• LAVA Moderator: streaM Freak

The LSAT Mega-Thread

AmorRoark

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jul 28, 2002
Messages
21,183
Location
way over yonder in the minor key
Welcome! You are Entering the Wonderful World of LSATs!

Disclosure: This is not 100% verified information. Please don't assume any of my knowledge before you take serious steps toward applying for law schools. Also, please correct any mistakes you should find. Thanks! :)

The LSAT is the basic examination used throughout the United States by accredited law schools to help determine which students they will admit.


Signing Up to Take the LSAT

It's solely administered by the Law School Acceptance Council (LSAC). It is administered 4 times a year on a Saturday (or Sunday for Sabbath test takers) February, June, September & December. It takes about 4 1/2 hours (including a small break) & starts at 8:00 AM. From my experience they usually happen at a university or college of some sort.

There are strict deadlines about how late you can sign up for a particular test. Also, the spots are known to fill up quickly (especially if you live in a fairly urbanized area). You can see the deadlines here. Right now it costs $132 to take the test.


LSAT Sections

The LSAT is similar to the SAT or ACT in terms of use by higher education but is very different in terms of content. The test has 4 multiple choice sections and 1 writing section.

  • Reading Comprehension (MC)
    This is fairly similar to the reading comprehension section on the SAT or ACT. You read a passage and answer questions that relate to the structure, central theme etc. From my experience and what I've read it seems reading comprehension is somewhat difficult to improve upon.

    [*]Logical Reading (MC)
    Generally, this section has the testee read a passage where the writer is making an argument. The MC questions relate to sorting out logical jumps or fallacies, what a better argument would be etc.

    [*]Analytical Reasoning (MC)
    These are often referred to as 'logic games' and there are 4 puzzles in the entire section. To people who aren't naturally good at this complex level of logic they may seem very difficult when you start studying. They were to me. However, these are, IMO, the most learnable. By that I mean I think they're the area which the most improvement may be made in preparing for the test by studying/taking classes. I have heard similar sentiments from peers.

    [*]Unscored Section (MC)
    The unscored section is an area which the LSAC uses to 'try out' questions. It will look almost exactly like another section listed above. Test takers don't know which of the three sections above will be used again. Additionally, you don't officially know which of the two repeated sections will count and which will be unscored. Therefore, it is important that the test taker treat all the sections as if they will be scored.

    [*]Writing Section
    This is always the last section of the test. The writing section is set up so that the reader is prompted with a question in which a decision must be made. The test taker writes out their decision and the criteria they used to make that decision. It's basically another way to show your logic and argument skill.

    Like the unscored multiple choice this section isn't scored by the LSAC either therefore it doesn't affect your final score. However, the LSAC cautions law school hopefuls not to simply ignore the writing section because law schools do have access to them via your finalized application which is compiled by the LSAC. That said, it's fairly uncommon for a law school to actually read your writing sample. It is possible that if you're on the cusp of being admitted or are looking to top tier schools they may have more incentive to read your writing section. Thus, people should take it seriously.


Scoring the LSAT

The scores are sent out via e-mail a couple weeks after taking the test. The scores are on a scale from 120-180. The LSAC curves the actual #s of correct answers so they fit in their model. Thus, if everybody gets a lot wrong it's still to scale versus a year where everybody does really well. About half the people taking the test get a score between 145 -155.

lsat-scores.gif


The average score at a top law school is around 170 (minimum) - 175.


Possible Application Requirements

As I briefly mentioned in a previous paragraph, the LSAC compiles all the items needed for a completed application based on each law school's criteria.

  • LSAT score - all schools ask for this and will be automatically included in your packet by the LSAC
  • Transcripts - sometimes just college but usually both high school & college transcripts. They're looking obviously at your grades and the courses you took.
  • Proof of Graduation - I apologize, I don't remember how to provide this
  • Letters of Recommendation (LOR) - If I remember right you may have up to 5 letters. I remember reading it is normal to have 3 or 4.
  • Resume
  • Personal Statement - The law schools provide the possible areas to write on and usually deal with personal experiences, why you want to go to law school... you get it.
  • Application Fee - The cost of each application usually ranges from $20-60 from my experience.


