Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.6K All Categories
- 28.2K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 192 Webinars
- 11 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 112 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 36 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
- 4.1K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 647 Technical Problems
- 288 Off-topic
Comments
If you are absolutely set for September, I'd advise that you do at least the10 most recent exams, 70-80 (if you don't already have access to them, purchase them as singles from LSAC's Amazon) which are not yet available in a Ten Actuals book...doesn't come out until October it's only available for pre-order (the most recently released Ten Actuals, Volume V, begins at 71...purchase that if you have time do mo more than 10, depending on how much time you can devote, depending also on how much of the exams you need to review...be sure to properly BR them all). Taking as many as you can without review may improve your timing, but will not do anything for your score improvement, so carefully review as many as possible. At best, you'd probably be able to squeeze in 3 a week (for a total of 12 exams before you sit), but aim for a minimum of 2, and a cap of 4 per week (if you are scoring high consistently and don't have many questions to BR---which will fit about 16 PT's in before exam). Good luck!
I'm in the same boat. I recently got done with the core curriculum, it took longer than I anticipated, about three months worth of studying. I start my first preptest tomorrow and I'm thinking about starting with the 10 New Actual (52-61) and the nest series after that (62-71). If possible, I'll attempt to do more recent preptests (72-80). I'm scheduled to take the September LSAT as well. I just hope that I don't burn myself out.
This is one of those questions in which there is no general or right answer that fits everyone. The answer is really as many as it takes to hit your target score consistently. Some people have taken each PT 2x or more. Some people only take 20 to hit their goal.
I think the safe bet is to at least start out with the older stuff and then work your way up to newer stuff once you have an idea of where you're at coming out of the CC.
I think it really depends on what your target score is, and also how high you score on your diagnostic.
As @"Alex Divine" said, all of this is variable. It really depends if you have any background in logic or if you take to the material fast or not. For what it is worth, I am also taking in September and I started practice tests 2 months ago, and there is no way I would have been ready and able to hit my target score in a month of doing PTs. I could only manage to do one a week in the beginning in order to BR and really drill my areas of weakness. This isn't a test that you get better at simply by doing PTs over and over, it requires going deep into why you made the mistakes you did and really understanding the logic behind the test. I personally feel this takes a lot of time to sink in for most people (again, you may be a logic genius and get it immediately, so in that case ignore what I'm saying
But I say all this as someone that considers herself pretty smart, but has found this test incredibly difficult to crack. I'm also aiming for 170s, so it depends where you are aiming too.
I found even after finishing CC, I still spent a lot of time going back to the CC after doing PTs and going over fundamentals again and again to make them stick. I also found I had to take a couple days of break now and then to rest my brain, so the more pressure you feel to cram the worse position you are in, imo
I'm only now feeling confident to just focus on taking PTs twice a week for the next month and focusing on building stamina and speed before the September test (and I say that as someone that has been doing nothing but study for this test full-time for the last 2 months, on top of 7 months prior of part-time study on it). I feel much more confident in the basics, so I'm more working on minor tweaks now rather than major hurdles of understanding. And the confidence that comes from knowing what you are doing can't be underestimated.
Just my two cents, but if you aren't feeling ready by september to hit your target score, there is no shame in postponing.
Good luck!
It definitely depends on the person-I've taken tests 19-64 so far-some of them multiple times and I've done all the logic game sections from many earlier tests as well-I plan on taking 65-81 before the sept lsat plus any other tests I can get my hands in-I'm actually working with a deficit of tests-don't see any other way to study, and want to maintain my goal score consistently up to the actual lsat-but depending what you are aiming for, you can get there with less also....
Definitely different for everyone. Just save the newer ones for once you're scoring in the range you want to score in. Use older tests to work your way up.
Thanks @mzoodle on asking this specific question. I'm in a similar situation where I'm wrapping up the CC and want to spend at least 3 months taking PT with BR and hopefully hit my target score when December comes around. This is all good advice! Thanks everyone.
Why is it better to start off with the older tests?
2 reasons. First, so you don't burn the newer tests which are more likely to be more similar to what you see on your administration. Second, because older tests are great for the early learning process because our goal is to master things on a simpler level before we add the nuance and misdirection we see on the newer tests. Older tests are not easier per say by any means, but some of the classic flaws and classic moves are less disguised. For example, LG doesn't have the annoying 1 or 2 Rule Equivalency questions. And RC correct answers are better supported by textual support. All these things make it easier to learn the fundamentals doing the older material.