LSAT Courses; Yay or Nay?

[CalBoy]

Hey, why France? The UK clearly needs education in English. . . [ducks!]

1. I know some French (could do me some good to brush up on it).

2. I get the random chance to appear in Michael Moore's next movie!

Hey, you're IN law school, when MANY people who wanted to be are not. Hopefully you're there because you always wanted to go. It says a lot that you're there--regardless of where your school may rank in the (greatly overblown) US News rankings.

I loathe those rankings, but they are sadly so important for "reputation" whatever that's worth. Sometimes I think I would be happier at a lower "ranked" school. I certainly don't think it would really get in the way of my ultimate goal of opening up an appellate-specialty office.

Yea It had "S-A-T" in it so I figured it was along the same lines....Some crappy test you had to stress out about and take to get into some sort of institution of higher education.

Haha, yeah. But law school is less about learning material and more about learning process it seems. Law school teaches you how to think and be a lawyer (Naimfan, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the first class 'how to blood-suck' followed by, 'misery, and how to make more of it' ? ).

You took the ACT huh? I'm so sorry. JK.

 

[madoka]

Disclaimer: I am an LSAT instructor/law school admissions advisor. IMHO, I am the best at what I do. I've taught a student to score a 180 on his actual test (he came to me scoring in the mid-150s). I've had former students go on to teach at every major LSAT course. In my last December LSAT class, 40% scored in the top 5%. I was the most requested and referred instructor in the company, at one point with over 175 private tutoring students. I was on the admissions committee at a top ten law school. I know how admissions works and how to maximize students' chances. I've got dozens of former students currently enrolled in every top law school right now: Yale, Harvard, Stanford, NYU (I got 7 students in last year alone), Columbia, Chicago, Berkeley, etc. A few months ago, Harvard Law School published a personal statement I created with a student as one of the best PS that they received in the past few years. Last year, I took a student who was rejected by 21 schools the prior year, reworked his application and he is now attending a top 20 school with $150,000 in scholarship.

I say all this to show that I know what I'm talking about.

If your budget is not an issue, then by all means, take a class. However, the biggest x factor is your instructor. Before you sign up with any company, ask about your instructor's credentials. How long has he/she taught? What LS did they attend? How large is the class? Etc.

If budget is an issue, then go with the Powerscore books and the 10 LSAT books from LSAC. However, you are about to invest 3 years of your life and $125,000+ in tuition. Realistically, $1,000-$2,000 is a worthwhile investment in the greater scheme of things. Anybody who tells you not to take a course simply to save money is not only cheap, but stupid.

As for games, it is the most easily coached section. Plus, they've made them a great deal easier for the past couple of years. First, you have to be properly trained to setup and think through the problems. Second, you need to do a massive amount of work to get your speed and accuracy up. The good news is you have the time right now since you are applying next year.

 

[desenso]

Yeah it's real tough these days. The worst part is, I think I'm perfect for law school itself. The Socratic method doesn't bother me one bit.

And o/c I learned that very important IRAC method recently...very nice.



So how has it been?

I don't know what o/c means. I'm not sure if you were being literal about the IRAC method being nice or not, but you should know that most of my professors advocate against strict usage of IRAC. Getting to Maybe is a really good book on how to take exams, and I'd actually recommend that you read it once before going to law school since it will help you understand how to approach the subject matter. Plus, you won't have time to re-read the whole thing right before finals, but the Q&A in the book is pretty helpful as last minute exam advice.

 

[jng]

The logic puzzles suck. They definitely favor people who have taken advanced mathematics courses, and they're totally unlike the kind of analytical process that goes on at law school, so for that reason they're frustrating.
<snip>
Don't neglect the rest of the sections, though,..

I took the LSAT about 2 years ago in Munich, so it was an afternoon exam. Bad idea to get up at 6am to hope on a train to take the test btw. There was literally also no food break and we started late because of a storm, so I didn't eat the whole day.

Stupid things like that can affect your score unbelievable.

I'm not a math person but actually after practicing awhile I started to like the logic puzzles, although I wasn't do super on them. I did some on the train ride to the Munich and ended up scoring in the 95th percentile on that section. But it was the first and I slowly crashed and scored in the 30th percentile on the last section. I eventually realized I hate analyzing sentences and gave up on the idea of going to law school.

I didn't take a course, just practiced by myself on weekends. But I don't think I ever sat through the entire length of the exam (plus an experimental section) until the exam. So I really crashed. I don't think that's something worth paying over a $1000 for. But I would definitely recommend that people sit the length of it, without food or a real long bathroom break.

