Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - ySKhYr

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Studying for the LSAT / Re: improved your writing skills after LSAT
« on: January 06, 2007, 04:11:16 PM »
Everyone who read my personal statements commented that my writing has improved a lot over the last year.  So I guess its possible the LSAT had something to do with that.

absolutely not, the LSAT had little to nothing to do with writing ability IMO

Studying for the LSAT / Re: how to remain calm?
« on: January 06, 2007, 12:49:14 AM »
honestly, I remained calm because I knew I could retake if I didn't do well, due to the new LSAC policy.  Of course, I didn't want to retake, but it took some of the pressure off. 

Studying for the LSAT / Re: 170+ requires your innate ability
« on: January 04, 2007, 03:17:24 PM »
I maintain that your innate ability is what determines your capacity to learn.  Therefore, your innate ability will give you your range and then your studying will allow you to score within that range.

I agree with this--accurate and concise, IMO.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Hours of preparation into your 1st Lsat?
« on: January 04, 2007, 03:13:26 PM »
I guess I would count as someone who "coasted"--8 total preptests, and I felt that it was more than enough. I wanted to get it right the first time, without retakes, and haven't looked back since.  I suspect, though, that it's only coasting relative to this board, and that the vast majority of LSAT takers probably dont even take 8 full tests.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: 170+ requires your innate ability
« on: January 03, 2007, 10:47:40 AM »
(my first practice test ever was a 160). Not to brag, but my innate abilities and intelligence say that I am someone who is in the top twenty percent of all people who take this test even without ever studying.

True, but I think a better indication of intelligence isn't what your starting score is, but how much you are able to improve.  Some people can start at 160 and end up with a 180, and some start at 160 and end up with a 165.  Some part of their innate intelligence can get them a cold 160, but what matters more is the part of your intelligence that allows you to learn the test.  (and it is definitely learnable).

Studying for the LSAT / Re: games =( =( =(
« on: December 30, 2006, 11:53:21 PM »
that's exactly how I felt, that my brain wasn't wired for games.  I had to force myself to practice them because I hated them so much, and I still ended up with -2 games on the real thing...and I considered myself lucky because I had been missing about 5 or 6 a section even after lots of practice.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: need your LSAT tips
« on: December 30, 2006, 03:44:25 PM »
i did 8 full practice tests plus about 20 or 30% of TM's homework.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Should I take testmasters?
« on: December 28, 2006, 02:47:01 PM »
keep in mind that TM's methods are not the only way to approach the lsat, and they aren't necessarily the best for you.  I myself took a TM course but by the time I took the LSAT, I was using few, if any, of TM's methods because I had figured out better ways to approach the problems.  Especially if you are naturally a higher-scorer, you may find TM's methods (or the methods of kaplan, PR, etc) to be cumbersome and slow, because they are designed in a "one size fits all" manner.  I recommend TM or similar courses more for the discipline factor than anything--being that's its a classroom course, you'll feel more obligated to do the work and keep up.  However, if you're a disciplined person and it's only the methods you want to learn, the bibles offer pretty much the same thing at a much cheaper price.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: PrincetonReview Private Tutoring
« on: December 28, 2006, 08:29:08 AM »
in the meantime, if you want some explanations for wrong answers, you can just ask me or people on this board...there are a lot of knowledgable people here.  i'd be willing to help you over aim for free if i have some time, i dunno.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Your Worst Section?
« on: December 28, 2006, 08:23:55 AM »
I don't know anyone who's naturally good at both games and RC. I was -3 for RC on my first no-prep diagnostic, and ended up with a -2 on the actual LSAT after what seemed like thousands of hours of studying. At the same time, I was something like -12 or -14 for LG on the first no-prep diagnostic, and was -2 for LG on the LSAT. Meh.

almost the exact same here...i was -2 rc on my first ever diag, and ended up with -2 on the real thing.  games, on the other hand, i was something like -13 on my first diag and then -2 on the real thing...i still consider my games section my weakest by far, though.  i got a lucky draw on the actual lsat and had games i could do (i was getting -5 or -6 per section on practices right up to the actual test).

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5