Mix and match the unused sections to form a full PT.

I've found it helpful to retake used exams, especially when it's been 3+ months since I've done them. It was helpful to cement proper thinking on questions I had gotten wrong in the past and can be helpful to if I still get the same question wrong (a sign I didn't properly review).

General advice without knowing more information:

Do you get almost every single question wrong on the passage just when it's in a timed section? Untimed? Stand alone passage? You mention timing to be an issue, so it'd be helpful to know if you still have trouble with it if you eliminate that aspect.

Psychologically you have to treat the 5-star passage the same as a 1-star passage: apply the same skills, don't stress just because you know or think that it is more difficult.

I agree with your instinct to hold off on taking the April LSAT if your current PT scores aren't in your target range. The deadline to cancel with a full refund for April is still available, although only a few days away.

The June LSAT registration deadline is still two months away, so you have time to continue studying and to see if your PT average aligns with your goal score. You can decide between the June and August dates based on your practice test results as the registration deadline gets closer.

Although it's generally advised to apply as early as possible in the cycle, October is still considered "on time". You could potentially submit your apps with your June, August or Sept scores and retake the test in October if necessary while you apps are "on hold".

The key is be flexible with the LSAT scheduling based on how your PT scores progress.

Also, 161 is a great diagnostic! Good luck on your LSAT journey!

Like others have said, retaking sounds like it'd be in your best interest. If scholarships $ is a consideration, scoring even just a few points higher will put you in a better position for those offers.

Good luck on the rest of your LSAT journey!

I will preface this by saying that you should grow comfortable with all question types - knowing what they're asking and how to solve them - and advice on your question will vary depending on where you're at in your LSAT journey and your overall goals.

If your goal is to reach the 170s, you will absolutely need to be comfortable with these questions. However, it will take time and integration to reach this point.

Knowing your weak and strong areas is important, and strategy should be used during timed sections / PTs. Make sure to drill your weak areas outside of timed sections and PTs. In fact, I advise you to work on parallel and analogy questions UNTIMED until your accuracy increases. PTs are useful for gauging weak areas, but improvement (if you don't quite understand a question type or are extremely below target time when solving) needs to occur outside of PTs and timed sections.

If you integrate drills with PTs for timing practice and gauging other weak areas, it can be a good strategy - just be mindful of how you're using the strategy and make sure it's helping you in the long run. If you're skipping them just to get an extra point here and there, it will catch up to you on test day.

Edited for clarity.

Like many of the comments said, a mixture of overthinking and luck. Even when you get 4's and 5's right, review ANY part of the question that you feel unsure about. It's completely possible that you lucked out (especially if you were 50-50 between ACs). It may be that there's a weakness in your understanding that is highlighted by easier but not harder questions.

It's also possible that you're used to the difficulty of the harder questions and overthink little things on 3's. Make sure you're consistently applying the same standard across all ACs for 3's (ex: being too lenient on possible assumptions on the (unknowingly) wrong AC and being too harsh on the (unknowingly) right AC.

Good luck!

I agree with the above comment - if you have enough PTs, take one to see where you're at. Also, it's important to reflect on your previous study habits. Ask yourself what worked well prior to June testing. What didn't? Build in a solid routine based on your prior experience.

Don't be hesitant to review parts of the CC to address your weaknesses as well.

Good luck!

Do you know how your time fans out across questions in a section? Look at the time analytics of questions and try to narrow down the amount of time you spend on the (generally) easier questions (1-15 ish) while maintaining accuracy. This will allow for more time on the more difficult questions which (if I had to guess) you're rushing through at the end due to time constraints. Rushing and stress will cause you to miss out on the little details that are so important to distinguish the ACs for difficult questions.

For consistency, you mentioned that you had other commitments that impacted your PT abilities. Lack of consistency (I get it, life happens) can significantly impact the progress you make.

I also want to caution against burnout. I and many others in this community can vouch for the "burnout-based" plateau. Sometimes you don't even realize it, so take a step back and take breaks. It might seem counterintuitive, but taking ~1 week off can be monumental for score gains.

When do you plan to take the test? If it's not till April or later, stick to PTing every other week until you're a 1 month to 1.5 months out.

LR question types are so intertwined, so you absolutely need to be able to identify the main conclusion of an argument for virtually all LR q types. Even if you're able to skim by not understanding the main conclusion for other question types at easier difficultly levels, it's going to catch up to you for 3+ level difficulty of all q types.

Don't just look for the main conclusion - try to identify how all the parts of the argument work together (context, premises, conclusion).

What approaches have you used so far?

I gave advice on a similar post that I'll drop here:

Short answer is that I (mostly) completed CC before drilling and PTing, but did not finish all CC practice sets.

My longer explanation is that there are A LOT of CC sets imo, and it takes time to get through them. I completed about half of the sets for each question type in the CC. If I felt confident in my approach / understanding (and if my scores reflected that) after sets 1-3, I would usually skip ahead to set 6+ to avoid redundancy and challenge myself. After that, I would move on to the next question type and repeat.

How many sets you do ultimately comes down to your skills and confidence with the questions. Plus, you can always come back to take "left over" ones after CC completion.

I didn't drill until after I completed CC because I wanted a good understanding of the depth and breadth of the exam before targeting weak areas.

Also, set a realistic study schedule that you're able to follow consistently. 1 hour of focused studying per day is better than 3 hours inconsistent on unfocused.

Lmk if you have any questions or if I can clarify anything. Good luck on your LSAT journey!

Biggest difference I've noticed is the wording in the passage or question - nothing that will make or break your understanding. Don't worry too much, because the main fundamentals and skills are tested either way. I recommend saving modern tests a bit closer to when you're planning to take an official test.