As for books, I just practiced from the real exams and go the answer book too, I think it was called LSAT Answers or something. Princeton Review also has a nice strategy guide for the logic games.

<snip>
I say all this to show that I know what I'm talking about.

Yeah right.

 

[CalBoy]

Realistically, $1,000-$2,000 is a worthwhile investment in the greater scheme of things.

Yes, this is my thought on it as well, which is why I'm pretty sure I'll end up taking the course.

I don't know what o/c means. I'm not sure if you were being literal about the IRAC method being nice or not, but you should know that most of my professors advocate against strict usage of IRAC. Getting to Maybe is a really good book on how to take exams, and I'd actually recommend that you read it once before going to law school since it will help you understand how to approach the subject matter. Plus, you won't have time to re-read the whole thing right before finals, but the Q&A in the book is pretty helpful as last minute exam advice.

Well I just sort of learned it off hand, but I am so PMing you my first semester in law school!

PS: o/c= of course.

 

[madoka]

But it was the first and I slowly crashed and scored in the 30th percentile on the last section. I eventually realized I hate analyzing sentences and gave up on the idea of going to law school.

I don't think that's something worth paying over a $1000 for.

As for books, I just practiced from the real exams and go the answer book too, I think it was called LSAT Answers or something. Princeton Review also has a nice strategy guide for the logic games.

For your information, the PR book doesn't contain a single actual LSAT question - only their lame attempt to mimic it. They were too cheap to license actual questions. If you depended on the book, you may find that the actual test is really quite different from what you prepared for.

So instead of paying for a course, you decided to spend $20 on a worthless book, which ended up causing you to forgo a lucrative profession?

 

[Naimfan]

For your information, the PR book doesn't contain a single actual LSAT question - only their lame attempt to mimic it. They were too cheap to license actual questions. If you depended on the book, you may find that the actual test is really quite different from what you prepared for.

So instead of paying for a course, you decided to spend $20 on a worthless book, which ended up causing you to forgo a lucrative profession?

You seem to exemplify my [edited] comment.

Your last line is uncalled for and simply rude. I'd suggest you edit it.

As far as law being a "lucrative" profession, it certainly can be, but I'd like to think that income is not everyone's primary motivation. It is an honorable and, often, a gravely misunderstood profession.

[Notes removal of personal insult.]

 

[jng]

For your information, the PR book doesn't contain a single actual LSAT question - only their lame attempt to mimic it. They were too cheap to license actual questions. If you depended on the book, you may find that the actual test is really quite different from what you prepared for.

So instead of paying for a course, you decided to spend $20 on a worthless book, which ended up causing you to forgo a lucrative profession?

As for books, I just practiced from the real exams and go the answer book too, I think it was called LSAT Answers or something. Princeton Review also has a nice strategy guide for the logic games.

I rolled my eyes earlier because really all you needed to say was that you are an admissions advisor instead of dolling out a long list which came off as egoistic to me.

But it seems like it's you need to learn to read analytically a la LSAT and pick up the keywords that indicate that I wasn't just talking about Princeton Review.

Anyway, let's get back on topic.

 

[Naimfan]

I rolled my eyes earlier because really all you needed to say was that you are an admissions advisor instead of dolling out a long list which came off as egoistic to me.

But it seems like it's you need to learn to read analytically a la LSAT and pick up the keywords that indicate that I wasn't just talking about Princeton Review.

Anyway, let's get back on topic.

An eminently fair rebuttal.

Back on topic. It's fine to think of courses as an investment, but it depends on what the return on that investment will be. Since it's impossible to know whether or how much a LSAT course will benefit someone, it represents an investment that I would approach cautiously.

In my case, I used a workbook that had several prior exams and hundreds, if not thousands, of practice questions. I was nowhere near as diligent as I was in preparing for the bar, but I did 30 or so questions a day for about a month, with practice exams once a week. And my score was fine. (Calboy--I'll PM you with it if you'd like.) I do well on standardized tests anyway, so I knew I had that going for me.

JNG--Your experience demonstrates how important basic things are--get a good night of sleep, eat well, take something to eat with you for a break, etc. Because you said it well--it's amazing how much of a difference things like that make. It's too bad you equated analyzing sentences with law practice--although that is certainly a part of it (larger or smaller depending on what you do), it's not all of it. For me, there is NOTHING better than the look on a client's face when you're able to tell them they won their appeal and that their child/spouse/whoever will be taken care of, or that a nonsense charge has been dropped because the DA never specified what action allegedly broke the law, or that the Supreme Court (state or federal) has refused to hear the appeal from their opponents. Or the sheer joy when a judge finalizes an adoption and I get to hand the signed order to the adoptive parents. Etc. Those are the kinds of moments I live for as a lawyer.

