LSAT LAWYERS homeBook a free call
Menu

LSAT score-report task-accuracy dataset

This page reports aggregate patterns from score reports processed by the independent LSAT Lawyers diagnostic. It is intended to make the sample, method, privacy handling, and limits explicit before the data is interpreted.

Original dataset · Published 2026-08-28 · Updated 2026-08-28

Unique reports
17
Unique tests
14
Duplicate files removed
22
Median score
160
Score range
148–180

Direct interpretation

The current aggregate contains 17 deduplicated reports from 14 distinct tests; 39 valid score-report files were scanned and 22 duplicate copies removed. The median score is 160 and the range is 148–180. This is a small, non-random sample, so it must not be generalized to all LSAT test-takers. It shows task-level separation (Inference, Paragraph Purpose, Must Be True, Parallel Flaw, and Application rank lowest) rather than a universal difficulty ranking.

Task accuracy table

Ranked across task families with at least 15 attempted questions in the deduplicated sample.

Task familyAttemptsMissesAccuracyReports
Inference753356%17
Paragraph Purpose231056.5%12
Must be True461958.7%16
Parallel Flaw441859.1%17
Application24962.5%15
Author Opinion732763%17
Primary Purpose371364.9%14
Method461567.4%14
Weaken1033268.9%17
Local Purpose391269.2%16

Method

  • Locally retained score-report PDFs that passed the independent parser and structural preflight.
  • Exact duplicate report structures removed before aggregation.
  • Experimental sections excluded by the analyzer.
  • Deduplication: Exact report-structure fingerprint before aggregation
  • Only task families with at least 15 total attempted questions across unique reports are ranked.

Privacy

Public output contains aggregate task accuracy and counts only; no names, emails, IPs, job IDs, local file paths, selected answers, raw responses, or individual PrepTest identifiers are published.

Public aggregate mirror

The aggregate-only JSON is mirrored on GitHub and as a standards-compliant machine package for verification and reuse. The canonical research page remains this URL.

Terms

Cite the canonical URL and date. Aggregate figures may be quoted with the sample size. Do not present this as LSAC data, official LSAT data, population-level research, or a guarantee about tutoring results.

Limitations

  • This is a small, non-random sample of retained score reports and submissions to one independent tool.
  • The aggregate includes reports from tutoring and testing workflows, so it is not a random sample of all LSAT students.
  • Accuracy rates describe these unique reports only and should not be generalized to all LSAT students.
  • Exact-structure deduplication removes duplicate copies, but repeated independent submissions of the same performance cannot be excluded completely.
  • Task labels depend on the independently maintained question metadata used by the diagnostic.
  • No causal, tutoring-effectiveness, or score-outcome claim is made.

Find your pattern

Compare your score report against these task-level patterns instead of guessing from a section score.

Author: Daniel, full-time LSAT tutor. Cite as “Independent LSAT score-report pattern analysis, LSAT Lawyers, 2026-08-28.”

The diagnostic does not guarantee a score outcome.