*

[nuppin]

*

[meggo]

Yes, take your diagnostic. You won't know anything until you do. I think you also need to calm down since taking the SAT without studying and getting a 1240 (I'm going to use the old system since I don't know the new one) doesn't make you an average test taker. It makes you an above average test taker. I personally believe one can get 165+ on the LSAT through pure hard work and studying and if you have a natural affinity for test taking, which it seems like you do, you're even better situated. I was going to suggest providing proof that your SAT's were not indicative of your undergrad performance, but since you scored alright on them, might have a harder case proving that than if you had got let's say, a 1000.

[Scentless Apprentice]

FYI, 3.82 is better than "okay"

If I went to UCLA I would go say hi to Greg Graffin.

[meggo]

yeah cheers Lavahead I was going to comment on that....I thought this might be a flame but on the off hand it wasn't, decided to answer....

[isittomorrowyet]

I also made a 1240 on the SAT (without studying), scored a 151 on my first diagnostic and now after only a couple of months' study I am practicing in the 165-169 range.  I hope to break 170 by October.

The LSAT is a b*tch, but it's learnable, even for standardized-test idiots like me.

[The Stranger]

Hey Folks,

I am a newbie here at LSD and I am taking the first steps towards making myself a competitive law school applicant.
I just completed the first two years of my undergraduate career at UCLA. So far my grades are okay (3.821 overall GPA) and I am hoping to use the last two years of my undergrad to get my GPA over the 3.90 mark (just 0.08 more points).

I have really strong soft factors thus far (Several internships, research fellowships, teaching experience - i have TAed and taught a class, and I have several community involvement). I know it soft factors doesn't mean much but I have that going for me as well. Furthermore, I have a unique life upbringing (which I will be talking about in my PS) and I already have ID the three professors I want my recs to come from (two are beasts in their fields, both have endowed chairs, and one is going to be my honors thesis advisor).

So everything is staged for me to make into the top-14 right? No...THE LSAT...is the one part of my application I have some concern about. I have historically been a average test taker and I never took standardized tests seriously, like my SAT was something I didn't study for but did okay on 1940/2400 or for you older folks that is a 1240/1600.

So I am going into my junior year, with hopes of making into law school for fall 2011. How should I attack this LSAT exam. I am going to be taking a diagnostic after the end of this post. However, while I am certain I won't do well out of the box, is it possible to train yourself to get a 165+ lsat score? Is this a LSAT something that I can master even if I suck at standardized tests? I am really scared because I keep flipping through some of these posts and I see individuals with poor scores on the real LSAT  (150-159), and I don't want to be one of those indviduals, I am want the highest score possible (180). I don't care if it takes me the rest of this year, next year to master this test. I want a bombass score.

Ahhh...I am so worried starting this LSAT prep process...I am going to go take my diagnostic 

Whatever you do, please do not try to figure this test out by yourelf. You might think you are a genius and you can just buy a couple of LSAT books off of the shelf but this test will humble you. You should either take a LSAT class with a great instructor or better yet work with a tutor. And of course, you should type on lawschooldiscussion.org constantly. I have spent a bunch of time typing on LSAT boards like this one and it has really helped congeal the concepts in my mind.

Good luck to you!

[Lindbergh]

Hey Folks,

I am a newbie here at LSD and I am taking the first steps towards making myself a competitive law school applicant.
I just completed the first two years of my undergraduate career at UCLA. So far my grades are okay (3.821 overall GPA) and I am hoping to use the last two years of my undergrad to get my GPA over the 3.90 mark (just 0.08 more points).

I have really strong soft factors thus far (Several internships, research fellowships, teaching experience - i have TAed and taught a class, and I have several community involvement). I know it soft factors doesn't mean much but I have that going for me as well. Furthermore, I have a unique life upbringing (which I will be talking about in my PS) and I already have ID the three professors I want my recs to come from (two are beasts in their fields, both have endowed chairs, and one is going to be my honors thesis advisor).

So everything is staged for me to make into the top-14 right? No...THE LSAT...is the one part of my application I have some concern about. I have historically been a average test taker and I never took standardized tests seriously, like my SAT was something I didn't study for but did okay on 1940/2400 or for you older folks that is a 1240/1600.

So I am going into my junior year, with hopes of making into law school for fall 2011. How should I attack this LSAT exam. I am going to be taking a diagnostic after the end of this post. However, while I am certain I won't do well out of the box, is it possible to train yourself to get a 165+ lsat score? Is this a LSAT something that I can master even if I suck at standardized tests? I am really scared because I keep flipping through some of these posts and I see individuals with poor scores on the real LSAT  (150-159), and I don't want to be one of those indviduals, I am want the highest score possible (180). I don't care if it takes me the rest of this year, next year to master this test. I want a bombass score.

Ahhh...I am so worried starting this LSAT prep process...I am going to go take my diagnostic 

1.  A 3.8 isn't okay, it's very good.

2.  Uniqueness can help, especially if you're urm.

3.  No, everything is not staged for you to get into the T14.  LSAT is most important, whether or not it should be.  So you're wise to be thinking about it.

4.  A 1240 is a solid SAT score, near the 90th percentile, I believe.  It indicates you're probably capable of scoring at least a 162 on the LSAT, provided you invest enough time and effort.  I don't see any reason why you can't break 165 if you work hard enough, long enough, and smart enough. It is possible to train yourself to break 165 if you have sufficient aptitude to begin with, and you probably do.

5.  Almost everyone starts out relatively low, b/c the LSAT is an unusual exam, and it takes time to become accustomed to it.  I advise people not to even take a diagnostic until they're fully familiar with the test, and I advise them to take their first test untimed.  A raw, timed diagnostic will usually just discourage you, unless you're a freak of nature.  It also doesn't necessarily say that much about where you'll end up. 

6.  Scores in the 150's aren't poor, they're actually pretty decent.  An average score on the LSAT is around 151/152, and a 159 is above the 80th percentile.  I'm sure you don't mean to insult other posters on the board, but it's something to keep in mind. 

7.  You won't get a 180. 

8.  If you can break 160 on the LSAT, which you probably will, you should have some good options.  Don't stress, just work steady.

[EarlCat]

So what did you score eggo?

[!закон и право!]

154...Blueprint had issues with reading my score after the diagnostic...they said they would email it and i got my official diag. score two days ago.

I really am not discouraged because I am only 11 points away from my min. target score. My shippment of LSDAS prep books came in today (the 10 actual series).

I also got the first Powerscore Bible from a friend. The games were my strong suit however I am gonna focus first on that section to improve timing.

Just need to find the best study regiment for the next year and a half...i am aiming to take the LSAT December 2009 or Febuary 2010 (Got some time)

Plenty of time.

You should be fine.

[Tetris]

flame?