Anyone here taken it?

 

Of those who have taken it did you find you did better, worse or about the same as you did on practice tests?

 

Finally, did you find the questions to be easier, harder or about the same as what you saw on the practice stuff?

 

Thanks!

my roommate has been freakin out all week about the LSATs tomorrow

 

One of my other friends who took it last year said it was a little harder than the practice, but got close to the same score as the practice tests

Yeah, I have been nervous but I'm feeling more confident...I'm around 160 on my practice tests and most people say that you can get a 3-4 point bump on test day.

 

Tomorrow's the big day.

I took it last February - not fun but not as bad of an experience as I would have thought. I scored right inside my range I had been testing at on test day, but hopefully you get some kind of bump.

 

Now the applications/essays, which I'm currently working on, suck major balls. Honestly I'd rather go through the study/take the LSAT process again than do this whole turn in apps and wait garbage.

 

Edit: I guess you are taking it right now, so good luck.

took it last October. Am currently not in law school.

I gotta take this friggin' thing at some point, I'm just really intimidated by it.

I did decently on the practice one with no preparation or sleep, so I'm not as intimidated by it anymore. I do need to take it soon, though, to get the process going and just in case.

 

Let us know how it was when you get back.

it's really not that bad, at least in my opinion. it's not like you have to memorize a bunch of garbage that you won't use again - only learn how to do a bunch of games that you won't use again (along with reading comprehension and reasoning exercises that are somewhat useful tools)

 

i didn't study for the sat or act, so i can't talk about preparing for the lsat vs. preparing for those tests, but actually taking the lsat was alot less painful than taking the sat and act for me

The concept of the exam's not unfair.

 

Today's exam though, I found to be quite difficult. I had been doing pretty well on the practices, but todays test was harder than most that I had been exposed to previously.

 

However, my understanding is that when there are test taking inconsistencies among the entire population, there's a curve, sometimes a sizeable one. And judging by the reactions of the people coming out of the exam, it seems that this has a good chance to be one of those instances.

 

I'm sure every test center had it's fair share of chicken littles, but I walked out of there finding it diffucult and just about everyone else I heard said they couldn't even finish a single section in the time allotted.

Has anyone taken a course? If so, are they worth it? If I raise my score by even 5 points, I'll supposedly have a fairly large pool of schools to choose from.

 

I took a diagnostic where I performed well, and have since been working on my problem areas. I went through a logic games book by a company called "Curve Breakers" (supposedly based out of Harvard), which taught how to identifiy each game then apply the best method for solving it. Are there any books that people found have been helpful?

 

I won't be taking the test until next year, but I'm curious to know anyone's opinion on the matter.

I took a weekend cram course with Power Score and have a book by Kaplan.

 

I got tutored by a guy from Princeton Review...the processes are all, basically, the same.

 

I'm not an LSAT expert, but it depends where you're scoring. Low scores can see big improvement, medium to high scores sometimes may just hit a wall because a lot of this "out-thinking" the tests takes a big "unlearning...relearning" process. I know that the super intensive stuff works for some but freaks others out.

 

Also, 5 points isn't a huge deal. Supposedly, the margin of error for the test is 3 points, so whatever you get, the law-schools will give you 3 points, generally.

Interesting. I hadn't heard the "margin of error" thing before.

 

I've been considering taking one of those semester long courses offered by Kaplan, but they're so expensive. On one hand, I'm uneasy to commit that much money to something. On the other hand, if it has the potential of giving real results, then maybe it would be worth it.

Interesting. I hadn't heard the "margin of error" thing before.

 

I've been considering taking one of those semester long courses offered by Kaplan, but they're so expensive. On one hand, I'm uneasy to commit that much money to something. On the other hand, if it has the potential of giving real results, then maybe it would be worth it.

 

 

If all you're after is 5 points, a course should help, but it depends where you want those 5 points. I mean, it's much easier to go from a 145-150 than it is to go from a 165-170.

 

Really, my advice would be to get a book of practice tests. See how you do. Then see how those scores stack up to the schools you want to apply, then evaluate from there.

 

I've heard stories of people taking a class and seeing a 20 point swing, and I've also heard stories of people coming out of courses knowing less and feeling less confident than they did going in. Because, really, all the "intensive" courses do is teach you how to beat the test, rather than how to understand it.

Thought the real test was no harder than the practice. The only difference is the pressure constraints you put on yourself know that this is the real deal on test day. This makes it a little harder to concentrate during reading comp, at least IMO. Atmosphere is also much more intense. Either way, when the scores come they will not be much different. I went down a tiny bit but still did very well overall and got myself a scholarship. I'm sure your score will be fine if you are scoring near 160 on the practice.

