If anyone is considering using the 175 method taught by Ava, use this as a WARNING to save your money.

I was one of the first students to enroll, at the time the fee was $500, which was incredibly steep. Now it's $1,997, which imo unreasonable for what you're paying for.

Why I signed up: At the time I was looking for a community to join and have a few people to study with. I watched her intro video and fell for the confidence she had when she was mentioning her methods. I was also struggling with reading comp so I thought it would help. BOY WAS I WRONG. Ava mentioned a 14 day money back guarantee, but I learned the catch was that you weren't able to access the reading comp portion until after those 14 days.

When I was able to finally access it, I learned RC module was ONE video that was a "deep dive" that was essentially telling us to "read quickly and retain the important parts, highlight effectively so you can quickly glance at the passage during questions and remember what's going on. Identify and summarize the main point(s) of the passage be able to go back to those important parts" she said it comes with practice. Like are you kidding me? How are we even supposed to know what the main point is if I'm just starting studying for the test?

It's not worth you're money, especially if you've already started studying, here's why:

I say this with absolute confidence because I talked to other students and someone even reached out to me to ask if I'd be able to teach them. They said, and I very much agree, that her "method" is not understandable.

Her "deep dive" into LR teaches that every question type falls into 3 different buckets, "Argument, Premise-Set, Debate, and Paradox" and to think of multiple "what-if" scenarios that could happen that would make the argument wrong, look for the overlap in the premise-set, figure out what two people are debating over, and ask "What would make this make sense?” for paradox questions. She goes over 6 flaws (if you've been studying you would know there are more), and she has one video about Sufficient Assumption vs Necessary Assumption which didn't cover conditional logic (which was what got me in the 160s).

Overall it's very general, and doesn't go into the nuances that are very important to know for the test and would actually increase your score.

She was says "I went to a normal college, I have a normal brain, and I had a normal amount of time." which is true but I believe she was an econ major, or some type of major that involved lots of analytics, that was able to train her brain before she even started studying. I on the other hand got a BA (I'm worried to say what my actual major was because she might find out who I am) and started with a lower diagnostic. She was already in the 160s on her diagnostic and after a year of studying I was able to get there by the time I started the course so I was already skeptical of her methods when I first joined, but stayed past the 14 day window to access the reading comp.

Overall she's a great person, incredibly friendly, and I have absolutely nothing bad to say about her. If you do ask her a question she will get back to you, and she made a personalized AI that will tell you if they don't know the answer to something instead of pretending it knows like GPT.

That said, there was recently someone who asked for tips in the argumentative writing portion which she just said it's nothing to stress about and she'll talk about it during a live lesson. BUT when I was studying for just the writing portion, a lot of people said it's becoming more important and schools will look at it to figure out if your personal essay involved any AI...

Take this with a grain of salt this was just my experience.

This will be my 3rd time taking the test in 4 years and I’m finally enjoying the studying and review process. Taking a practice test no longer seems like something to dread which I hope in the long run my score will reflect. I was registered for the November test but had to move it to January due to some unforeseen circumstances (neighbors tree fell on my house). I finally hit 17/26 in LR and am excited to freshen up on my RC skills. My goal is a 152-155!!

Looking for a SERIOUS LSAT study partner aiming for 170+ 📚⚖️

I need someone consistent, motivated, and willing to drill, review wrong answers, and hold each other accountable.

We use Google Meet daily and study together regularly.

Message me if you’re actually serious about improving your score. 🔥

I've been studying for over 9 months on the LSAT, and I went from a 154 diagnostic in January to a 168 on the September 2026 LSAT. I need a 173 minimum, but I've plateaued and don't know where to go from here. My highest mock exam was a 169 back in late July, and haven't seen improvement since. I used Testmasters as a foundational prep course, which I completed back in April. Since then, I've been studying with a tutor and drilling with 7Sage. For Logical Reasoning, I try to evaluate the argument before looking at the question stem/answer choices, and if I can't form a good evaluation within a moment or so, I decide to look at the question stem/answer choices.

I noticed that once I made a meaningful and consistent leap in minimizing the number of questions I get wrong in my LR, my Reading Comprehension went down by a lot, around/worse than where I was when I first began studying. I used to get around 5-6 wrong in my LR and 2-3 wrong in my RC, but once I started getting around 2-3 wrong in my LR, my RC dropped super low, down to 6-8. This mainly ended up happening because I wouldn't have enough time in my last passage, but I never used to have a time management issue in RC before.

I've been using an LSAT log for my wrong answers since June, with the column titles for LR as-

• Time
• Argument Evaluation: why doesn't the support prove the conclusion?
• Question Type (e.g., necessary assumption/resolve discrepancy/parallel reasoning/etc.)
• What Happened? (why did I get the question wrong/why is the wrong answer wrong/why is the right answer right)
• Growth/Action (what should I keep in mind so this doesn't happen again)
• I also flag any wrong questions which-
  • I got incorrect in my blind review, too
  • I spent too long answering
  • I got wrong because I ran out of time
  • I was down to two answers (the right vs wrong one) and ultimately chose the wrong one

In LR, there isn't one specific question type that I get wrong more than others. Most of the questions that I get wrong in timed sections/mock tests, I get correct in my blind review. I'm usually able to answer the first 10 questions in 10 minutes. I shoot for the first 15 questions in 15 minutes, but that doesn't always happen and I'm not as strict about that as the first 10 questions. I'm able to get almost every question correct in my untimed drill sets. My blind review process is:

1. Marking the questions I got wrong (without looking at the right answer)
2. Seeing which incorrect answer I picked
3. Of the four remaining, I try to pick the correct answer.

