Dave, 144 and working toward 165: a live LSAT coaching session

This is what LSAT Unplugged coaching looks like. Dave came in at 144, aiming for 165 on the June LSAT LSAT. Steve Schwartz coached him live for about 27 minutes on both, and the whole session and transcript are below.

The numbers here are where Dave started and the goal we set together in this session. Individual results vary.

• Student: Dave
• Score when recorded: 144
• Goal: 165
• Target test: June LSAT
• Situation: Full-time job with 2 kids at home, studies about 3 hours a day 5 days a week; a returning learner targeting the University of Buffalo (median around 156), scored a 144 on the February LSAT after practice tests in the 152 to 154 range, pushed his retake from April to June to change his approach instead of repeating the same cycle.
• Focus: both
• Worked on: most strongly supported, necessary assumption

Jump to the full transcript

What we fixed in this session

It's not enough to get the questions right, you've got to get them right under test day conditions. Studying alone, it's easy to look at the answer key and say I get it now, then do the exact same thing next time.

Steve Schwartz

This is one session, in the middle of the work. I've been coaching the LSAT since 2005, and every session runs the same way: find the real problem, fix the process, reset the plan.

I pointed out Dave had been studying alone with no outside feedback. That let him think he understood a missed question without ever correcting the underlying habit, and tied that isolation to his weak February result.

I told Dave to stop extrapolating his score from individual timed sections and instead take 5 full, strictly timed practice tests (4 sections in one sitting with the proper break) over a month to get a real PT average before deciding he's ready for June.

The plan: I had Dave shift his study-time ratio toward reading comprehension, roughly a third of his time since it is a third of the score, after Dave noted it had gotten less attention than logical reasoning despite being his currently weaker section.

I replaced Dave's old habit of just tracking histograms of missed question types with a structured review journal that logs, for every missed question, whether the error was in the stimulus, the question stem, or his reasoning, and why the tempting wrong answer was tempting and the right answer unappealing.

Where the session landed: Dave says his biggest takeaways are that he needs to start a structured review journal and that he may be closer to his goal score than he thought, and I told him 20 points in 3 months is achievable if he keeps the journal and gives reading comp more attention.

If your prep looks like Dave's did, that's fixable in one session.

Book your free LSAT tutoring lesson

In Dave's words

I kind of want this score for me maybe more than the school wants it.

Dave

You know, I might be closer to where I want to be than I thought I was.

Dave

I need to start putting together a journal so that I can reflect back on what I have done.

Dave

Questions people ask about LSAT Unplugged coaching

What happens in an LSAT Unplugged coaching session?

The coach finds the specific habit that's costing points, fixes the process, and sets the plan for the weeks ahead. In Dave's case: Dave had been studying alone with no outside feedback.

Who runs the sessions?

Steve Schwartz recorded this one. Every LSAT Unplugged coach scored 170 or higher on an official LSAT, and students are matched to a coach on learning style and weak areas.

Where can I see finished results?

On the student reviews page at unpluggedprep.com/reviews, with video interviews and official scores.

Learn the fixes yourself: necessary assumption questions, must be true questions, Reading Comprehension.

Student reviews and finished results.

Full session transcript

Recorded August 2025.

Steve: Your accuracy is quite good, we can make it even better by bringing it from that 70% accuracy to 85%. This is Dave and he's looking to go from a 144 to a 165 in the next 3 months. My name is Steve Schwartz and I've been teaching the LSAT for the past 20 years. Today, Dave is going to bring me his biggest LSAT challenges and I'll help him address them as he looks to improve by more than 20 points.

Steve: Tell me a little bit about where you're scoring right now, and what's your ultimate goal score?

Dave: I've targeted one law school, the University of Buffalo, since for my life and circumstances that's the appropriate one. My original concept was that I needed to score within the median of the score band for the class of 2024, which was 156. During my preparation I spent 3 months working through the LSAC materials on LawHub, and my simulated exams were bringing me in the 152 to 154 range, so my thought was if I got a 153 or higher I'd just submit my application. Unfortunately, I got a 144 on the February exam. I engaged your services since then, and I haven't done any full length practice tests since I took the exam, but I've done sections, and if I loosely extrapolate those out, I'm a little higher, right about 158, though that's a very squishy number.

