Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 12 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 31 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 636 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
My LSAT journey is over |144 --->166 Rough road(inspiration)/Top 3 Tips
TheDeterminedC
Member
10/26/2021 Update: I am currently a 2L at USC Gould. Feel free to DM me questions about the LSAT, the application process or law school. My journey was far from ideal, but I hope I can provide some insight.
Overview of my journey:
I'm writing this for a bit of inspiration for anyone that is in need of it because my journey was not easy, but it sure paid off because I stuck to it.
I studied on/off for nearly two years total. My diagnostic was a 144 back in Jan 2017. After finishing the 7Sage CC, I was sitting at a 152 in May of 2017. I made sure to really take my time with the lessons and I hope everyone does the same as well--it was time well spent and I would definitely do it this way again.
Post CC was really where the grind began. I was dead set on a 170 score.
My first take: 161 in December 2017.
Second take: 161 in December 2018.
After studying for 10 months 5.5 days a week for 8 hours a day, I received the SAME EXACT SCORE.
I was actually depressed after this test. I was emotionally numb for about a month, it was rough. The following weeks post-results felt like a nightmare I would eventually wake up from. In particular, LSAT was my life at this point, and to have zero improvement on the only thing I was focused on was one of the toughest feelings out there. Most of all, I had nobody to blame but myself.
I took a two month break and got back to hitting the test hard again for 4 months.
Third take: 166 in June 2019.
Same study plan, but I used the BEST tutor, @"Cant Get Right." I'm not sure how the rules are for plugging people, but he was just phenomenal with picking out my weaknesses and helping me combat them in an understandable way. I cannot say enough great things about Josh. Here is his website. https://www.nevermorelsat.com/
Top 3 tips:
1) DO NOT USE ALL THE PT MATERIAL. I cannot stress this enough. I would feel so confident after blind reviewing a PT from learning an immense amount from it that I would take another right away WITHOUT drilling weaknesses. Not surprisingly, I would receive similar scores, on average, because I failed to address weaknesses. Sure I spent days on BR ripping apart questions, but what's that worth if I never addressed the underlying problem by drilling it away? Make sure to save PT material and use it wisely. Personally, I ran out and that created a ton of unnecessary problems. Without drilling in-between PTs, I would waste limited PTs on full tests to receive very little benefit from using all that material. Please don't make this mistake.
2) Good, bad, or otherwise, DO NOT let the overall score get to you, ever. When practicing for this test for an extended amount of time, the most important thing to know for keeping one's mental in the right place is that an overall score is simply a really poor gauge for your improvement. Seems a bit counterintuitive, right? Of course, to combat this, 7sage takes the last 5 PTs and averages them for your improvement score. Although this is more accurate, it's still a poor indicator of IMPROVEMENT. Allow me to explain why. LSAC has thousands of tricks that they use. Some happen more than others. It takes time to learn these tricks and just because you learned a few new tricks or new ways of thinking on your most recent PT BR, that doesn't mean those aspects are going to be tested again in the next PT you do. It actually would make sense that ideas being testing on in, let's say, PT61, are going to be testing totally different tricks than those used in PT60, since the previous test may have been released for people to study it. For example, LSAC is NOT likely to put two 5 star questions with a very similar small trick in them, in sequential PTs. But some people take PTs in sequential order. So while you are actually improving, you are likely being tested on the areas you have yet to ever see. So please don't look at the final score and think THAT is the measure of your improvement.
Here is an optimistic way of thinking that helped me keep my drive, despite the scores: The more missed questions, the more opportunities I had to fix problems. The more problems fixed, the less problems I could potentially run into on test day if I ran into a similar question/topic.
The only aspect that should be celebrated or frowned upon are similar questions that you've studied before/have seen and now on this second time: 1) you recognized the similarity or not, 2) you got it right or not, 3) you skipped it or not (strategically) 4) you got it correct again, but faster or not. Situations like this are a direct measure of improvement and they are key to watch out for.