Interesting. I hadn't heard the "margin of error" thing before.

 

I've been considering taking one of those semester long courses offered by Kaplan, but they're so expensive. On one hand, I'm uneasy to commit that much money to something. On the other hand, if it has the potential of giving real results, then maybe it would be worth it.

 

 

If all you're after is 5 points, a course should help, but it depends where you want those 5 points. I mean, it's much easier to go from a 145-150 than it is to go from a 165-170.

 

Really, my advice would be to get a book of practice tests. See how you do. Then see how those scores stack up to the schools you want to apply, then evaluate from there.

 

I've heard stories of people taking a class and seeing a 20 point swing, and I've also heard stories of people coming out of courses knowing less and feeling less confident than they did going in. Because, really, all the "intensive" courses do is teach you how to beat the test, rather than how to understand it.

 

I'm not really looking to improve my score, as much as I am looking to improve my performance in the logic games ( I feel confident in the other parts of the exam). Getting a better grasp of that section will get to my score in line with my goal. If the course gives insight into the games and makes most people feel more confident about that section, then that's what I'm looking for.

 

Good luck, by the way. I hope it went well for you.

I'm not really looking to improve my score, as much as I am looking to improve my performance in the logic games ( I feel confident in the other parts of the exam). Getting a better grasp of that section will get to my score in line with my goal. If the course gives insight into the games and makes most people feel more confident about that section, then that's what I'm looking for.

 

Good luck, by the way. I hope it went well for you.

 

 

Def. worth taking a class for logic games. IMO that is the only section a class really helps in. Once you figure out that there is basically only 4-6 real formulas that can be expanded to fit every game, you will do amazing on that section and it actually becomes quite easy and fun. I finished that section with almost 10 minutes to go and got a perfect score after initially struggling very badly on it during the diagnostic test.

Thanks for the advice. I guess that's what I'll be doing this summer.

The logic games were also my trouble point out of all the three sections. I didn't take a course but just used the Princeton Review book (much cheaper) and it helped alot - I ended up coming out of the test having the most confidence in my logic games score (I don't know how I did on each section as my test results were closed last february), and that's not because I felt I bombed the other sections or anything. Basically I had the same results/initial situation as The Fan but did it with the book, so that might be something to consider.

The logic games were also my trouble point out of all the three sections. I didn't take a course but just used the Princeton Review book (much cheaper) and it helped alot - I ended up coming out of the test having the most confidence in my logic games score (I don't know how I did on each section as my test results were closed last february), and that's not because I felt I bombed the other sections or anything. Basically I had the same results/initial situation as The Fan but did it with the book, so that might be something to consider.

 

 

Easily a true statement most people feel by test day. Logic games is a section where you know it or you don't and there is very little doubt left after you answer each question as to if you got it correct.

Interesting. I hadn't heard the "margin of error" thing before.

 

I've been considering taking one of those semester long courses offered by Kaplan, but they're so expensive. On one hand, I'm uneasy to commit that much money to something. On the other hand, if it has the potential of giving real results, then maybe it would be worth it.

 

 

If all you're after is 5 points, a course should help, but it depends where you want those 5 points. I mean, it's much easier to go from a 145-150 than it is to go from a 165-170.

 

Really, my advice would be to get a book of practice tests. See how you do. Then see how those scores stack up to the schools you want to apply, then evaluate from there.

 

I've heard stories of people taking a class and seeing a 20 point swing, and I've also heard stories of people coming out of courses knowing less and feeling less confident than they did going in. Because, really, all the "intensive" courses do is teach you how to beat the test, rather than how to understand it.

 

I'm not really looking to improve my score, as much as I am looking to improve my performance in the logic games ( I feel confident in the other parts of the exam). Getting a better grasp of that section will get to my score in line with my goal. If the course gives insight into the games and makes most people feel more confident about that section, then that's what I'm looking for.

 

Good luck, by the way. I hope it went well for you.

 

Yeah, if it's games (as it almost always is) a class is a good idea.

 

They'll break it down into: linear, spatial, numerical distribution and multiple variable sets. After that you're at least able to conceptualize how to get the answer.

how long are scores good for?

 

 

aka if i take it this year, how long can i use those scores for?

i believe 5 years

how long are scores good for?

 

 

aka if i take it this year, how long can i use those scores for?

 

 

5 years.

 

But sometimes schools will make you take them again if it's past 2 years.