 

[CalBoy]

(Calboy--I'll PM you with it if you'd like.)

I would like that actually.

Those are the kinds of moments I live for as a lawyer.

I look forward to that too. I really am going to do more research into appellate law; it looks far more interesting than generic practice.

 

[GoCubsGo]

I didn't take the SAT, just the ACT

Read the title more carefully.

LMFAO love it!


But really, knowing me I'd do both the books and prep course. $1000 is a small chunk of change when you compare it to the real cost of schooling. In the future you'll look back at that $1000 you spent as money well spent. I do think if you're not real great about being motivated and working without supervision the prep course is crucial. However, there are some books you can buy as previously suggested that may help. I'd also probably spend a fair amount of time at a book store so that I could go through every book they had and not have to buy all at once. This is in fact your future, it's worth investing some time into it.

Best of luck to you!

 

[Naimfan]

I would like that actually.


I look forward to that too. I really am going to do more research into appellate law; it looks far more interesting than generic practice.

You've got a PM!

Yea It had "S-A-T" in it so I figured it was along the same lines....Some crappy test you had to stress out about and take to get into some sort of institution of higher education.

That's exactly right!

jessica.--only a Serta? Tsk, tsk. . .

 

[CalBoy]

But really, knowing me I'd do both the books and prep course. $1000 is a small chunk of change when you compare it to the real cost of schooling. In the future you'll look back at that $1000 you spent as money well spent. I do think if you're not real great about being motivated and working without supervision the prep course is crucial. However, there are some books you can buy as previously suggested that may help. I'd also probably spend a fair amount of time at a book store so that I could go through every book they had and not have to buy all at once. This is in fact your future, it's worth investing some time into it.

Best of luck to you!

Yes, I'm thinking the same way as you, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up signing up for the course.

And thank you.

 

[ravenvii]

I took the LSAT last year. Got the score that's good enough, though not stellar. It did get me into a good school, so I'm not complaining.

I took a course. And honestly, I think I could have done all that on my own and done just as well, if not better. The only thing that the course helped me with, really, is to control my procrastination tendencies...

EDIT: I just noticed I've already posted in this thread, on two separate occasions no less.

See what cramming contracts, property and criminal law, all in succession, does to you!

 

[jng]

JNG--Your experience demonstrates how important basic things are--get a good night of sleep, eat well, take something to eat with you for a break, etc. Because you said it well--it's amazing how much of a difference things like that make. It's too bad you equated analyzing sentences with law practice--although that is certainly a part of it (larger or smaller depending on what you do), it's not all of it.

I think it's also better just to take it in the States on a Saturday morning early instead of abroad in the afternoon with horrible weather. They delayed the exam to the point where I nearly missed my train back home. But I am glad it's offered.

In the end, law school just isn't for me. I don't equate it with analytical reading per se. I wanted actually to do intellectual property right law in the tech sector. I know some people who work in this field and they love their job. But I just can't read analytical texts or historical texts, etc for a long period of time. My eyes are shot as is. My failure on that part of the exam and the stories I heard from people about the load of reading ultimately turned me away. Plus other opportunities arose - hence my living in Europe now.

But I'm glad you enjoy your job. It's always nice to meet a happy lawyer who enjoys his job and not the stereotypical disgruntled person trying to climb the ladder to partnership.

 

[killerrobot]

I've been a proctor for a couple of LSAT tests (yes, I got to read the directions, walk around and make sure no one was cheating blah blah blah).

You can always tell the people that have taken prep courses from those that haven't. They get done with the sections faster, have time to go over all of their answers, and never seem quite as stressed out about the whole thing.

I was looking into teaching GRE courses, and was astonished to find that you had to have had a minimum score of 1400/1600. That wasn't me. I'm assuming that in order to teach the LSAT some high score like that is required - and those people would definitely know the tricks and definitely be able to help someone out. So my vote is yes, the classes are worth it.

 

[desenso]

I've been a proctor for a couple of LSAT tests (yes, I got to read the directions, walk around and make sure no one was cheating blah blah blah).

You can always tell the people that have taken prep courses from those that haven't. They get done with the sections faster, have time to go over all of their answers, and never seem quite as stressed out about the whole thing.

