PT average of 169+ scorers

fib099

Hi all, I'm posting so as to ask for help in regards to how I should be interpreting my PT scores. When I take the LSAT this coming December, I'm aiming for a 169+. If I don't get that, I'm retaking. Also, come December I intend to have taken at least 35 PTs. I'm working towards that goal now, and am about 2/5ths of the way through.

I don't know what to make of my PT scores. I've been told that people generally score lower on the real test than they do on PTs, which is worrying to me, given that my current average is roughly a 170. In any case, I'm curious as to what kind of PT scores people who have taken the test and who have score at or about my goal were averaging. I'm wondering basically whether the fact that I'm not doing better, or the potential that I might not do substantially do better as I work my way through the rest of my PTs, is a problem.

Thanks

LSATKingsman

Great question I too am interested in.

deleted account

@fib099 @LSATKingsman

This is only based on my experience, so don't take it as gospel.

However,I don't think that there is any reason to assume you will score lower on the actual test than practice tests. In fact, I don't know if I am unusually consistent (I think that may be the case to some degree) but I honestly believe that the 2-point margin of error that LSAC says the test has is an exaggeration. I suspect that that the real margin of error is less than one point.

Incidentally, I'm not putting my numbers in here to brag. Just for context. Thought about typing it with variables, but I think my answer will be more useful this way.

Diagnostic: 162
After 13 PT's, averaging 163-164, max of 165: Feb test was 165
Feb to June, did 76 more PT's. I was a little bit inconsistent towards the end, I think because of massive burnout. I was averaging 176 or so, but occasionally plunging to 170. Got 170 on the real tests.

June to October I slowed down my study a lot. I did only 2 tests/week and this is where the consistency hit. My lowest score in this time (only once) was 173. Other than that, my average was 177.1, and towards the end I had ten consecutive tests that were all 178 or 179. Actual test was 178.

The real place where I find consistence is in number of questions wrong per section. And when I say every, I mean that it is invariable. Even at -10, I was getting -10 on every single section. No more, no less. I really think the test is statistically perfect.

So I think the lesson is that you have nothing to worry about. You'll do great. The test is extremely well written and well researched. You will probably get your preptest average exactly, and definitely within a couple of points, unless you burn yourself out like I did before June.

Before Feb:
EVERY LG section: -10
EVERY RC section: -8
EVERY LR section: -1 to 3

Actual unknown of course, as test was undisclosed.

Before June:
Every LG section: -0
Every RC section: -3
Every LR section: -1 to -3

Actual: LG -4 (bombed it ) ; RC -3; LR: -1, -3

Before Oct:
Every LG section: -0
Every RC section: -1
Every LR section: -1
Actual: LG -0; RC -1; LR: -2, -1

fib099

@josephellengar, Thanks for your feedback. I wonder though, did you end up having to reuse some PTs, being that you've retaken 3 times?

Pacifico

@fib099 said:
Also, come December I intend to have taken at least 35 PTs. I'm working towards that goal now, and am about 2/5ths of the way through.

If what you are saying is accurate then you have only taken 14 PTs so far, and plan to take 21 more in 5 weeks. This is a pretty terrible idea because you will need to take at least 4 per week and that's not taking any time off in the last week really. You will invariably burn out doing this. From what we have seen happen time and time again in the past, at this pace your scores will likely start to take a hit to the mid 160s or worse around Thanksgiving and then you're going to totally freak out heading into that last week and not know what to do and then you will panic and likely underperform in the 5-10 point range.

You need to set yourself up for success. If your average is actually a 170 (and it sounds like it is less than that) then you should expect a 167-173 on the test given how well it jives with you and how well you perform on test day. While people greatly underperform for a variety of reasons including the ones listed above, the vast majority of people never outperform this score band. People who get 170+ are pretty much always above 170 on every test, and have a few in the mid to high 170s, and their BR is in the high 170s. People that hover around 170 usually get in the high 160s.

But back to the original point. Your plan is going to set you up to fail because you are going to shortchange the learning process in order to just hit a higher quantity of PTs and hopefully get the instant gratification of a 170+ score on them. You would do better to do a quantity of PTs somewhere in the 10-12 range over the next 4-5 weeks with excellent clean copy BR in which you develop a deeper recognition of the patterns across tests. Quality over quantity. Notice @josephellengar's note about massive burnout. It is real and it is not to be trifled with, especially when there is simply no time to recover from it on this short timeline. Tread carefully. Good luck!

fib099

@Pacifico, thanks for your response, I appreciate it. I was deliberately vague about my PT average because I haven't actually sat down yet to average it, but basically, besides the 2 PTs that I got that were in the mid-170s (174,176), everything has more or less been in the 167-171 range. In any case, if you don't mind me asking, how many more tests would you recommend that I take, if not the 21 or so I had planned? As well, if you've taken the test already yourself, what was your experience in regards your average scores on the PTs in comparison to what you got on the actual test? Would you say that you got what you expected to get, or no?

Petrichor

The 7sage analytic predicted my score pretty much exactly (+0.3 in June, +0.1 in Oct) so personally PTs are a great way to gauge actual performance.

deleted account

@fib099

Over the course of my study I did roughly 130 PT's and definitely did reuse. I did the 60's tests 3 times, the 50's tests twice (some three), the 30's twice, and a couple random tests (I think numbers 43 and 46 or so) also twice. Everything else I did once.

I'm probably grating on @Pacifico 's ears at this point, since I've said it elsewhere (just kidding!) but I really think that retaking has a ton of value. A ton.

Regarding your original question, which I don't think I entirely answered in my first post, I would say that if you are going to retake if you don't hit 169, then you shouldn't test in December unless your preptest average is at least 169. I really regret not cancelling at the very least my first score, since I knew I was going to retake. Now I have a substantial blemish on my record.

And honestly, sending applications in January is pretty late anyway for the schools that take the type of scores you're going for (I'm guessing with a 170+ that you're at least looking at like UPenn and NYU/Columbia). My consultant wants my applications in before Thanksgiving. So it might be a good idea to push back a year and study more.

Faaabs93

For what it's worth, I scored 5 points under my average on test day because of lack of sleep and burnout.

So you would be doing yourself a huge favour by not doing that many PTs, and taking a break here and there. It's something that I wish I did.

Elle2015

I somewhat rushed to take the Oct LSAT (169) because I wanted to apply this cycle. With that said, though, I'm not going to take that kind of risk again. If I don't feel super confident going into December, I'm going to withdraw my registration and retake the LSAT later.

I studied seriously in Jan. and Feb., then took a long break as I was working a ridiculous amount and knew that preparing for the June test wasn't possible. In September, I began studying again. At the time, I wasn't using 7sage. My PT average was 171/172. I took fewer than 10 PTs though. My highest was 176. My lowest 166 due to -9 in LG. The 166 was the only PT I did where my score was under 170. I never missed more than 4 questions in any section except LG. My BR score was probably 179 or 180 for all of them.

When I took the test in October, I think my score was slightly lower than my average and the recent PTs I'd done because I was nervous and panicked. My test was not released but I imagine that I did as I normally had in RC and LR. In LG, I had never been consistent and I was incredibly confused by one of the games so... I also hadn't studied that much, so my confidence wasn't high, even though I tried to build myself up.

I think having the right mindset is important. If you practice a lot and go in calm and confident, you should hit your average.