165 to 170 by December LSAT

jurisprudent

Hi all,

I hope all of your studies are going well! I'm writing to ask about any tips for the final climb (presumably the hardest one) from a 165 to 170+. I'm still registered for the September LSAT, but I'm thinking of either taking it and canceling it OR just taking it again come December.

My LSAT journey has been long and turbulent, and I'm ready to just MOVE ON with my life come December. That said, I'm almost there. I've been consistently scoring 165 with the occasional 170 or so, which have been rare but also on the "easier" tests with a more generous curve, or I get lucky with a really easy LG/RC section. My BR scores are nearly perfect -- almost always a 180, and a few 177-178s. Any ideas on how to close the gap?

My score breakdown is as follows:

LR (-3 to -5 per section)
LG (-0 to -2)
RC (-2 to -8)

As you can see, my range for RC is ridiculous. On a good day, I can score -1 or -2, but on a bad day, I can miss as many as 8. I am STILL running out of time for some RC sections -- at the 5 minute mark, I'm either halfway through the last passage, or just starting it and rush through the questions. So any tips on STABILIZING RC scores would be much appreciated.

I've also been studying part-time, so the sheer fact of not being able to dedicate 8 hours a day to studying may be a factor. I have the option of taking off of work for two months starting in September. It would be good to know if this would be a worthwhile endeavor.

If you know of any tips to really gain those last few points, please share! I'd be eternally grateful.

Thank you in advance!

Alex

Hey,

So I'm kind of working toward moving consistently into the 170 + range.

If you can, absolutely take those 2 months off to prep. Having a full time schedule to dedicate to prep will be extremely helpful.

As far as specific strategies, I would start by targeting LR and getting that down to as close to -0 as you can. It's half the test, so any improvements will be 2X. I think the best way to improve on LR is to narrow down why you're missing questions. It usually comes down to not understanding our task on a question type as well as we should, not understanding the grammar, or not having a good grasp of the conditional logic. It could also be all 3! I find that when people cannot identify a particular question type they are missing, it usually means they probably have room to improve their logic skills. If you know you need work with certain question types make those a priority.

For RC, what types of issues are you having that lead you to miss -8 per section? Are there certain passages or question types that throw you off?

jurisprudent

Hey @"Alex Divine" thanks for the advice!

For RC, I think it's really timing. I usually have no problem breezing through the first two easier ones, but then I get stuck on the third passage (usually level 4 or so) and get like -3 alone there. And then as a result, I'm rushing through the fourth passage and miss like -4 or -5.

I'm thinking about doing timed sections from the 50s with comparative passages as timing drills.

Alex

@"yeram.choi" said:
Hey @"Alex Divine" thanks for the advice!

For RC, I think it's really timing. I usually have no problem breezing through the first two easier ones, but then I get stuck on the third passage (usually level 4 or so) and get like -3 alone there. And then as a result, I'm rushing through the fourth passage and miss like -4 or -5.

I'm thinking about doing timed sections from the 50s with comparative passages as timing drills.

I think doing some timed RC from the 50s is a great idea! You might also want to try being a bit more aggressive with passages you find easier to bank some time for the harder ones.

nevadacity37

I used to really struggle with RC too... that has passed now (consistently only miss 1 or 2). Some things I did that may help you:
1) I stopped reading for details; I read for structure almost entirely. Quickly note where details are in the passage (I write one word in the side column or just circle it) and the same thing with dates (ex: 17th century). This spend up my timing, and ultimately my comprehension because I was not concerned with the details anyone. Why try and remember 10 details only to be asked about maybe 2 of them?
2) I am acutely aware the author's attitude in the passage. So many times answer choices are not commensurate with the author's position, but they discuss all the right details, which throws a test taker off, because it looks right. But from reading the passage for structure and the author's argument, I know that position - despite all the correct details - cannot be correct.
3) Less is more. If you are someone that likes to notate a lot, I can almost guarantee you this is costing you more than you are gaining. Not only does that take a lot of time, it breaks your concentration on the passage and how it all flows. If you know where to find things quickly, you need not put boxes around terms, circle details, or liter the passage with underlining.
4) Science passages: they are almost always littered with details. Again, know where to find them, don't try and retain all of that. It used to get bogged down in science passage badly, but that has passed since just reading for structure and the author's argument and tone.

Best of luck!!