from Imgflip Meme Generator
from Imgflip Meme Generator
from Imgflip Meme Generator
from Imgflip Meme Generator
It depends on the specific test you took. On some exams a raw score of 46 could be a 149, on some it can be a 152 depending on how many questions were in the test sections and what the curve for that particular test was when it was administered. The Lawhub score is based on the final score actual test takers with your raw score got with the curve they used for that particular test, so it is more accurate than entering your raw score into a score predictor which can't factor in what test you actually took and what curve they applied to those scores. Also, don't get discouraged. You'll get there- don't worry. My first diagnostic score after I had already studied for a couple of months was a 154, and last week I got a 179 on a PT (btw I got 3 wrong on that PT, but that particular test was curved up to a 179 instead of a 177). You really can get into any score range you want with enough time and dedication. It's a very learnable test, even if it doesn't feel like it right now!
Don't let it get you down! Progress isn't linear- you are just trying to get the proportion of PTs where you're happy with your score to be more over time than the proportion of scores you aren't as happy with. Eventually it'll be every once in a while you get a PT that isn't great, but 7 pts after a couple months is definitely within the margin of error- I'm (finally) scoring consistently at my goal score after several months, but a 7 point swing once in a while isn't crazy for me either- it just means that particular test pinpointed more of my weak points or I was having an off day. Totally normal. Just remind yourself that there is no reason to think that this "off" score is more representative of what you've learned than all of your other good scores! If you feel inclined, you can enter the problems you got wrong in a wrong answer journal so you can recognize trends in why you're getting particular questions wrong, so anytime you get something wrong, it's not a "Uh oh, I got this wrong" feeling, it becomes a "great, more data so I can fix this" feeling. Hang in there- it sounds like you've made great progress already, so don't let a bum score steal that motivation from you!
I had a 7Sage instructor who got a 180 on their official LSAT tell me the last PT they took before getting their 180 score was in the 160s. Some PTs just hit at your weak points more than others, even for people who end up doing basically perfect on their actual exam. It's ok. There is no reason to assume your last two PTs are a more accurate representation of your abilities than ALL of the other GREAT PTs you've had over the last TWO MONTHS!!! All of the skills you have earned through a ton of hard work are still in there- maybe take some time building your confidence back up with some easier sections or question types you're good at, then take a PT once you feel more confident. And, the good thing is, at this point and at the score band you're consistently in, the work is not lost. Even if you don't have the same amount of time to study in the future, you still have all of those skills because you've already done the heavy lifting, so it's just more bits of fine-tuning you need now, not hours and hours of work! I took 8 months off studying and the first PT back after I started studying again for a week was right back at my old PT average- it was all still there, and it took WAY less to dust if off again than it did to get all of that knowledge there in the first place. Not saying any of that to assume you won't do amazing in September- I think you will! I'm saying this to take some of the mental pressure off, because for me, I perform way worse if I think this test is going to make or break me- there are multiple ways things can work out as good, or even better, than what you could imagine!!!
Ok, I think I've dm-ed everyone who commented as of June17th at 12:30pm. If you see this and I missed your comment, shoot me a message. Will continue dm-ed people who comment after I post this as well!
Me too pls!
If anyone is reading this, we have a regularly scheduled meeting time on Mondays for this group- if you'd like to be included, send me a dm with your email and I'll add you to the calendar invite:)
Hi All, I'm stuck in a mid-160s plateau with a goal of breaking into the 170s. If you're in the same boat and want to meet remotely maybe once per week to work through some 4 and 5 star questions that were particularly hard for you, comment and I'll dm to get a study group started. Personally, I'm hoping to get better at pattern recognition in answer choices and fully understanding why a wrong answer is wrong. Thanks!
Hi! Plateauing in the mid-160s right now, working towards 170+ in Aug/Sept. I'm interested in joining if there's room. Thanks!
