14 AdCom member openly about this issue, and they assured me that a re-application can only be seen as a positive factor, if anything.

DO NOT submit the same materials. What's important is to construct a different application with better essays, hopefully an improved LSAT, etc. It's fine to stick to the same general theme, but make sure that you have significantly updated/put new effort into every single document that you submit. Show the AdComs how you've grown since the previous cycle and show them why they were wrong to reject you last cycle. If you can do that, your commitment to improving yourself/your application can only help your odds.

Don't worry about getting auto-rejected just because you were turned down last year—it's a new cycle and, as far as AdComs are concerned, a new you! Capitalize on the extra time you'll have to prep for that LSAT and create a totally new, more cohesive application. It can only work out in your favor!

I think the fact that you were volunteering during this time excuses you for the need for an addendum. If you were doing nothing during this period besides LSAT study, it may have been a good idea. But given your prior work experience and the fact that you had other responsibilities during this study period, I think your idea for a simple bullet point on the resume would suffice.

For what it's worth, I was unemployed for eight months out of college and got into a T14 last cycle with $$$. I did write an addendum for this last cycle. Now that I'm reapplying with some full-time work experience under my belt, I've been admitted to higher ranked schools with no addendum at all.

@ said:

@.PHIPPS I had a solid offer too, but no scholarship offers. I'm actually still dangling my feet on the fence about going, but as of now, I'm retaking in July and set to reapply this coming cycle.

When did you apply @ ? I wouldn't get roped into paying sticker unless it's a T6 (or, arguably, just HYS). You can pull some big $$$ with a few more months of study and a better application. Not to mention an extra year of savings to cut down on the COL debt. Retake & reapply FTW!