Weight of Each Application Requirement on Admittance

Though there are a lot of items that law schools may request, each item has a significantly different amount of weight in admissions. Generally, IMO and from what I've read most law schools break down the % of importance as such:

  1. LSAT Score - 75-85%
  2. GPA - 15-25%
  3. Everything Else - very little (usually only used if you're on the bubble for admissions

That said, what law school admissions councils look at vary and may put more or less weight on any factor depending on their system/policy/philosophy. So it is entirely possible that the first two items I've listed are worth significantly less to a certain law school.


Preparing for the LSAT

Therefore, clearly, it is imperative to study your ass off for the LSAT. If you don't do well you might not get into any law school at all. I forgot the % of people who take the LSAT and don't end up at law school but it was definitely significant. I would recommend taking a prep class or two. I know Kaplan provides these in all areas of the country. I didn't take the classes and just took the LSAT after studying on my own. Thank God I studied a lot through workbooks, otherwise I'm not sure I'd make it.

There are several books that help outline a timeline of how to successfully study. Generally, it seems these books suggest it (should considering how long you should study) take about a year total to complete the process.

Regardless of their weight, you only have a certain amount of time to get all these items in to the LSAC. Much of it may be done online via attachments which is very helpful. Actually, most of the process of getting applications in is done online at: http://www.lsac.org/ . It might seem complicated at first but their staff is very helpful by explaining things. Plus, they have an online forum to help people with navigating the site.


Retaking the LSAT

Didn't do well on your first test? You're not necessarily doomed. You can decide to sign up for the test again. The LSAT allows people to retake the LSAT 3x in 5 years. However, they will average your two scores and the universities will know that there are two scores (thus know you didn't do well the first time). Additionally, you cannot pick which score to show to the law schools... it must be the averaged score. If you retake it and don't think you did much better I believe it's sage to cancel the score. If you cancel the score you will never know how well you did. However, your score won't be averaged and the law schools won't know you took it a second time. You have a few days to decide whether to cancel which will be done online, or you can cancel at the actual test site the day of the test.

Helpful Resources
http://www.lsac.org/
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/index.php - #1 source IMO for help on this
http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/prelaw/ - good forums too
http://officialguide.lsac.org/UGPASearch/Search3.aspx?SidString= - decent LSAT/GPA calculator


I hope this helps in terms of at least a vague introduction of the FUN and EXCITING (;)) process involving law school admissions. :)
 
Last edited:
Does anyone want to disclose any impressive test scores? I took a practice one three years go with a real proctor and a lot of other students in the class taking the same test, and I took it without knowing shit except for what the sections were (i.e. no practice before this) and I scored a 144. Horrible score, but the LSAT is definitely not something you just walk in and take. I have all the old tests (multiple copies) and plan on nailing this thing so that I can go to the best law school possible after I spend 5 years or so in the business world. I love the LSAT because it is extremely difficult and imo the best standardized and most appropriate test I have ever seen with regard to the accepting institutions' expectations of a base level of commitment and intelligence wanted within their programs. Practice, practice, practice - with a real proctor - one who will cut a random section short by 5 minutes just like in real life - is what is needed to turn into an LSAT killing machine from what my friends who have successfully gotten into the programs of their choice have told me. Princeton Review and Kaplan's books go well in tandem with each other, and there are a bunch of extra textbooks I have (if anyone's interested - very high retail value) if anyone wants to take a look at them or borrow them.
 
Just to add to the great posts above:

The breakdown of the test is:

1 scored Reading Comprehension section.
2 scored Logical Reasoning sections.
1 scored Logic Games section.

Like Amor noted, there will be an unscored section, which could be any of those three types. You won't know which is the unscored section on test day.

In terms of study, there really isn't any substitute for intelligent practice. By this, I don't simply mean taking test after test.

You might start by taking a test just to see where your strengths and weaknesses are. Take the test timed, first. After you score your test under timed conditions, go back and answer the questions for which you didn't have time. And then score the entire test again.

This will tell you where your strengths and weaknesses are, and will also tell you what role time plays. It may be that you can figure out the logic games with a lot of time, but that you aren't yet able to do within the time-limits, for example. And that's important information as far as how to practice.