Great advice! It's not talked about enough in LSAT prep communities, but try to take breaks before you even reach the point of burnout. So easy to get caught up in the grind of LSAT and law school admissions. I recommend building in one day per week where you don't study or even think about the LSAT.

Like a previous comment states, it's unlikely for a difficult numbers-based question to appear more than once or twice within a section (or even the entire test). If you know that this is a weakness, skip the question, focus on getting all the other's right, and return to it if you have time at the end.

You've already put in the work for the exam, don't let yourself get worried about one or two potential questions out of ~100.

Customize the question difficulty for drills to 1- and 2-star questions only. This will allow you to practice and master the fundamentals of each question type before moving on to more difficult questions.

Agree with the comment above. Also want to say that experimental questions are just as useful for studying and absolutely lessons you can take away from them.

I agree with the above comment. If you're PTing in the 140s, it's a sign that there are fundamentals that you need to improvement upon.

Here are some recommendations:

focus on UNTIMED drilling of easier to medium rated questions

-shift to timed drilling only when untimed accuracy has significantly improved

-hold off on PTs until your accuracy improves, both timed and untimed

-review CC & understand what each question type is asking of you, how to do conditional logic, practice identifying parts of an argument, etc.

With only 1 month of studying, 140s is a totally reasonable score. It takes time to improve, so don't get discouraged.

Q14: I understand why AC C is correct but am still struggling to eliminate A, especially since A seemed supported by lines 37-40 "personal and cultural screens of silence and secretiveness that have enshrouded her past". Here are a few things that I believe discredit A as a viable answer choice:

1) There is a distinction between heritage and history.

Although this might be a subtle distinction, in this context "history" means a a factual record of historical facts, where Naomi "reconciles" history - in other words uncovers or accepts difficult truths about her personal history and the historical context in which she lived.

Heritage, as JY alludes to, refers to cultural or ancestral legacy, including cultural traditions.

In this case, being discouraged from exploring heritage is not supported(?). I would still argue that if AC A references history (not heritage) it might be supported by lines 37-40. Even with the distinction between history and heritage, I'm not fully convinced that A is not supported. These in-text lines refer to cultural secretiveness. Does this mean that Naomi was discouraged from seeking her heritage? Secretiveness of the past does seem to refer to a form of discouragement.

2) AC A is from Naomi's POV whereas AC C is from Kogawa's.

Conclusion indicators can be useful, but (as a warning) they can also be used to trap you with a wrong AC, particularly on more difficult MC questions. It's important to practice understanding arguments, especially since finding the conclusion in arguments applies to a large portion of LSAT questions.

Like the above commenter said, understanding the parts of the argument should be your main focus. Ask yourself which parts of the argument are supporting which other part(s). Premise indicator words can clue you into this (since, because, etc).

Focus on foundations and accuracy untimed. Move to timed drilling once your accuracy increases. It's difficult to give more specific advice without knowing your current study habits.

Have you considered canceling your April LSAT registration? There's still time left to cancel with full refund.

I don't recommend canceling. 3 points is well within standard score variance.

How can we assume that D is referring to a negative effect/change? A previous question in a different PT (can't remember which one) said that "effect" could be interpreted as a positive or negative thing and should not be assumed to be the one that would best fit the argument. In this case, a negative effect fits the argument. But it could easily be a positive effect - in which case the argument is not weakened since a positive change wouldn't be a worrisome change.

#help

The interface is mostly similar to 7Sage, but the flag is in a different spot and the buttons are slightly different. Like 7Sage's feature, you are able to hide the timer during the official test. Highly recommend taking a PT on LawHub to get used to the actual feel of the interface; you can import the test data to 7Sage afterwards to still take advantage of analytics.

You can sip coffee during the remote exam, but it has to be in a 20 oz or smaller clear water bottle. However, you can eat only during the 10 minute break unless you have been approved for a specific type of accommodation to eat during the exam.

You're allowed to leave the view of the camera during the 10 minute break, which means you can go into another room, eat, etc. Your phone is supposed to stay off and within the view of your camera, so you can't use your phone even during breaks. When the 10 minute break is over, you'll have to do another room check with your proctor.

Yes! Blind review allows you to review questions without time constraints of the test. When you flag questions to review during the test, BR is the time to check your answers without knowing the correct answers yet. It can also help you gauge whether time was a main factor in getting an answer choice wrong or if there's a gap in your knowledge (ex: if it's wrong even after time review, there's likely a gap in your knowledge).

This is helpful for a diagnostic as it is for other PTs and is something that can be used to measure progress throughout your LSAT journey.

The above comment addressed this well. I'll add that going through all practice sets in the core curriculum might not be necessary for you. There are a ton of practice sets which become time consuming, especially if you're drilling in addition to them. Don't be afraid to take PTs without finishing all sets as long as you've covered the main foundation lessons.

It is possible that the experimental sections you've taken happen to be easier in the sense that they contain less four or five-star questions. The analytics page is helpful for determining whether the overall section is considered medium difficult, super difficult, etc. Go to Practice -> Analytics -> scroll halfway down to the "test section" area (after the graph). This breaks down overall sections into difficulty ratings.

It's also possible that the experimental section doesn't contain as many questions that are weak areas for you. Example: Maybe your weakness is in flaw and inference questions, but the experimental section happens to lack those question types.

However, imo it isn't super helpful to focus on how your experimental section raw score differs from the scored section raw score. Review what you're getting wrong and maybe look for a pattern in question types to target weakness (as mentioned before, if the scored section has a lot of flaw questions missed but experimental has only one flaw question included in it).

In other words, review and learn - don't over focus on numbers.