I'm seeing more and more students with this profile:

• Minimum goal score: 165+
• LSAT take history: 2-3 scores in the low 150s or below
• Registered for an LSAT in couple of weeks
• Current PT range: mid 150s

This is guaranteed failure. It is possible to jump 10+ points on the LSAT. It is almost never possible to do it in a couple of weeks, especially if you've been studying for a while.

What schools will see in this record is poor decision making. Choosing to do a thing when there is 0% chance of success. This is pure sunk cost fallacy.

Yes, you paid money to register for the LSAT. You can't get that money back. You're past the refund deadline. This means, you have two choices:

Take the LSAT

Cost:

• $0
• putting a score you don't want on your record.
• Destroying one of your limited LSAT takes
• Stress and loss of your precious, finite time, which you will never get back

Do not take the LSAT

Cost:

• $0
• Clicking "withdraw" in the LSAC interface

----

Option 2 is strictly better. There is no upside to taking it if you can't get the score you want. Taking the LSAT and not taking the LSAT cost the same amount of money, nothing.

The only way to get better at the LSAT is to focus on the underlying skills, not the timeline or test days. The LSAT is a test of reason, and making the rational choice not to fall into the sunk cost fallacy is the first step you can take to assessing things with reason.

Your LSAT takes and your time are precious, don't throw either one away. Take the LSAT when you're ready, withdraw if you're not. Cancelling is not a solution, you still lose the LSAT take and the time, and schools see the cancel.

Use this thread to ask questions, give tips, vent, or tell people how you're feeling. Good luck in your studies :)

a lot of people here and on adjacent subs say to take your first diagnostic blindly… for anyone like me who had no prior clue what the lsat entails, don’t do this!

it may seem like common sense (probably is—definitely is) but i took it a diagnostic blindly as a first-gen everything with no clue what was actually on the test other than logical reasoning and it being hard. i think it goes without saying, but i got VERY discouraged.

i’m now doing lawhub’s article section, taking notes (because i have a very bad memory), and doing the questions embedded in and in the videos. i’m already seeing better results and feeling more confident with what i’m doing. i HIGHLY recommend the articles for anyone just starting out and who has no clue where to start since it’s free and the only thing you need is an lsac account, which you need anyway to apply.

Hi all,

I've been struggling with the science passages on RC, and no matter how much I try to "actively" engage with the passage, I still do terribly. I have no issues getting -0 on the other passage types, but for science passages, I seem to overwhelmingly get the majority of the questions wrong because I'm unable to understand the text.

For context, on my last PT, I got every single question for the science passage incorrect.

Does anyone have advice on how I can tackle this issue?

Thank you!

So I'm taking the test in August. Got a 163 initial diag, hoping to get as close to 180 as possible. Just finished reading the Powerscore LR Bible and started on 7sage. I don't know anyone else studying for the LSAT right now and want someone to talk about this with who is also taking the test in August, preferably someone with a similar initial diag and goal who is also doing 7sage. Thanks in advance.

[removed]

I just got my Bachelor's this weekend. My GPA is 3.88 (just missed Summa by.02). My practice test in January was 137, and I had to finish at home. I'm 47, Autistic (Asperger's), with Tourettes and ADHD in addition to that. My handwriting speed is also that of a 4th grader. I usually get accommodations for testing, but not sure what I can do for the LSAT.

I managed to save my data for any tutors that I might find. I mainly took the practice test to get a baseline reading. However, with the previous post I just saw here, is that format change going to be significant to the point of nullifying the previous practice test?

As you guys would say, am I cooked?

Hello everyone, as the title says I will be hosting classes on the upper west side of Manhattan

The study location will be the main conference room of my building – there are TVs available for us to connect to and drill together in person. There will be some structure to it, and I will also allow for structured one on one or group learning time.

Any score is welcome- please reach out to me if you’re interested.

Also, if you have a score over 170, please let me know that as well.

I am offering this entirely for free in order to prepare for June and August.

There will be a WhatsApp group created regarding this group. We will meet two times a week.

Students often tell me they didn't pick an answer because "I'm not sure I could assume that".

For example, one question used the term highly inaccurate in the stimulus. The answer talked about unreliable. They were't sure they could pick it.

But if you think about what we mean by highly inaccurate, and by reliable, would you ever consider something highly inaccurate to be reliable? No, it isn't what those words mean. So, it isn't an assumption to come to the conclusion that they refer to the same concept.

The LSAT requires you to use the meanings of words and think through them. Saying "I don't know if I can assume that" isn't logic, you have to actually think about the word and think "would everyone agree this word means this other thing is true?" And if yes, it's not an assumption.

I see this especially when people get into the 160s and can notice small distinctions more easily. You can see a distinction without acting on it: the LSAT wants you to think about whether something is actually a difference or just a distinction.

I have an LSAT question that I don't know how to answer. Can someone explain it? It's this one here. I am paraphrasing from memory.

Ed: President X said that he would would sanction Latveria if they implemented Enhanced Currency. However, they implemented Enhanced Currency, and he didn't sanction them. That makes him a liar.

Fred: Latveria's implementation of Enhanced Currency actually helped us, and he clearly didn't mean he would sanction Latveria if they did something to help us! So he is not a liar.

Ed and Fred disagree on which of the following?

a) Whether President X lied.

b) Whether President X's promise applied even in circumstances where Enhanced Currency helped us.