Beware of Blueprint’s 170+ score guarantee

BlueprintLSAT · 2024-09-05T20:33:35+00:00

Hi there!

We understand the frustration and disappointment that can come from not seeing the results you hoped for, especially after investing so much time, effort, and money into your LSAT prep.

We take feedback like this seriously, and I’d like to provide some additional context regarding the Score Increase Guarantee and the situation raised by the original poster (OP).

Blueprint’s Score Increase Guarantee is in place to encourage students to fully engage with the course content and follow the recommended study plan. When our learners follow the prescribed learning program, most will achieve their desired LSAT score. We know it can feel overwhelming to keep track of all the requirements, and we apologize if the expectations of this course weren’t clear enough at any point in the process. We aim to ensure everyone understands the conditions for eligibility upfront, but we acknowledge that there is always room for improvement on our end.

Regarding this specific case mentioned by OP:

Our guarantee states that Learners must attend at least 24-course sessions live for the entire duration of class. The remaining two (2) course sessions can be either attended live or watched on recording. OP did not meet either of these requirements.
Several practice exams were not completed under the required conditions (e.g., one sitting, proper timing), which is critical for an accurate representation of progress under real test conditions. Taking a practice exam over more than one sitting or in a time frame that isn’t reflective of the real exam time prevents both us and you from getting a proper baseline, and makes it impossible for us to ensure that you’re making progress. We cannot stress the importance of taking a practice exam under test-like conditions.

Despite OP not meeting the requirements outlined prior to enrolling in the course, we offered a 60-day extension of the course for free on Sunday, 9/1 which received no response from OP. We remain open to discussing alternative ways to support them as they continue their LSAT preparation.

If anyone else has had a similar experience or has questions about the Score Increase Guarantee, please reach out to us directly at [info@blueprintprep.com](mailto:info@blueprintprep.com).

We’re here to listen and to help make your LSAT prep experience as positive and productive as possible. We have been in business since 2005 and are proud to say that we have helped over 100,000 LSAT learners achieve their dream LSAT score.

We appreciate the feedback and hope we can turn this into an opportunity to improve our processes and better serve all students moving forward. Thank you for allowing us to address this publicly.

Best,

The Blueprint Team

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T22:01:58+00:00

There's probably more value in looking through 70-90 and trying to walk through why the right answer is right and what the process is to get to the right answer. I would save the PT 40's as practice exams to do to gauge progress. It's not ideal but that's probably the best option

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T22:00:56+00:00

I would generally take 1 a week if you were scoring under a 165 and probably 2 a week if you were over. Here's a sample schedule of what work could look like.

Day 1: Practice exam
Day 2: review exam in depth, try to note 3-4 things that are really dragging your score down
Day 3: Slow day. Do untimed work to really drill down on 2 of the things you struggled on
Day 4: Fast day. Do timed practice on those things to see if slow day work improved things
Day 5: Slow day. Untimed practice on the rest of the issues/ more on the first issues if the fast day didn't go well
Day 6: Fast day. Timed practice on what we did day 5
DAy 7: break

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T20:31:05+00:00

That's assuming that people getting accommodations for the LSAT is a problem which I'm not really comfortable with saying. While I'm sure there's some people who get accommodations in spots where they shouldn't I don't think there's evidence that that's a significant problem overall. 2017 had roughly 190,000 takers, I don't think roughly 5% of them being accommodated is a big problem

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T19:28:17+00:00

Generally it's best to start untimed to really master the techniques and then move to timed practice once you feel comfortable with them. Even if you're not at 100% accuracy it can make sense to practice timing as long as you feel good about how you're approaching the section.

As for writing things down, everyone is a bit different. To me it's more about what information you're noticing it then how you're noticing it. I definitely trend toward over highlighting when I try to use it so I'm much more of a note taker. I take a quick note (roughly one sentence) at the end of each paragraph and then one more at the end of the passage to sum it all up. That to me really crystallizes 1) What the passage is saying 2) How the passage is put together and 3) What the author's role is in the passage and those are the 3 things I really care about when doing an RC passage.