I was looking into teaching GRE courses, and was astonished to find that you had to have had a minimum score of 1400/1600. That wasn't me. I'm assuming that in order to teach the LSAT some high score like that is required - and those people would definitely know the tricks and definitely be able to help someone out. So my vote is yes, the classes are worth it.

My experience is with the Kaplan prep course. The requisites for their instructors are based on percentile; I think you have to be in the top 2 or 3% in order to be eligible to teach the course.

That really don't change the fact that: a) teacher quality will be a crapshoot; and b) the class will nevertheless be an elaborate reading lecture. Just because someone is good at the LSAT themselves doesn't necessarily mean that they will be a good teacher. Second, the kids who are "teaching" the class really don't do much more than read off of a class plan. It's really not that dependent on their ability, other than when they have to answer questions.

If I had to go back and do it again I wouldn't pay the $1,100 to take the Kaplan course. I didn't take it seriously enough, and ultimately I didn't find the Kaplan techniques nearly as helpful as the PowerScore techniques. I would have been better off just taking more practice exams. But that's just me, other people's mileage will obviously vary.

 

[CalBoy]

^^^I have never heard good things about Kaplan.

My friend and I have pretty much settled on Test Masters, as their reputation is better and they specialize in LSAT courses.

 

[nbs2]

Ian - if you're still checking this thread, which Baltimore school are you at?

Anyway, for the little that my input is worth, take a practice exam (one of the old LSATs) under real conditions, then subtract 10 points. That'll be your score without much prep. With even a little prep, you can cut your losses to 5 points or less by the test date.

As for the logic games, I have to echo the earlier suggestions, plus recommend the puzzle magazines assembled by Penny Press. You may be able to get them cheap from your college's law school assistance place thing center place. I did - it was a couple bucks for 5 of them, and by the end of the second, I was salving the puzzles more for fun than as a challenge.

Now, if only I could have wrapped my head around IRAC (or as my professor called it, CRAC (conclusion twice, no issue)).

 

[killerrobot]

That really don't change the fact that: a) teacher quality will be a crapshoot; and b) the class will nevertheless be an elaborate reading lecture. Just because someone is good at the LSAT themselves doesn't necessarily mean that they will be a good teacher. Second, the kids who are "teaching" the class really don't do much more than read off of a class plan. It's really not that dependent on their ability, other than when they have to answer questions.

My experience with every class I've taken is that I get out of it what I put into it. Sure it's easier to learn with a better teacher, but I've sometimes learned more in classes where the teacher sucked a"· because that much more responsibility was placed upon me to learn.

But yeah, that's something you're totally not expecting when it comes to paying for LSAT classes. Either way I think you have to be very proactive in the class to get out of it what you want or else it would probably become a "reading lecture".

I am dead serious about being able to tell those that have taken courses even from those that have done practice tests. I always ask them afterwards or sometimes they all ask each other about it after the exam, and with the exception of one kid, I picked it right every time.

OF course, I've never seen anyones final scores and as you mentioned results do vary.

 

[QCassidy352]

Well, I used to teach LSAT prep classes and tutor individuals for Kaplan, so I have some perspective on this.

Prep classes help to a degree. They help the people in the middle of the curve the most (mid 140s to low 160s). People outside of that range are probably better served with individual tutoring. Regardless, you really need to do work outside of class. So many students would just show up on class day obviously not having looked at the material since the last time. Sorry, but 2 or 4 hours a week isn't going to do it.

You get better at the LSAT by practicing the questions over and over until the formats are so familiar that you can answer questions before reading to the end of them (yes this is possible).

Also, sorry to say, but the LSAT really is largely an aptitude test (note: I didn't say IQ test. With the SAT (which I also taught), I really believe that the majority of people could just keep learning vocab and grammar and math, and eventually you could get a perfect score. Not so with the LSAT. A lot of people just can't get the way some of the questions work - their minds just don't work that way.

Also, as far as the comments about Kaplan go - there are lots of great teachers, and some not-so-great teachers. Of course there's an element of luck of the draw, and there are also differences by "center." To a large degree centers are autonomous, and some are better than others. I think different people find that different programs work better or worse for different people, so what I'd do is ask friends or associates in your area what they've done and liked.

 

[CalBoy]

I did ask around about the local Kaplan, and didn't get very many good responses...

Test Masters on the other hand seems to have a positive rating. And, considering their schedules are also easier to work with, I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up going with them.