Steve: Remind me when you're taking the test, I know you were aiming for April before, is that still the plan?

Dave: I'm going for June now.

Steve: Tell me more about why.

Dave: That was based on two conversations. One was with an admissions counselor at UB, who said rather than retaking in April, I should give myself until June to get the score I want. That was a little frustrating, since the context was about the minimum score I need for a mid-tier school where I'm a returning learner paying full price with a lot of life experience, volunteer experience, and good recommendations. I think I'm a shoe in, but partly this is for myself, to prove I can score well and not give them any reason to refuse me. The other conversation was with a friend who's a UB graduate, who asked if I really expected to do anything differently on the April exam than I did in February. I thought about that, and 3 months gives me the chance to change my approach and try something new rather than repeating the same cycle. I've had a ton of fun studying for the LSAT. My background is in the physical sciences and I'm thinking about patent law, so this has been a process of identifying a major entrance exam and working out how to address it and use my brain again. I kind of want this score for me maybe more than the school wants it.

Steve: I love what you're sharing here. The folks who do the best on the LSAT are the ones who see it as a challenge to take on rather than an unfair obstacle, since the skills you build now carry forward into law school and beyond. When Dave told me he wanted the score more than the school wants it, I loved that mindset shift, because going from external pressure to internal drive is often the point where things start clicking. The students who get 170, 175 and above don't say the LSAT is stupid and has nothing to teach them, they see it as building critical thinking skills that relate to their success in law school and their legal career.

Dave: The first thing I found useful and different about this program was that in our initial conversation you pointed out I'd been going through this process alone, and that hit me harder than I expected, because I realized there was no one who could speak into my situation and say, here's where you're going off the rails, or have you considered this instead. That's happened during tutoring sessions, live sessions, and study groups, which has been encouraging. The other thing is the LASER approach, the learning aspect is foundational, and I suspect that's part of why I had a weak performance, since even though I felt comfortable taking the exam, the foundational underpinning wasn't as firm as it could have been. I've taken your personalized study plan and knocked out the questions there, and during review I go back and refresh on the basic ideas behind a question type, which makes it easier to identify whether my issue was the question stem, the stimulus, or my actual reasoning.

Steve: Dave's insight about studying in isolation was spot on. So many students go months without any feedback or correction on their mistakes, then wonder why their scores aren't improving. Studying alone, it's easy to look at the answer key, say "oh, I get it now, how could I have been so dumb," and then do the exact same thing next time. If you have someone else to talk to, a coach, a study buddy, an instructor, you have accountability to go deep enough during review to extract the insights that help you avoid the same mistakes.

Steve: Which areas are you finding are your stronger sections and which are your weaker areas?

Dave: If you'd asked me in November, I would have said logical reasoning was my primary challenge, because I wasn't able to attempt every question, my pacing was slow, and on the actual exam I had to guess on about 5 questions per section. Looking at it now, I think that stemmed from not being comfortable enough with the question types, understanding what type of question it is and how to approach it. I expect to be faster in June, but right now I'd say the weakest area is reading comprehension, possibly because I'm not paying as much attention to it. I am going to seek out an accommodation for extra time, since I read and process a little more slowly than other folks. That said, the last tutoring session we did was on reading comp and I only missed one question, so it's not that it's difficult, I'm just not as comfortable with it or practicing as much with RC.

Steve: Reading comp might be an area to devote a bit more attention to. It doesn't always feel like a weak area until you actually look at the data. Dave's strategy to shift more study time toward reading comp is exactly what more students need to do, because a third of your score comes from reading comp, so roughly a third of your study time should go there. That said, if you're scoring roughly evenly between reading comp and logical reasoning, I'd still recommend spending more time on logical reasoning, since there are two scored sections of it and only one of reading comp, so any gains there get doubled. But you can't make an informed decision until you look at the data, which is why you've got to track your results. Are you finding timing is the issue, or accuracy, or overall strategy?

