Your Ten Point Window | Thinking LSAT, Ep. 579

Main ideas / lessons

1. Bar exam success correlates strongly with early law school grades (especially 1st-year performance).

   • A study of ~13,000 graduates across 36 law schools found:
     • Academic success (particularly GPA/grades) is the strongest indicator of passing the bar on the first attempt.
     • Finishing more courses/credits or completing particular “bar-related” subject courses predicts much less than actual performance (grades).

2. “Correlation is not causation,” but the predictive pattern is still actionable for students.

   • The hosts emphasize the findings show a strong relationship, while cautioning that it may not prove that grades cause bar outcomes.

3. Practice/internships are weak (or even negatively) correlated with first-attempt bar outcomes.

   • The discussion contrasts:
     • grades/course performance vs.
     • internships/practical experience (including external practice), which show much smaller predictive power.

4. LSAT predicts bar outcomes, but law school performance predicts more.

   • Another study (Texas Tech; ~1,500 graduates; Texas bar exams 2008–2014) concluded:
     • LSAT score is a statistically significant predictor of bar performance, but weaker than law school final scores.
     • Undergraduate GPA showed little/no significant relationship in that dataset.

5. Don’t over-interpret a law school’s high “bar passage rate” (selection effects dominate).

   • The hosts argue schools with high passage rates likely enroll students who were already likely to pass (LSAT/GPA selection), so the bar rate reflects applicant quality more than training alone.

6. LSAT learning strategy: don’t only analyze the questions you missed—analyze why you ended up at 50/50.

   • A listener reports repeatedly getting 50/50 choices and then selecting the wrong one.
   • The hosts explain:
     • students notice only errors and may miss that they also narrowed correctly,
     • “50/50” is usually not the start of the problem; the real issue often begins earlier (often during reading/understanding the passage or argument).

7. Approach to multiple-choice LSAT answers: learn to expect “most answers are wrong,” especially at first glance.

   • Emphasis that spending time trying to “convince yourself” between two options can waste time.
   • Better workflow:
     • quickly eliminate clearly wrong choices,
     • treat the remaining plausible choices more efficiently,
     • avoid slow over-analysis that kills accuracy/tempo.

8. Test-taking confidence and nerves: treat the official test as repetitions of your process (ups/downs happen).

   • Advice to a listener (Kay) about handling stress:
     • breathe, rest eyes during breaks,
     • don’t catastrophize the “second half,”
     • remember trial scores indicate capability; official performance varies.

9. Case study: a student (Melvin) plateauing despite time spent.

   • Hosts discuss that if a diagnostic was ~160 and the student studies heavily (LawHub modules + Demon), then:
     • doing blind full sections repeatedly may waste time,
     • focus first on questions missed,
     • only review “doubted but correct” items selectively,
     • build confidence that LSAT is manageable (especially for high-accuracy students).

10. LSAT content and background knowledge (STEM vs. humanities).

    • From Discord:
      • There’s observed correlation between STEM background and LSAT performance.
      • Hosts stress causality is unclear, but logic/reading skill transfer and general study habits may explain part of it.

11. Podcast methodology critique: “4-step” framework vs. what they actually teach.

    • Listener Samuel challenges the “predict answers” wording and asks whether something is missing.
    • Hosts clarify their framework prioritizes:
      • attacking/understanding the argument or passage correctly early,
      • then predicting/anticipating conclusions or fixes naturally,
      • reviewing after elimination and question types (strengthen, flaw, conclusion, etc.).

12. Word of the Week (“otiose”)—examples and meaning as “unnecessary/useless/nonsense.”

    • Used in example sentences to show redundancy or lack of usefulness.
    • The discussion connects meaning to “leisure/otium” historically, but in practice concludes it’s essentially “unnecessary / pointless / nonsensical.”

---

Methodology / instructions (detailed bullet format)

A) How to think about bar exam study based on the research findings

• Focus on maximizing first-year performance:
  • Track and improve GPA/grades after the first course/year, since it shows the strongest relationship with bar pass on first attempt.
• Don’t rely on:
  • merely taking “bar-tested” courses,
  • accumulating extra credits,
  • internship/practical experience as a primary predictor.
• Use a selection-effect mindset when evaluating schools:
  • high bar passage rates often reflect who gets admitted (LSAT/GPA), not just instruction.

B) LSAT learning: fix 50/50 behavior (listener problem)

• When you hit 50/50 and miss:
  • recognize the problem likely started earlier than the choice itself.
• Before choosing between answers:
  • ensure you fully understood:
    • the passage/argument (not just “I basically get it”),
    • each sentence’s role,
    • the conclusion/evidence relationship.
• For practice reviews:
  • don’t only analyze wrong answers—also review how you narrowed correctly.
  • aim to identify why you reduced to two plausible choices (often reading comprehension gaps).

C) LSAT workflow across question/answers (practical pacing)

• Expect the default:
  • most answer choices are wrong (often ~80% wrong by character/fit).
• For each question:
  • eliminate clearly wrong choices quickly,
  • avoid getting stuck trying to “prove” a choice you suspect is wrong,
  • don’t spend equal time defending two options (unless both truly remain viable after strong textual grounding).
• If doing answer choice “deep reading” becomes time-wasting:
  • read enough to confirm fit,
  • move on once it becomes obvious the choice doesn’t properly match the passage/argument.

D) Reviewing practice tests efficiently (Melvin plateau guidance)

• Priority review order:
  1. Questions you missed (highest ROI).
  2. A smaller set of questions you were unsure about but answered correctly.
• Avoid:
  • blindly reviewing entire sections at length if accuracy is already high.
• During training (within Demon):
  • use delayed/re-targeted practice for missed/doubted questions rather than reviewing everything immediately.

E) Exam-day stress management (Kay)

• During the day:
  • reframe official test as “another trial repetition.”
• Between sections / during 10-minute breaks:
  • rest eyes (close them),
  • breathe deeply / quick meditation if available,
  • reduce rumination (don’t plan “a new game” for the second half).
• Mental framing:
  • trust trial results (performance has variance; “good and bad days” occur).

---

Speakers / sources featured (as named in the subtitles)

• Nathan Fox (host; “I Nathan Fox”)
• Ben Olsen (co-host; co-founder elsatdemon.com; “With me Ben Olsen”)
• AccessLex (source of one bar-exam study)
  • Jason Scott
  • Rob Gunter
  • Andrea Pals
• Reddit contributor: “mysterious ball 1475”
• Discord contributor: “KO” (sharp thought)
• Email / listener: Melvin
• Email / listener: Samuel
• Reddit / listener context: Kay
• Email / Discord / forum contributor: Abigail, Billy, Leslie, Damon (mentioned in event promo)
• LSAT Demon team / teachers (referenced as a group; no individual names beyond Ben/Nathan in the main content)
• Erica (fictionalized/illustrative argument example discussed during logic question analysis)
• LSAC / LSAT (institutional sources referenced)
• ELSAT Demon website/podcast materials (referenced generally: elsatdemon.com, LSAT Demon Daily, Thinking LSAT ep. 579)