Not sure if this is helpful, but it may be worth doing some drills just for accuracy, meaning untimed/less questions, and making sure you're following each step for each type of question every time. For me, I would do only timed drills and PTs over and over again, but would miss some easier questions and still had a hard time on harder questions. Turned out, I needed to step back and make sure my brain was doing each step accurately for every question. I noticed a couple of steps I wasn't doing all the time on the easier questions which meant I didn't have a good foundation when it came to harder questions. I might have been able to get away with skipping a step or two on shorter drills when my brain wasn't tired or when I wasn't rushed, because I was generally good at the test, but when I was moving quickly on timed full sections or on multiple sections in a row (like a PT), my brain would default to being sloppy because it was tired. Doing a high volume of timed drills and sections can reinforce unhelpful habits, so instead of volume and timing, accuracy might be a better thing to focus on until you start getting really consistently good results on untimed question sets, then integrate in more timed drills. Maybe start with sets of 10 questions, one question type, * to *** questions, and really think through each step you're doing one each question. Eventually those steps will become easier to go through quickly. Then start adding in the harder question, and then add in some longer timed drills to build that accuracy endurance up. Also, it is WAY easier to stay motivated when you see a bunch of correct *to *** questions that you know you've done perfectly with one or two harder questions you've missed- then the harder questions you've missed seem easier to approach and understand why they were wrong. Bottom line, you may get more out of studying less questions slowly, and spend less time overall studying, and harder questions get way easier when you have those foundational steps down accurately for easier questions. Sorry for the novel. Your situation sounds similar and this it was helped me. Hang in there- you're already scoring better than most people who take the test!
Hi! Your LSAT is not a bad score at all- it's actually above average, which is about 152-153 I believe depending on the test. And it is possible to get into the 160s with a few more months of studying depending on how much time you have to dedicate to it and the quality of studying you do in that time. I think what may be helpful in making your decisions regarding retesting for this cycle vs deferring till next year is asking yourself if you are ok letting your score choose the law schools you apply to, or are you ok with letting the schools you want to apply to dictate the score you need. If you know what school(s) you want to go to, use their medians as a guide. If you plan to go to a regional law school and have a career in that part of the country long term, you may not need a better score! If you want to have more school options to choose from or more mobility in where your career is based (the t-20s tend to be better for that) you'd likely need a better score and timelines for studying become secondary to getting that score. If you have a set amount of time you want to study or are very committed to going to law school in a particular year, you can let that time studying guide you and go with the score you get at the end of that time to determine which schools you apply to. Neither way is better than the other- it just depends on what you want. I deferred taking the test from last year to this year because I know what schools I want to apply to, and that dictated what score I need- I ended up needing more time to get there, and that was a good trade off for me in terms of my long-term goals. On the other hand, I have friends who wanted to go to law school and weren't very concerned about where they went to school because, bottom line, they knew they wanted to be an attorney in the region where they lived. So, they took the exam and applied to the law schools in their area that fell into that score range with their medians- they are very happily employed and successful lawyers. In summary, there are so many roads to get you to where you want to go as long as you know what your ultimate goal is! There is honestly no "wrong" decision here, so follow your gut!
Hey! There are a bunch of things that can help in the score range you're in to get you into the 150s- good news is that increasing the number of questions you get right is easier in the 140s-150s than it is in the 160s-170s because you are generally dealing with more broad things that are easier to correct vs addressing a bunch of tiny flaws that might add up to get you a point or two. I'll just list off a bunch of stuff that helped me- you may already know a lot of these! It sounds like you might need to go back to the core curriculum for the types of questions you are having a hard time with. After that, it may be worth doing untimed drills and get the accuracy on those down before going back to timid drill to make sure you aren't practicing bad habits. Memorizing the common logic flaws (I used flashcards) can help you identify wrong answers quickly or identify what's wrong in the logic of a stimulus that you are trying to deal with in your answer choice. Make sure you have a specific way/prescribed steps to approach each question type so you know as soon as you see what type of question you're dealing with, you have a check list to go through to get you the answer. Instead of looking for the right answer in the answer choices, focusing on eliminating the wrong answers can be extremely helpful because there are no "maybes" on the LSAT- answers are either 100% wrong or 100% right, and often it's easier to explain what's wrong with an answer instead of digging through them all to find the one that might feel more correct. Also, it made a big difference for me if I highlighted the conclusion in every single stimulus to keep straight what you're actually trying to do in a particular type of questions (ie, weakening= making that conclusion at least 1% less possible, sufficient assumption= guarantee that conclusion happens when you add your answer to the provided premesis, flaw= why do these premises not add up to this conclusion?, etc.). If you lose track of what the conclusion is, you're going to have a really hard time finding the right answer. Timing was also a big issue for me initially- I was missing at least 2 or 3 questions in every section which is a big chunk out of your score (like a full score bracket chunk). Maybe work on a timing strategy (ie, one minute for each of the first 15 questions, then 2 minutes for each of the last 10, or starting RC from the last passage and working back because the last passages require more time, etc). All of those little things add up, and can get you into the 150s. I hope at least some of these are helpful- good luck, and know that so many people have struggled with this test and ended up smashing it in the end! It is very doable!
ZeSean and Henry did a couple of helpful videos on this topic on the 7sage YouTube channel- I think they're called "The 180s mindset" and "Seeing through the matrix" or something similar. Worth checking them out.
from Imgflip Meme Generator