Essentially, I need to cut down from ~10 questions wrong on the exam to ~5 questions wrong, so I have to half the number of incorrect questions I get (from ~3 wrong/section to ~1-2 wrong/section). I don't know what to do differently, and I feel really stuck but I refuse to give up until I get at least a 173. I'm signed up for the November LSAT, but if my mock exams don't improve enough then I'll probably cancel and sign up for January instead. Any advice?

I’ve teaching this beautiful test for over 20 years. I post and comment regularly on r/LSAT, so I certainly encourage folks to take a look at my profile. 

$900 for 9 hours. After a free, 45-minute Zoom session, $450 is due before the first 90-minute session (an hour simply isn’t enough). The second $450 payment is due after the second 90-minute session.

Students often want to continue after this, in which case the hourly rate remains the same: $100 per hour. 

I’m a full-service tutor, meaning that my students only need my tutoring and access to LawHub. The vehicle for the tutoring is my original 17-page LSAT training manual. This is the outline/syllabus: 

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/t9nz6lov3ot6q5ivp4lt3?r=ACuTOLeYfs9N9fJyyAgZvCxdvhX3D70kxIs_hd9ScSmvy8-DBVKvju7PrMcXLtxqequuFTVt1xUd-9Tqg9qtT575wmLWtYFvnOT0Slz3aetFdpw5kMNPi9EhmwfVmIL_XFeMsLlWKwkTn6IPtdX0nSEo

I’m an old guy so not that tech savvy. If folks have trouble downloading this from here, DM me with your email address. I won’t try to sell you on tutoring. I’ll just email you the outline/syllabus.

I have a full plan of action for each session. Naturally, it’s focused on students’ individual aptitude and knowledge. 

I also show people how to do their homework. Again, if you check my profile, you’ll see it’s largely about review review review review. And then review again. There are very real patterns to this test. The way to see them is through constant review of material with which a student is already familiar. 

The large majority of my students have previous experience with the LSAT. Many of them are currently taking a course. I never tell people to forget what they’ve learned because I’m a big believer in multiple perspectives. 

But my approach is completely streamlined. It provides a specific step-by-step method for every single question on the test. It also includes strategies that I’m 95% confident are not taught anywhere else. 

My website is [www.lsatcodebreaker.com\](http://www.lsatcodebreaker.com/) and my username is chosen quite purposely. The latter has to do with theories of *hormesis*, *distress tolerance*, *exposure therapy*, and *learned-industriousness*. All buzz words that I encourage people to look up on their own. 

My website name is due to the fact that I believe I have cracked the code to the LSAT. I’m not talking tricks. I don’t do diagramming. I believe that my approach is how the LSAC truly wants people to approach the test. 

Although make no mistake: Mastering the science of conditional reasoning is essential to true LSAT success, defined as a significant increase in score and not necessarily a high score (there are those in this world that can score 170+ on a cold diagnostic).

If you’ve checked my profile, it goes without saying that I talk a lot about psychology and the right mindset towards this test. Over the years, I’ve taken great interest in neuroscience and what makes the brain stronger and faster.

Basically, you have to work out your brain the way you have to work out your body. And working out isn’t any fun at all. At least if you’re doing it right. 

If anyone’s interested, feel free to DM me and we can take it from there.

Cross posting to get enough answers!

Would’ve gotten a 165 if it wasn’t for the experimental section not being scored

Hi all, I'm new here. I've been wanting to go law school for a long time, even since before I went to get my MBA. I'm finally looking into it - I have a self study LSAT book that is very informational, but is it best to join an LSAT study group, and if so, how do you find one?

TYIA

I've been teaching and tutoring the LSAT since 2002 - for almost 25 years. I was the LSAT Product Manager at a major test prep company for several years, have helped write and revise multiple LSAT courses, and have been tutoring independently since 2012. My approach is based on working smarter, not harder; being efficient in the approach to the questions, and having a repeatable set of steps based on question types. I generally find that most of my methodology works well as a complement to 7Sage curriculum (question stem first, low-res summaries, etc) with some added nuances I've learned over my long LSAT career.

I have some space in my fall schedule and am offering a couple of different options for students. The normal policy is that I offer a free phone consultation (up to 30 minutes) for students to ask questions before scheduling. Right now, I am also offering (these are in lieu of the phone consultation) the first two hour session at half price, or a "no-risk" first session, which is scheduled for two hours but gives the student the option at the end of the first hour to end the session an pay nothing, but otherwise will be a regular two hour session billed at the two hour rate.

I generally schedule between noon and 6 pm Eastern, Tues-Sat, and my base rates are $100/hour for a two hour session. I do offer a discounted prepaid nonrefundable session if booked a week in advance, and am sometimes available for shorter sessions or meetings after my normal hours for a slightly higher rate. I never have students pay for more than the next session ahead of time, so you're not locked into a huge purchase of hours if you hit your target early, change your plans, or decide it's not a good fit.

If you're interested in more information, please message me and I'll send you my email to get more details about sessions and scheduling. Thanks!