so discouraged and need some advice

[Framboise]

bigs the idea is that first of all, it's not the same pool of test-takers every time.  Johnny, Jill, Mary, and Steve are taking it in June.  Johnny, Mary, and Steve are happy with their scores, but Jill decides to retake in October.  Karen, Mike, and Angela are also in sitting in October.  IF you're one of the people who believes that the curve is set after everyone takes the test, than you'll think that Jill received a score that was determined by how many raw points she earned in comparison to anyone else.  In this case, even if Jill scored below median in June, it doesn't mean she'll be below median in October.  What if the pool of test-takers is less prepared in October and what if Jill studied her heart out and jumped up 17 points and went from a 153 to a 170?  Therefore, someone whose percentile was probably around 55 (I don't feel like looking it up for real, but the exact number is not important).  Suddenly, she finds herself in the 97th percentile.  That is what we're talking about.  Just because someone scores below a 160 doesn't mean they don't have the potential to do so.  Any of Jill's fellow October test-takers could also re-sit in December after ample self-study and could end up being the next Jill.

On the other hand, if you're one of those people who think that the curve is set before the test-takers take the exam, and this is probably the case, that means that yes, more than 20% of test-takers can fall above the 20th percentile, because the raw number of questions one would need to get right would already be determined.  Let's say that number was 28.  If more than 20% of test-takers get 28 or fewer questions wrong, then you would have more than 20% of test-takers above the 80th percentile.  Someone already pointed this out earlier in the thread.

And once again, we're talking about individuals.  Each reasonably intelligent individual has the power to reach the 80th percentile, even if they throw in the towel before they reach it.

[Framboise]

Oh, and I've thought this for a bit, but I call troll on you bigs.

[like_lasagna]

It really disappoints me to open every thread here and see bigs5068 commenting on them. I really hope people don't take his advice seriously.

Why doesn't everyone get a raw score sufficient for a 163 on the current scale? (I think that completely removes percentiles from the equation.)

Because people are bums. Some people are smarter than others, yes, and they probably won't have to work as hard to get a very good LSAT score. But time and effort can get you to where you want to go. I don't think it can always get you to the 170s or whatever, but you can certainly improve.

OP: you can get to a 163. You already jumped 8 points; all you need to do is jump 8 more. Use allllllllll of the Kaplan resources; they put so much stuff online that I think it's impossible to run out. Every time you take a test, go over allllllllll the questions and read the explanations. Figure out the patterns in the test. Figure out where you're messing up. You can make it.

[haus]

It really disappoints me to open every thread here and see bigs5068 commenting on them. I really hope people don't take his advice seriously.

Well I am glad that we have your 4 postings to gain wisdom from.... anyway....

[bigs5068]

I honestly  hope nobody is taking advice period from anyone on this thread or the board very seriously. It is bunch of anonymous random people with completely different lives commenting from their own unique point of views. Often times I am embarrassed I spend so much time on this site. I do it to kill on time on Caltrain or during breaks of studying. The LSAT is different for different people. Law school is different for different people. As most people who actually attend law school know there is almost never a right answer for anything.

Hopefully the OP gets a 163+ that would be great. Not everyone achieves that score as I said a million times 80% of test takers do not achieve that score. It is possible those 80% of people including the OP did not work hard enough,  did not have the raw intelligence to score that highly, or it could be one of a million other factors that come into play. In the end hopefully the OP will get the score she wants, but there is no way of guaranteeing she will post a 163.  Most of the people commenting on this thread have not even taken the LSAT. I have a hard time listening to someone discuss the LSAT or law school in general if they themselves have not done even taken the LSAT. That is just me though. It should be noted I am only a second year law student, which essentially means I know nothing as well. The reality is most people on this thread and board in general really have any idea what they are talking about. It is again anonymous people on the internet posting their views. Hopefully  few pre LSAT 0L's take everything they read on this board or the internet in general with a major grain of salt. 

[like_lasagna]

Well I am glad that we have your 4 postings to gain wisdom from.... anyway....

My lack of advice does not make his advice good.

The forums at top-law-schools.com have a far, far more realistic perspective on law schools and the legal profession.

[haus]

Would you like me to google the address for you so you can find your happy home?

Your correct four postings does not make your advice good nor bad, it simply states that you have yet to provide anything of value but to female dog about someone who does contribute.

I honestly do not care I'd you like or dislike bigs. Reasonable (& unreasonable) people can disagree, but bigs seem to be very forthcoming with his experiences and the choices that he has made. The material is all there for someone to review and decide how to weigh his advice/comments.