3) Do not be complacent with studying. During some time in August 2018, I "perfected" logic games. To me that means I had done each LG from PTs 20-70 6 times each. Even the easy ones. Additionally, I typically finished the first 3 games in 15 mins. This left 20 mins for the last game. With that amount of time banked, it gives way less of an opportunity to bomb the (typically) hard last one. My LG got to the point where I was able to use the restroom during my second LSAT take and I still got a -0 (please don't drink 5 bottles of water within 20 hours of the exam). HOWEVER, I neglected LG and I made a simple mistake on the third take with the game board. That mistake cost me 3 questions. Meaning, my best section I usually have 10 minutes left over after going -0 cost me a 168 score because I neglected that area during study. I became overconfident and made a mistake that I had, in the past, fixed before. Yet, I decided to make it again on test day. I think this is a direct result of my complacency. Please learn from my mistake.
This community has helped me so much. So if anyone wants to chat about anything LSAT related, has any questions, or simply wants to vent, please feel free to DM me 
What a journey this one was and I would not be in this position without 7Sage and the community.
Thank. You.
Comments
Thank you for sharing this.
Thanks for sharing!
Can you maybe talk about what went wrong during the 2nd take? especially if you studied so hard for so long and got the same score? Nerves? Were your PT scores leading up to the second take much much higher than 161? Or perhaps it was hard to tell because you ran out of test material so quickly
Sure I can.
One of the worst parts about my second take was that I felt so ready. I had zero nerves at all and plenty of room at the test center in the back corner of it too (which is my favorite/preferred spot for classes in college). However, I drank too much water and was literally bouncing in my chair having to go so bad. I was seconds from disaster. It was VERY distracting.
I did take the test a few months later after it was released and I missed a ton of the same LR questions I did on the actual test. It seems I was just duped by the LR sections.
I was at a 165 average during that time and a 169 for the third.
Edit: I used up all the remaining LSAC PTs for the second take, I was that confident (sadly)! Luckily, one new PT was released and I got a 169 on that one.
I went over the second take and others with my tutor and he found big, overarching problems we fixed and my score went on the rise from there. It had to do with 1) getting rid of all anticipating, 2) getting rid of following strict "rules" I have internalized over the years 3) focusing in on precise language.
In other words, I would eliminate/pick answers because: I would anticipate a trap (LSAC knows what a 160 scorer would anticipate), it fits "patterns" I've seen over the years (which many have flipped on the newer ones) and, I would misread a very small word that changes the meaning completely (by design, of course). After I fixed those I was finally improving.
I would have never known about these bad tendencies I had if my tutor, Josh, did not point them out.
Congratulations! Thanks so much for sharing these tips!! Wishing you the best of luck in your law school journey!
You did it. Grind it out. Law school aint ready.
Thank you so much for sharing your story! Very inspiring; you made my day hearing about your struggles and ultimate perseverance.
Thanks for the kind words!
Always loved your explanations! Congrats bud!
This is very encouraging! Thank you for sharing and congrats
It is very encouraging to read your post! Congratulations on your LSAT journey!
Ty for the post and congrats
great work, especially coming back from your second take. you won!
Logic Games Question - What prep tests do you think are essential for foolproofing? Some say 1-35 and others have a different range, like yours. I will be foolproofing soon and would love some guidance!
Congrats! That's about my goal score and I'm chipping away with 7sage help!
LG question: I feel and see tangible improvements in LR. I grasp conclusions better and eliminate trap answers faster. I can feel my thinking processes change.
For LG however, how do you KNOW you've made improvements? IS there a mental checklist or process that gets faster or more accurate? For new games, I still freeze up after initial set up when I can't make any of the key inferences.
How do you think you've improved on this and how did you go about eliciting this type of improvement on inferential skills?
Thanks!
I don't have a specific range for LG, as I think all of them are essential for the "hard" game (usually the 4th one). I say this because LSAC doesn't typically reinvent a logic game to make it really tough. The are typically unique combinations of games put into one. Having a very good understanding of all major game types both saves time for the last one and it also aids in a quicker understanding of how to go about completing it.
For example, during my second take I vividly remember being on that 4th game with 19 mins left just confused. I messed around with the game board a bit and then the solution hit me like a truck five min later--I saw that the game was a sequence game using a subtle hidden trick of double spacings that I have seen before. I finished that game so quickly afterwards. This is what I mean by all games are important. We won't know what the hard game will be, but knowing the various game types though and though allows the mind to be more creative in situations like this.
Though if I had limited time to study, I would be using the newer LG sections to fool poof. The newer ones have been using reiterations from old tests with a twist to them (even the "easy" ones). While others are just straight in/out games with no twists, for example. In this sense, I think the newer LG sections offer more learning experiences per section than do the older ones.