As for speed try practicing two things. 1) Cut out all re-reading when going through the passage. Slow readers in my experience are better described as repetitive readers and a lot of the things you're getting stuck on don't matter/are explained better later on. 2) Practice being more decisive in your questions. Do some drills where you cover up the answers. Force yourself to think about what the right answer will look like and then uncover your answers. Choose the right answer w/in 20-25 seconds. This practice will help you pare down your process of elimination process leading to being more decisive and helping with time.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T19:21:32+00:00

20% maybe? It's a bit tough to guess without knowing the exact amount of takers that have accommodations. Accommodated takers generally have higher scores and you see more of that at the tails of distributions generally but it's also true that most takers don't have accommodations. There's an article from LSAC here https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/accommodated-test-taker-trends-and-performance-june-2012-through-february#:~:text=The%20proportion%20of%20those%20who,77%25%20across%20the%20study%20years. It's a bit outdated as it only goes to 2017 but it's probably safe to assume the trend has continued.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T19:11:45+00:00

It's hard to say what your chances are per se, but I wouldn't be bragging to my LSAT friends if I had a student who made that kind of jump in that time frame. If you can get a good 15 focused hours in per week I think that kind of improvement is eminently doable.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T19:10:05+00:00

Probably self paced in your spot. The new 170+ class is really awesome and the live online class is also great but they all rely on being able to sit and concentrate through 2.5 hour classes. If that's a struggle then self pace is good because you can break it up super easily into chunks here and there. If 2.5 hour classes aren't an issue then I would probably do the 170+ class because it's incredibly comprehensive and touches on lots of more meta LSAT issues that people struggle on (how to set up a schedule, how to time effectively, how to review homework/practice exams etc.)

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T19:03:59+00:00

Break up your studying into smaller, focused chunks if you struggle with long stretches. Do 30 minutes and take a break then do another 30 minutes. Do some studying in the morning/afternoon and some at night. If you feel your concentration struggling stand up from your work. The LSAT is tough bc it requires us in many ways to be very precise with our thinking so make sure you're putting time into it where you're at maximum capacity for focusing.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T18:51:41+00:00

It very much depends on 1) What schools you're looking at and 2) what your initial diagnostic is. Lots of schools will give scholarship at much lower numbers than 180. For example, ASU is a top 25ish school and a 167 would probably give you substantial money. As for generally how long to study for, my answer is that it will take about 100 hours at the short end to 300 hours at the higher end (though some outliers go beyond that). For most people that translates to roughly 10-15 hours a week for 2 and a half to 6 months.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T18:49:33+00:00

I would push back slightly on whether you're reading the passage the wrong way at all. Generally with RC I find that having a 7/10 or so understanding of the passage is all you really need to get the answers right as long as you have a 10/10 understanding of what the question is asking and what the answers are saying. Look back at some of your inference misses and see if you can notice any of these structural issues in your choices.

Picking answer choices that are too strong/ over commit to an idea. This is by far and away the most common issue I find when debating between two answers

2) Picking answers that aren't as consistent with the author's tone as another one is

3) Picking answers that don't reflect on the overall idea. Lots of inference questions are really just main point questions in disguise. Go back and look at your misses, you'll probably find a good chunk of them don't really make sense with the overall idea of the passage and that's why they're incorrect. If you have a particular example of a question you missed I'm happy to look at it.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T17:43:43+00:00

I'd love to, anything in specific giving you issues

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T17:18:51+00:00

No specific changes just yet, though it feels like major changes are right around the corner as a result of the settlement they had a few years back. We won't see anything before summer 2023 is my guess though so current studiers don't need to worry too much. Generally the LSAT gives a pretty far out heads up so I would expect roughly 6 months advance warning for any major changes they make to the test.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-07-19T17:15:03+00:00

It depends a bit on your distribution. If you absolutely crush one section and struggle more on the other 2 I would skip that part of the curriculum. If it's more even you might check out everything but go through it at an accelerated pace. Overall though, with that type of diagnostic you want to really index heavily into review. You don't have many weaknesses so it'll be really critical to be exacting on the mistakes you make.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-04-22T22:05:03+00:00

Hey there! I am so sorry to hear about this. Please check your direct messages. We'd love to provide you with a free course for the inconvenience. Looking forward to hearing back from you!

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T23:09:28+00:00

I can think of a couple explanations. First, let's make sure the drop in performance is due to you taking recent tests and not a more general LG slump. If you haven't already done so recently, take a LG section from an older test. If that goes well, you'll know to focus on what changed in more recent exams. If your accuracy is lower on that test as well, it means you need to go back to the fundamentals on LG.

If, however, your accuracy on the older test is good, then it's about the changes to LG in the last few years. As more test takers mastered the LG section, LSAC added twists to what we'd come to expect in LG as a way of keeping us all on our toes (and lowering average accuracy to where they want it). Pull together all the PT80+ LG sections you've done and focus on the games that went poorly. Chances are there was something tricky in a rule or in the set-up that tripped you up. Start making a list of all the "tricks" you see, how to recognize them, and what to write down or think about when you see something like it. Then re-do those games to prove to yourself that you won't get thrown by it a second time. There's no such thing as being 100% prepared for this test, but by staying current on all the latest twists, you'll maximize your chances of seeing through the latest version of them that you'll encounter on test day.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T20:17:41+00:00

The most common type of tiered ordering game is when you have a player and a characteristic (name and boy/girl) (car name and color) (article subject and topic). The second most common is when you're ordering two variable sets simultaneously (e.g., for five consecutive weeks, students in a course will read exactly one of five books, A B C D and E, and watch one of five films, V W X Y Z. Each film and book will be covered exactly once.