Dave: I think my overall strategy and approach is one I'm comfortable with, though of course you don't know what you don't know. As far as timing, I've noticed that the more comfortable I feel with a question, the faster I complete it, and I noticed that in the run-up to the February exam and again in the logical reasoning section now, when I drill down on specific question types like most strongly supported I'm going a little more quickly. I haven't paid much attention to timing myself on drills, I don't do them timed, since I figure with repetition I'll get more efficient. As far as accuracy, I'm at about 70% right out of the gate, striving for 80% and above.

Steve: Good, and you've still got 3 months till the test, especially with the 2 additional months you gave yourself. How many hours per week are you putting in?

Dave: I have a full-time job and 2 kids at home, so between getting food on the table, running kids to practices, and my job, I've shot for about 3 hours 5 days a week. These last 2 weeks I've been okay about that, there was one day I couldn't get to studying because of work, so I filled in that day's work later. I like Saturday because I can crank for a bit, and Sunday I typically relax and take the Sabbath.

Steve: So 3 hours a day, 5 days a week, balancing the LSAT with a full-time job and taking care of the kids, with 3 months till test day. I wanted more clarity on score goals, since you mentioned wanting to get in range of UB's median around 153, but you also mentioned your most recent practice was a 158. Wouldn't that suggest you're already above the benchmark you need?

Dave: That would suggest I'm already above the benchmark. What's really motivating me right now is the uncertainty from that 144, what happened there. My worst fear is pulling like a 149 or 150 on test day, though I expect that won't happen. I know it's a confidence issue. Yesterday I was working problems and missed a necessary assumption question, I'd selected the correct answer, then went back through the other choices to positively eliminate them, and there was a trap answer I clicked on before going back to my original choice, then hit show answer and thought, you've got to be kidding me. It's just one of those, oh shoot, this is still happening moments. But why not just go balls out and really see what I can do, partly for personal aspirations, I think that's a lot of what's driving this.

Steve: I totally get the feeling of a bad practice test result shaking your confidence, I've been there myself. But Dave isn't reacting emotionally, he gave himself time, a strategy reset, and started building the foundation the right way. LSAT scores fluctuate, everybody has a bad day, so you don't want to overly index on any single practice test result. Instead, take the average of your most recent 3 to 5 practice tests for a better indication of where you truly stand. If you're within a few points of your goal, go ahead and take it, if you're 10 points below, maybe hold off and postpone. And if you do postpone or withdraw, law schools will never even know you were scheduled for it. Let's go balls out and get you the highest score possible, so that if your PT average going in is a 163, worst case you drop 5 or 10 points and you're still at or above the median. Was that 158 a single data point, or are there others in the high 150s too?

Dave: That's a single data point, a squishy one, an extrapolation, not a full practice test that I actually scored 158 on.

Steve: I've got a number of thoughts. First, let's have you taking practice tests on a regular basis, not extrapolating from individual sections or accuracy, because it's not enough to get questions right, you've got to get them right under test day conditions. That means strictly timed sections, then building up to full exams, 4 sections in one sitting with a 10 minute break between sections 2 and 3, not 4 sections added up separately. If we get you to where you've taken 5 practice tests over the course of a month with a PT average in the high 150s to low 160s, we could safely say that's where you are, and even if you drop 5 points or more from a bad proctor, tech issues, or nerves, you're still safely above the median.

Steve: On getting you there, you mentioned reading comp hasn't gotten as much attention. I'd recommend shifting the ratio of your study time to roughly a third reading comp, since that's roughly a third of the test. Your accuracy is still a bit low, so if you're feeling comfortable on your approach of reading the passage and any notes you're taking, I won't touch that for now, we have plenty of support for that already in the program with live tutoring, classes, and videos. Dave's going to keep a review journal now, not just marking what he missed but why, and that alone is easily worth 5, 10 points or more. It's what turns "I hope I don't miss this again" into "I won't miss this again." Until you're tracking your results with that bird's eye view of your mistakes and why, you're probably going to keep making the same mistakes.

Steve: Tell me a bit more about what your review process is currently like.

Dave: On the study plan we laid out, I go through the questions and put a check mark if I answer correctly and an X if I miss it, write down my answer and the correct answer, and when I finish that section I go back and review each individual question, trying to identify whether it was the question stem, the stimulus itself, or a processing flaw error, until I understand where and why the error occurred.