Now this is the hard part. After taking one of these things, and seeing how you did, the last thing you may want to do is go back and analyze how you did on each question. But that's really important. That's how you're going to learn. Go back and look. For each question: how did I approach the problem, what led me to pick the right (or wrong) choice. Sometimes no improvements can be made. But, sometimes there can be.

For reading comprehension passages, what are you doing as you read? Are you skimming the passage quickly? Are you noting what the author's thesis is, what evidence he introduces to support his thesis, how his argument works, etc?

For logical reasoning passages, are you aware of the logical relationships between the different items mentioned, and why they work? If you got an answer wrong, what went wrong?

For logic games, how are you initially looking at the problem? Are you drawing a diagram? Are you noting all the things they tell you in the problem, and also seeing what things you can figure out just from the problem?

Your post-test reviews will become more productive as you become more familiar with the types of questions the LSAT poses. And after that initial test, I think it's fine to sometimes do one section at a time, and focus on that section for the day.

Books can be useful; commercial courses may be useful, but are expensive. Getting copies of old LSAT tests is indispensable.

If you're weak on logic, or have never had a course on logic, it may actually be worth it to read a textbook on elementary or introductory logic (or take a course, if that's an option). If you do this, you'll likely be very strong on the logical reasoning section (which is half the test).

The biggest part of the logic games is setting up the problem (diagram, notice ALL the relationships, and only THEN start looking at questions). Practice, practice, practice. Do logic games all the time. In the bus, on a car, in the plane, post-coitus, pre-game, etc. Find logic game porn if you can. Avoid during coitus, as your partner may become unhappy when you gaze into her eyes and say "so if eight people are sitting around a table, and Harry is sitting next to Jim, and Jim is sitting to the left of Mary, and Jane is not sitting next to Mary...then who is sitting to the right of Jane?" At this point coitus will cease, and you will find yourself answering irrelevant questions such as "who the fuck are Mary and Jane?!" And answers such as "they don't mean anything to me baby, they're just part of what I've got to do" will elicit further responses that you and your neighbors may find unpleasant, and certainly not conducive to a calm study environment.

I think the key to reading comprehension is being aware of how you're reading a passage. Once you do a few of these, you'll start to notice what you frequently miss as you read a passage (what was this guy's point again?). And that's the focus for improvement. Start reading passages with what you frequently miss in mind. Ask yourself questions, talk to yourself (silently if possible, softly if necessary, loudly if you wish to signal a need for medical attention), as you read through. "Okay, so his thesis is... And now he's claiming that because... and... that the thesis is more supported, or true, etc."

The odd thing about all this practice is that you will find your skills carrying over to other areas. You'll find yourself reading things better, with more understanding. You'll start evaluating arguments logically. And you'll discover that cute girls at the bar or club really don't find logic games a fascinating topic of discussion (and if they do, they're lying just to get into your pants, and you'll find to your unpleasant surprise the next morning that they really don't care where Jane is sitting and never did).

At the end of the day, realize that this is just about improvement. You'll get better as you go. It's unlikely you'll get perfect. Ignore perfect. Focus on better. And frustrations are a necessary part of getting better.
 
^ Excellent advice H, as usual. :)

I agree with your analysis in general. Unfortunately, I don't think most people have the drive to force themselves to study as much as they should.

Sure, there are those who DO actually have the motivation and DO realize how imperative studying these puzzles/reading comp. etc. & do well on the LSAT. Hell, I was weary that one of my close friends was actually studying enough/ effectively and just a few days ago he got his score back: 180. Anyway, that's why I suggested the course. The cost might seem high but it's nothing compared to getting an amazing score on the LSAT and getting into a good school and/or a school at all. I feel, for most people, it's worth it. What's more, for a significant # of people, it's practically necessary.
 
If the LSAT weren't timed, I could ace it. But with the damned time restrictions, I'd hit about 130. Oddly enough, though, students in the math department were often encouraged to take that test.
 