You, not so much.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=top-law-schools.com

[bigs5068]

That is an awesome link. Thank you for your support. All I have tried to say is that it is possible not everyone can achieve a 160 on the LSAT. Maybe everyone can in regards to my situation I could not take 6 months off or buy a course to study. When I graduated from college I had to start working immediately.  I could not move in with my parents and nobody was going to pay for a prep course. One week after graduation I was working 50 hours a week and I studied for the LSAT on weekends and when I had a free moment. My diagnostic was 143 and after 6 months of studying I raised it to a 155. It is possible I could have raised it to a 160 hell maybe I could even got a 170. If I could have quit work and had someone pay for me to take Kaplan etc courses. However, I am not aware of any banks that hand out LSAT study loans and real life comes into play.

For all I know Framboise and some of the other posters have parents who they can move in with after graduation. Maybe these parents will pay for courses etc. Maybe they don't have this advantage and will be in the same situation I was when they take the real LSAT. Maybe they can even score a 160+ while working full time and taking care of things.  However, it should be noted that someone has family support it is a huge advantage and you are likely going to be able to improve your score more than I did. Economics and family support is a huge factor to consider. As hard as it may to believe for many people considering or attending law school many people do not have parents that cater to their every need or pay for every academic advancement. I have had to hustle every since I left high school and up to this point everything has worked out for me. Now on top of the monetary and time considerations it is possible that not everyone has the raw intelligence to achieve a 160. My diagnostic score was 143 other posters started at 151. Based on this it might be possible that if you start at 151 you will have an easier time achieving a 160 than someone who started at 143.  Therefore, achieving a 160 may be easier for you than it is for me and the other 80% of people who do not finish with a 160 in the end. 

Again, believe it or not everyone's life and circumstances are completely different. Based on widely life circumstances and people starting with vastly different diagnostic scores it is possible that many people cannot achieve 160+ on their LSAT score. Maybe for the reasons above 80% of LSAT test takers finish below a 160.

[EarlCat]

Well the intellectual power is just to much for me to comprehend. Maybe in layman terms you can help someone as dumb as me understand how if you have 100 people taking a test more than 20 could finish in the TOP 20%. As I understand it 1-10 would be in the top 10%, 11-20 would be in the top 20%, 21-30 would be in the top 30% and so on. I feel like if you finished 24th you would not be in the top 20% of 100 test takers, but I have not done much math since I have been in law school so maybe I am mistaken.

You are mistaken.  First, there is a difference between COULD and WILL.  Only 20/100 WILL finish in the top 20%, but each of those 100 people COULD be among those 20.  This is first-grade vocabulary.  Learn it.  Use it.

Second, the LSAT even allows for the absurd scenario you outline above where 100% of test takers would in fact be in the top 20%.  If you had actually read my earlier post, you'd already know this.  The score that defines the "80th percentile" on the LSAT is set BEFORE ANYONE TAKES THE TEST.  So if every single test taker got a 163 (or whatever score defines the 80th% that time around), they ALL (yes, 100%) would have a score report that says "80th percentile."

[Tanrael]

i was preparing to take the february lsat after 7 months of studying (literally 3-4 hours a day, and i spent 6-9 hours a day during christmas break - not much of a vacation i know) im in a kaplan prep course and i scored a 156 on my 5th practice test tonight (my first score was a 148) and this was the best score i've gotten yet. i know i should probably postpone until june for taking the test but after all of the hard work ive done i almost feel like ill never get the score i want (a 163 or 164 is my ultimate goal) does anyone have any advice? am i being paranoid or am i at all correct in my fears of just never improving my score enough to get to my goal? i may have even been studying TOO hard (didn't know there was such a thing..) and studying along with 18 credits for my college classes has been difficult, to say the least. has anyone else had this same kind of discouragement? i'd appreciate any advice anyone may have (minus the every test gone be hardest ever remarks of course - not that those arent absolutely hilarious)

thanks so much for even reading my post!

Rachel

Not sure if anyone asked this already since I just skimmed the last 4 pages.  What exactly are you studying for so much time if you have only taken 5 practice tests in 7 months?  I would highly recommend ordering a couple of test booklets to practice on the real thing and also get a bunch of the PDF copies from Cambridge.

Take each test under realistic conditions including diagraming on the test sheets (save the actual booklets for near the end).  Go back untimed and review your decisions.  Score the test and see how you did both timed and untimed.  If you got it correct on the timed test great.  Anything you got correct on the untimed, you need to do more of to improve your speed.  Anything you got wrong in both cases, review the theory and figure out why the correct answer was right.

Finally, there are something like 60 actual tests and most of them are available.  Take as many as possible.  5 practices isn't nearly enough.*

*My humble opinion and my intended method of studying for the June test.  I have only taken 2 practices so far and plan to devote next semester to full time LSAT prep (nights and weekend around work that is.)