Steve: That all sounds good, I can't argue with any of it. My only question is, is this all happening in your head, or are you writing anything down?

Dave: I've been writing it down on my list of practice questions as I go through. One thing I could change is an actual journal, I've heard you reference a journal quite a bit but haven't actually compiled one. Previously, last fall, I was just compiling histograms of question types I missed so I knew where my weak types were and practiced more of those. But I like your recommended review process a lot better, since it gets back to understanding the question itself, whether it was the stimulus that tripped me up, whether I went outside its scope, or whether it was a logical fallacy I messed up.

Steve: We are not logical beings by nature, we're prone to logical fallacies, and the LSAT exploits them, so we have to learn better habits. There are good general resources out there on logic, but when your LSAT is coming up in 3 or even 6 months, I usually recommend focusing on LSAT specific material, since there are 58 numbered exams in the new format, plenty of real material to work off of, plus resources built specifically for the exam, like the formal logic and classic fallacy lessons already in the program. Exhaust the LSAT specific material first, you won't get through all of it in 3 months anyway. Formal logic proofs are great if you have unlimited time, but not efficient for a timed exam like the LSAT.

Steve: Coming back to what you said about histograms, tracking the particular question types you're getting wrong, that's valuable and will help a lot for logical reasoning, especially if you keep it compiled in a single journal. In reading comprehension it's not quite as directly relevant, since you're not drilling reading comp questions in isolation, they're all tied back to the general passage, though noting certain passage topics or structures could indicate where to spend your time. A lot of it comes down to noting the traps: why was a wrong answer choice tempting, what makes it ultimately wrong, what makes a right answer seem unappealing, what makes it correct. A structured journal, answering the same questions in a checklist format every time, will help you better highlight the key takeaways to avoid going forward.

Dave: Great, wonderful information. I think using a journal to make sure I'm not repeating the same approach, and actually trying something different, is a good thing.

Steve: What would you say is the biggest takeaway or insight you've gotten from our call today?

Dave: Maybe the most glaring is that I need to start putting together a journal so I can reflect on what I've done, which will make my process apparent for logical reasoning and reading comprehension, and give me the ability to change it since I can see it there on paper. The other real takeaway is that you've been very encouraging, I might be closer to where I want to be than I thought. That doesn't stop me from working hard and pushing through, I did write down 165 as my target score, but I'd certainly be happy in the 158 or above range. I think that's adding a dose of reality.

Steve: If we think about this as going from what happened in February up to a 165, that's a 21 point jump, and your aptitude is clearly showing you're capable of far beyond what happened in February. Your accuracy is quite good, we can make it even better by bringing it from that 70% accuracy to 85% through keeping the journal, taking more timed sections and full length exams, analyzing your mistakes, reviewing in depth, and tracking your progress consistently. That's what's going to get you the 20 points.

Dave: Have you had folks you've worked with make these kinds of changes?

Steve: Oh yeah, 20 points over 3 months, especially if you can put in the 15 hours a week you're doing and just change the nature of your studying, keeping it organized in the journal, looking for the trends, highlighting the takeaways, and devoting a bit more time to reading comp than you have. That's going to be enough to get you there, if you're looking for the 20 points it's going to come from the journal and from giving reading comp the attention it deserves.

Steve: What I love about Dave's story is that it shows how to bounce back the right way. He didn't let a 144 define him, he didn't panic and immediately sign up for the next test. He stepped back, asked the hard questions, and rebuilt his approach from the ground up. He gave himself more time, not to cram, but to actually learn, refine his pacing, fix his review process, and build the confidence to crush it on test day, not just once but consistently. If you've had a setback too, take a page from Dave's playbook: push the date if you need to fix the process, not just the result, track your progress, and get support. This is what it looks like to go from a score you're afraid of to a score you're proud of.

More coaching sessions: Zabdi, 141 to 155, Abigail, 147 to 160, Leah, 153 to 170, Dominic, Alina, 157 to 170. Student results and reviews.

I've written free explanations for every question in LSAT PrepTest 159, 158, 157, 156, 155 and 154, with the right answer and why each wrong answer fails. All LSAT explanations are here.

Enough reading. Try a question. Free LSAT drills, 1 at a time, explained the second you answer. Start free drills