You said it yourself, "I still freeze up after initial set up when I can't make any of the key inferences."
The improvement is exactly at this point. As soon as you finish writing down all the translations and the gameboard, you should be in hunt mode, looking to write out all the inferences or split the board with no hesitation and with accuracy. This comes with practice. I think that's really why the 7sage method for LG is so great---inferences will begin to happen without much thinking. LG is 70% about inferences, 10% about knowing how to visually represent the game for yourself to best succeed, and 10% about reading correctly IMO.
Also, find out what method works for you. J.Y.'s method wasn't the best one for me. I like to solve for all game boards and run though the questions in less than one minute. J.Y. doesn't typically does not do it this way. So make sure you find out what works for you. As an example, if the game requires 6 gameboards to answer 5 questions, I would still do all gameboards. I can make the inferences quickly and solve for all possibilities right there on my paper. When asked a question, I already have the answer. Others like to make the rest of the inferences when the question asks. Either way works and they each have positive and negatives to the method.
What's your strategy for improving LR?
I stated three key reasons that were holding me back in LR in the comments above. That is what truly made the difference on test day for me. But there is no shortcut to knowing the material, i.e logic, conclusions, what the question stems are asking, ect.
I think that until around a 160 score, learning the basics should be a priority. After scoring a 160, studying should switch to 1) speed (intuition/trust), 2) bad tendencies, and 3) reading carefully. Aspects geared more towards addressing time. The logic behind this reasoning is that if one's BR score is right where they want to be at, then focusing heavily on substantive knowledge is likely to affect the BR score more than the timed score. Because of this, the focus should change to how to take the test with these timed conditions. It's one thing to do well on the test and it's another to do well with the time restraints and pressure.
I believe this was talked about in a webinar on this site, but a 160 scorer will have typically a 165-170 range for BR. This means our goal should shift away from figuring out how to answer the questions to closing the BR and timed gap by asking how to most efficiently answer them. I took this to heart and this is where I started seeing my LR improvement.
J.Y. gave some great advice on a random explanation that resonated well with me. He stated that 170+ scorers don't typically know the information better than a 165 scorer, they just bank more time than them and use that banked time efficiently. I totally agree with this as it makes sense why a 165 scorer can get close to or surpass the 170 mark on an untimed go. The challenge is being able to answer those "easier" questions quickly and with confidence. On the flip side, it's also knowing that a question is really difficult and should be skipped. I struggled with this and I eventually get better as I started trusting myself more. This all takes practice, but the second test I failed to heavily focus on closing my timed/BR score gap.
Following
bumping for all those who need inspiration!
Congrats! Just reading this post for the fist time.
DMed Question: Tips for getting better at the harder LR questions (the curvebrearker 4-5 star questions)
Answer: In my opinion, you need to diagnose the issue--are you missing those questions because of a substantive understanding issue or was it because of the time pressure? I.e. are you getting those questions wrong regardless of how much time you could have spent on it? If the answer is yes, you need to slow down in your studying and get rid of time being a factor (see below). An analogy: why try and shoot for finishing a marathon in three hours if you could not even finish a marathon with unlimited time? Focus on finishing (getting it right, and for the correct reasons), then speed.
What is your BR score? What is your goal score?
If your BR score is not at or above your goal score --> I would drill those 4&5 star LR questions untimed (use the 7Sage question bank to filter LR difficulty and PT range, then print those sets). Spend as much time as it takes to COMPLETELY break down the problem (label sentences that are irrelevant/filler, conclusions, premises, important words, tricks, AND your reasoning for each). I even spent two hours on some questions doing this. Your goal is to dig through each sentence, each answer, and WRITE DOWN your reasoning for marking it as correct or incorrect or why/what reason the sentence was there (or use a voice recorder and think out loud).
Doing this allows you to understand what you are thinking during the problem at each particular point.
Then, in retrospect, go through and figure out where your thinking was incorrect or how you could have arrived at the correct thinking quicker. After doing this detailed work, you can quickly figure out where your reasoning was wrong, or possibly find something critical that you initially failed to see. That is where the learning is.
It takes an enormous amount of time, but doing that enough times will change your thinking without you realizing it! It will make your intuition sharp, and will build trust within yourself (which is very important when trying to improve on the intense time pressured portion).