How to go to 177+ ? Forum

[BenJ]

Did you sleep? That was what screwed me up the first time; I went from a 167 in September to a 178 in December. Otherwise, I recommend just trying to stay calm. Once you're PTing that high, the key is just to keep your nerves under control and make sure you get sleep. Clearly, you have the skills to do amazingly well, so you don't need a lot more studying.

[IHaveDietMoxie]

Ice in the veins.

Edit for real advice: Don't get caught up in the gravity of the situation when you are taking the real test. Treat it like just another practice test. If you start thinking about how many points you think you have, questions you might have missed on other sections, etc., you can lose sight of what you're doing.

Hey, I liked the "ice in the veins" advice
But you're right, I think that was probably where I slipped up the most. I didn't have a full-on panic attack or anything but in the first section I could not stop thinking about how many I possibly got wrong / how that would affect how well I needed to do in the subsequent sections. I managed to pull myself together sometime in the middle of the second section, but I guess the damage was done already.

blueballa, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought the curve in Asia must've been tough.

MURPH, thanks for the advice but the problem is I live in Korea, so there's less of a demand for LSAT tutors here... I'll definitely keep that in mind though.

Hi DietMoxie!! how are your apps going? Are there any particular logic intro books that you recommend? Based on some other threads I've read there seems to be a debate on whether doing that is really effective or not but I guess it can't hurt...

Hey what's up? Apps are going pretty well. I made my ps perfect and then realized it was like any other boring sob story, so I've been staying up late to write a more interesting version. Think maybe my app will be more memorable if it is the very LAST one submitted in the cycle?

Copi/Cohen Intro to Logic is excellent if you have a couple weeks to devote to the exercises and aren't well versed on the subject.

ice in the veins is also credited.

[angel404]

A few words of caution. At a 170, when retaking you are statistically more likely to go down than up. So retaking is a decision that you should not take lightly. Having said that, I went up significantly from a 170, but I was sick with the flu the first time I took it.

Now, a note on the December test. I think your best prediction of a future score is an understanding of why you're making your mistakes. If you're the type that pretty consistently losing 4 points (or some other number) over the two LR sections, regardless of the curve of the LSAT scoring scale, then you probably benefited from the generous curve on the Dec test. Be aware of what's coming from error and what's coming from skill. On the October test a -14 would have landed you in the 160's.

I've seen friends go up and friends go down. The difference seems to be practice. If you're set on retaking, remember this: hope is not a strategy. Take it seriously and do the work. I did every single LSAT problem from 1990 to the present.

[sibley]

Think maybe my app will be more memorable if it is the very LAST one submitted in the cycle?

I wish that it worked that way. And that they also gave out more $$$ towards the end of the cycle as well.

[Kulax22]

I went from 98%ile to 99%ile, so I outscored half of the test takers who outscored me the first time around. That's a significant improvement, but the adcomms didn't see it that way. I was told that a 3-point increase was statistically meaningless. It is very difficult to improve at the top end. Some people retake without any additional prep and everything clicks. Others double up their study efforts and have only modest gains to show for it. Have you done all the PTs already?

Huh!? Come on now, that's crazy. Why else do they seem to prefer a 170 over a 167? That too would be meaningless... Maybe the adcomms just want everyone to be screwed at the end of the day. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[WrappedUpInBooks]

A few words of caution. At a 170, when retaking you are statistically more likely to go down than up. So retaking is a decision that you should not take lightly. Having said that, I went up significantly from a 170, but I was sick with the flu the first time I took it.

Now, a note on the December test. I think your best prediction of a future score is an understanding of why you're making your mistakes. If you're the type that pretty consistently losing 4 points (or some other number) over the two LR sections, regardless of the curve of the LSAT scoring scale, then you probably benefited from the generous curve on the Dec test. Be aware of what's coming from error and what's coming from skill. On the October test a -14 would have landed you in the 160's.

I've seen friends go up and friends go down. The difference seems to be practice. If you're set on retaking, remember this: hope is not a strategy. Take it seriously and do the work. I did every single LSAT problem from 1990 to the present.

OP took the LSAT in Asia, so it was a different test, and therefore probably didn't have the -14 curve.

[kazu]

Think maybe my app will be more memorable if it is the very LAST one submitted in the cycle?

I wish that it worked that way. And that they also gave out more $$$ towards the end of the cycle as well.

Memorable, yes... although probably not in a good way. I'm so glad I don't have to deal with apps yet & I can just concentrate on this for at least the next few months.

I got maybe 5~6 hours of sleep the night before, not quite enough but I was glad to get even that since I sometimes suffer from insomnia. I debated taking sleep medication but decided against it since it usually leaves me feeling groggy in the morning, and I thought it wasn't worth the risk.

As WrappedUp said I did not have the -14 curve, in fact I would be very surprised if the one I took had a generous curve. But I do agree that I probably need to pinpoint my weak spots...

And I agree with Kulax that saying a 3 point increase at the top is meaningless is completely crazy. Do all adcomms say that or was it just one from a particular school?

[JazzOne]

I went from 98%ile to 99%ile, so I outscored half of the test takers who outscored me the first time around. That's a significant improvement, but the adcomms didn't see it that way. I was told that a 3-point increase was statistically meaningless. It is very difficult to improve at the top end. Some people retake without any additional prep and everything clicks. Others double up their study efforts and have only modest gains to show for it. Have you done all the PTs already?

Huh!? Come on now, that's crazy. Why else do they seem to prefer a 170 over a 167? That too would be meaningless... Maybe the adcomms just want everyone to be screwed at the end of the day. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It might have had something to do with the fact that my original score was already above the school's 75%ile. A three-point increase didn't really help the school's numbers any more than my original score.

[skip james]

A few words of caution. At a 170, when retaking you are statistically more likely to go down than up.

actually this isn't true.

http://www.lsac.org/pdfs/InformationBookweb.pdf

average retake for a 170 was 171.2

[sibley]

A few words of caution. At a 170, when retaking you are statistically more likely to go down than up.

actually this isn't true.

http://www.lsac.org/pdfs/InformationBookweb.pdf

average retake for a 170 was 171.2

Dude, I fear the future of law.... none of us seem to understand basic statistics. I took it twice, getting C+ the first time, B+ the second. Suck at it. But... I do know 98% of people scoring below a 170 doesn't mean that you have a 98% chance of scoring below a 170...