I can see why. ;)

Nieswiadomy took the LSAC's categorization of test-takers into 162 majors and grouped these into 29 categories, finding the averages of each major

Physics/mathematics 160.0
Economics and Philosophy/theology (tie) 157.4
International relations 156.5
Engineering 156.2
Government/service 156.1
Chemistry 156.1
History 155.9
Interdisciplinary studies 155.5
Foreign languages 155.3
English 155.2
Biology/natural sciences 154.8
Arts 154.2
Computer science 154.0
Finance 153.4
Political science 153.1
Psychology 152.5
Liberal arts 152.4
Anthropology/geography 152.2
Accounting 151.7
Journalism 151.5
Sociology/social work 151.2
Marketing 150.8
Business management 149.7
Education 149.4
Business administration 149.1
Health professions 148.4
Pre-law 148.3
Criminal justice 146.0

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1430654
 
AR -- Thank you for creating this thread. It looks wonderful (I like your formatting style! Reminds me of someone I know..;)). Anyway, I will have a read over this later this evening and see if there is anything else I can add.

And Heuristic, thank you for your words as well.

Haha, the nerdy side of me is getting curious now. AR, do you know if any actual practice tests exist for this thing online? At least for the MC questions. I'd love to give this thing a go one free afternoon, just to understand it better. If not, I'll just go to the local library and get a book.
 
Great point about the motivational/disciplinary utility of a commercial course, Amor. I agree with it. Though I also think one MUST study on one's own as well, and self-diagnose and practice on one's own, in addition to, or as part of, the course.

Redleader, :) ask and ye shall receive:

http://www.lsac.org/pdfs/SamplePTJune.pdf
 
you'll have a hard time finding practice tests online.

also, I would caution people that the breakdown amorroark posted between GPA/LSAT/other stuff doesn't really apply in Canada. Law schools here claim that they base admissions at about 50/50, but they also take extra curricular very seriously. I got into my 2nd choice with a comparatively poor GPA (although my last 2 years were almost all As) and a median LSAT score with dynamite extra curriculars (music, sports, international volunteer work, work experience).

Moral of the story? Go build a school in Tanzania.

edit: guess i was wrong about the practice tests...
 
AR -- Thank you for creating this thread. It looks wonderful (I like your formatting style! Reminds me of someone I know..;)). Anyway, I will have a read over this later this evening and see if there is anything else I can add.

And Heuristic, thank you for your words as well.

Haha, the nerdy side of me is getting curious now. AR, do you know if any actual practice tests exist for this thing online? At least for the MC questions. I'd love to give this thing a go one free afternoon, just to understand it better. If not, I'll just go to the local library and get a book.


I seem to recall taking a practice test at school, and scoring low enough for several profs in the math department to rib me about it.

To paraquote my adviser: "Ouch. Holy Fuck. Looks like law school's not in your future. Good news is, that simplifies things a bit"
 
June 2010 LSAT FTW!!! I am aiming at a 170 +...... I want to get into a T14, but i dunno if i can get a 170.

I just been reading a lot to get my reading comprehension up.... top law schools dot com search it in google, very good forum regarding LSAT information....

So what is your majors LSAT people?

Accountancy over here
 
:) I think there's a lot of self-selection in that data. People who possess the type of intelligence useful on the LSATs are probably more likely to stick with a major in physics, or math, than to drop it and look elsewhere.

That said, I think the emphasis on proofs and logic in higher mathematics is great training, and I think the emphasis in problem-solving (applies to math as well) in physics is good training.

Philosophy, though, provides extensive training in logic (unless you have an exceptionally strange department enamored with French philosophers) as expressed verbally and in lengthier passages, and in evaluating arguments of just about every type. This in my view constitutes a serious advantage over other majors as a preparation for LSATs.

Of course it's ridiculous to choose a major as preparation for the LSATs. Regardless of your major, though, I would make time for a few courses in logic.

I'm not making any judgments as to which majors are more difficult, of course. The problem-solving aspect of physics and math is missing in philosophy, and imho the type of thinking needed to solve problems can involve a more rigorous combination of logic and creativity than that needed to understand, evaluate, and make philosophical arguments.

Edit: And Binge, imho your advisor was flat wrong in that assessment. I don't think the diagnostic value of a first test by an unexposed subject is very high. Of course he may have saved you from a profession with incredibly high rates of depression and substance-abuse, so...
 
^From what I've seen, LSAT questions don't require any creativity or depth; they seem to be more related to speed and ability to handle large amounts of information thrown at you all at once. And for that reason, I would have guessed history majors would have been best prepared.
 
Top