LSAT Study Plan

    • October 26, 2017 at 11:50 am #3332

      I am planning to take the LSAT in June (maybe September) 2018.

      I would like to know what study plan should I adopt regarding:
      What section to start first, then second and finally third or should I jump back and forth from one section to another one;

      After learning the ropes, when to start drilling and then when to start PT’s;

      How much time should I devote to studying per day;

      How much time, in terms of weeks/months should I devote to each section of the test (LG, LR, RC) as well as learning, drilling and Practice Tests;

      When, if at all, should I require one on one personal tutoring and how can that help me overcome certain barriers and gaps in my learning.

      Thanks very much!


    • October 27, 2017 at 5:56 pm #3334
      Mike Kim

      Hello Claudio!

      Nice to meet you online and thanks for trusting in the Trainer — I wish you the best with it.

      In terms of your questions —

      I’ve organized the Trainer very carefully to try and help you optimize your learning process, and the book is designed to build upon itself, and so I encourage you to go through it in order.

      In terms of organizing your learning with your drill work and PT’s — check out the free Trainer study schedules —

      There are some available here, and there are also brand new beta versions that go up to PT 81 that I can email you as well. Please see this link for more information —

      Depending on how much time you have per week, you probably want to start off with the 16 week schedule, extend it as you’d like, and then, as time allows, optionally add in extra work from older exams.

      And finally, in terms of keeping track of your work, and assessing when you might need a tutor, one tool I suggest is the Readiness Checklist —

      This can serve as a nice macro list of all of the issues you want to work on and master.

      Tutoring certainly isn’t required, and there are many different ways that you can learn about and master the exam, but tutoring can be very effective.

      In terms of when to go for it, I think it’s best to try and work toward mastery using the Trainer and practice first — then, when you know you’ve put in the time in a certain section and can sense that your understanding just isn’t right or you could use extra help, etc., that’s when you might consider a tutor. Alternatively, if you know you want more guidance, you can certainly work with a tutor throughout your studies.

      Hope that helps — if you need anything else please get in touch —


    • October 30, 2017 at 9:18 pm #3335

      Hi Mike,

      Thanks so much for your kind help and for your reply.

      At the moment, unfortunately, I am hitting a wall. I cannot really understand a complex ”Or” rule on page 192 of the LSAT Trainer (J will arrive after M or before N, but not both). Could you explain to me in more depth why if J is after M it cannot be before N (therefore, it must also be after N) ????? It doesn’t make any sense to me. Maybe my law career is doomed before its start LOL!

      Thanks very much!


    • November 1, 2017 at 2:28 pm #3336
      Mike Kim

      Hi Claudio —

      Happy to try and help —

      It’s useful to keep in mind that every “Or, but not both” rule actually gives us two rules that must be followed — one of the things must be true, and the other must be false.

      So, if we have a rule like “John goes to Disneyland on Tuesday or Wednesday, but not both days” —

      Per the first part of the rule, we know we have two options for what must be true:

      1) John goes to Disneyland on Tuesday


      2) John goes to Disneyland on Wednesday

      And, per the “but not both” aspect, we know there are secondary consequences in each situation, namely —

      1) if John goes on Tuesday, he can’t go on Wednesday.

      2) if he goes on Wednesday, he can’t go on Tuesday.

      Connecting this to our ordering rules —

      If we have

      “J will arrive after M or before N, but not both”

      First, we know we have two options for something that must be true:

      1) J will be after M


      2) J will be before N

      And, per the “but not both” part, we know that when one thing happens, the other can’t.


      For 1), When J is after M, it cannot be before N (meaning it must be after N).

      That gives us J after both M and N.

      For 2), When J is before N, it cannot be after M (meaning it must be before M).

      That gives us J before both N and M.

      It’s really hard not to get turned around on these rules, but I hope that helps clear things up —


    • November 3, 2017 at 10:24 pm #3337

      Hi Mike,

      Yes, it was really hard not to get turn around on these rules as you said. I gave myself a couple of days and now -with a clearer, more objective mind- what you actually explained made sense and I hope it will stick into my mind.

      Thanks again very much!


You must be logged in to reply to this topic.