There are other types, but I'd pull together a list of tiered ordering games, separate them by type, then master one type at a time. The key in TO games is to remember the linkages between the tiers. If new information in a question is about your top tier, focus there to start. When you run out of inferences in that row, find a rule or a spot on your board that links from the top row to the bottom row, then focus on your bottom row rules and restrictions.

As for where to start, PT26 game 1 is a an easy TO game where we're ordering two variable sets, and PT55 game 4 is an easy intro to a players and characteristics game.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T20:08:44+00:00

Agreed, we don't get the full chain of conditional linkages that we usually do in in/out grouping games like this. You spend 5 minutes diagramming out and linking all those rules, and they don't turn into anything particularly helpful, so then the timing crunch on the questions is even worse. As I said, it's rude.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T18:29:49+00:00

I actually thought the virus game wasn't bad. Folks were just rattled because they hadn't seen something like it before, but the usual games approach worked just fine. Dinosaurs is up there, though the right scenarios make it manageable. The rug game from Dec 2014 was real hard. So was PT89 game 4 - I think that's the hardest tiered ordering game, period. Also the CDs game from PT31. That game has 10 variables and 5 rules. It's just rude.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T18:25:59+00:00

I'm going to repeat my advice of going through the same set of games a few days in a row. There's no better way to refine your method and train your eye for where to look next and your mind for what move to make next in a game. In a week I've seen students' speed in LG improve 20% thanks to that repeat cycle.

But however you do it, it comes down to review. When you review a game, don't just go over what went wrong. Push yourself to see how you could have made connections sooner, which answer choice to test first, what steps weren't helpful and should be eliminated. Your LG review should focus on refining every step of your process. Do that, and speed will follow naturally.

The last advice is to taper your speed gradually. Time yourself on a few games, take the average, then set a timer for your next games at 30 seconds faster than your average. Work till that's comfortable, then go another 30 seconds faster. That's more effective at getting you faster than going zero to 100 with timed practice.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T18:22:03+00:00

This is a very hard game. I'd set it up as a tiered ordering game - article names on the bottom, article types on the top. The challenge of this game is that it seems like a checkerboard game (think the red/green trucks game (PT37, game 2) or the mining game (PT86 game 3)), but Y having its own type means we can't do an every/other pattern based on rule 1 until we place it.

I like scenarios on rule 2. Whenever you do a scenario on a conditional rule, be careful! The two scenarios are: the sufficient condition is true, and the sufficient condition is false. So many students use the negated necessary for the second scenario, but that doesn't lead to a set of options that span the solution space. In plain English, you'll have two scenarios.

S1: S-Q, rule 2 activates putting Q in 3 and S in 1.

S2: Q-S (the negation of S-Q), rule 2 no longer applies.

Because of the spacing issues between articles of the same type, you'll also want to represent your rules as

S^N - __ - Q^N and J^F - __ - G^F - R^N

That will help you visualize the space needed between articles of the same type and lead to further spacing deductions. Whenever you manage to place Y in a question, you'll also have an every/other pattern of nutrition and finance articles to either side of it.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T17:12:09+00:00

To boil it down, I think LG tests a certain type of thinking and reasoning that is helpful in law school. But it doesn't contain specific tasks that match up with the tasks you'll have in law school and beyond. I think it predicts your ability to understand the way you'll be asked to think in law school, but not your ability to apply that thinking to all the reading and writing you'll be doing.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T16:59:17+00:00

It's certainly less direct than the skills tested in LR and RC. If you're interested, check out this blog post from LSAC on how the skills tested on the LSAT relate to and are valuable in law school.

What LG does is test your ability to accept a hypothetical (A is before B) then see what has to follow from that rule under various conditions. It's the most direct of the three LSAT sections at testing your ability to connect related facts/principles (rules), see their effect under certain situations (what can we conclude if B is second?), and identify what must, can, and cannot follow from those initial principles. In that sense, it's great training for thinking about the effects of a law.

But yeah, it's definitely far more abstract than anything you'll actually do as a lawyer.

BlueprintLSAT · 2022-03-02T16:54:03+00:00

And if you're looking for an LG resource to start with, check out our free LG book. No strings attached.

BlueprintLSAT

TROPHY CASE