Blueprint LSAT Prep's ongoing ask-an-instructor extravaganza

Special forum where professionals are encouraged to help law school applicants, students, and graduates.
User avatar
TheMostDangerousLG
Posts: 1547
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:25 am

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby TheMostDangerousLG » Wed Jun 05, 2013 3:46 pm

What the heck is a "crux" question? Do you know of any PTs where I can see examples? (You'll never guess what I was just reading!)

User avatar
mvonh001
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:49 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby mvonh001 » Wed Jun 05, 2013 6:19 pm

TheMostDangerousLG wrote:What the heck is a "crux" question? Do you know of any PTs where I can see examples? (You'll never guess what I was just reading!)


+1

seagan823
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:18 am

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby seagan823 » Wed Jun 05, 2013 7:37 pm

I am having a little bit of trouble with certain paradox LR problems. For instance, PT 12, Section 4, #22

I narrowed down to A and C and chose C.

My logic against C was that smokers appeared nowhere in the problem, and it would be a great leap to assume that enough of those people who stayed at the same weight were indeed smokers and enough of those who gained weight were not.

My logic for choosing A was that those who gained weight could possibly be gaining muscle, meaning that they could counteract the trend of fat making up more body weight. I guess I also made the assumption that fat was the reason to expect health problems and the only other component of body composition outside of muscle and bone tissue.

I guess my answer makes more leaps. But in either case, I feel as though this answer C is weak at best. It seems like the test makers are making wild leaps. Am I thinking about this incorrectly? I just need help with paradox problems where the answer choices do not correspond directly to the question stem.

Hope that makes sense. Thanks.

seagan823
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:18 am

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby seagan823 » Wed Jun 05, 2013 7:38 pm

Sorry, I mean I chose A, the incorrect answer.

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:11 am

the_pakalypse wrote:My question is basically how do you approach such a game. Half way through the game I realized that this was very similar to another game I messed up (PT 65 game 4) in that I was really not sure how to incorporate that "wrinkle" back into the game. For that game it was about having multiple timelines (both time and tv show # were important)


First off, for that game, the only wrinkle was Generations (I believe that was the hour-long show, right?). It was a basic linear ordering game, and the wrinkle was that Generations took up two consecutive slots.

For the other game, it's important to set up the two tiers, and to make your ordering chains include information about type of article we're dealing with. That first rule really limits how the chains can work out. Same with the second rule, especially since Q won't be third most of the time, and when that happens, you have 6 of your articles in 2 different ordering chains. In those ordering chains, you also have to keep track of the fact that a lot of the elements in them can't be next to each other (J and G, for instance, need something between them). I'd probably split this into 2 scenarios, one where Q is 3 and one where Q is not 3 (possibly just do a scenario for each place that Q could be, though I don't think that would be too helpful). I wouldn't have much filled in, but I'd be able to visualize those two possibilities and have the chains set so I didn't have to keep cross-referencing the rules.

And when is a good benchmark to stop looking for inferences from conditional and just brute force choice by choice? I really didn't want to do that this time since it usually takes so much time... but I feel like this approach would have served me better this time


Check rule 1 against rule 2. Combine them if possible. Then, check rule 1 against rule 3. Combine them if possible. Keep doing that till you've made it through each rule combination. After that, it's time to move on to the questions. If you missed something, you're not likely to see it without staring at the rules for a longer time than it's worth.

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:12 am

mvonh001 wrote:
TheMostDangerousLG wrote:What the heck is a "crux" question? Do you know of any PTs where I can see examples? (You'll never guess what I was just reading!)


+1


"The answer to which one of the following questions would most help in evaluating the argument?"; "Which of the following pieces of information is most helpful in evaluating the argument?"

They're somewhere between Strengthen/Weaken questions, in that it skirts that line. The answer won't necessarily do either, but it'll bring up the piece of information that's missing to make the argument valid.

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15413
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby sublime » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:17 am

..

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:24 am

seagan823 wrote:I guess my answer makes more leaps. But in either case, I feel as though this answer C is weak at best. It seems like the test makers are making wild leaps. Am I thinking about this incorrectly? I just need help with paradox problems where the answer choices do not correspond directly to the question stem.


It does make sense. And they are making a leap. In these paradox questions, the logic isn't nearly as airtight as it is in other questions. You're going to be forced to make some leaps to get the right answer choice.

Here, my paradox is as follows:
On the one hand, those who gained weight tended to live longer than those who didn't.
On the other hand, studies show weight gain leads to health issues that lower life expectancy.

To resolve this paradox, I need to leave both statements as true and show how they can coexist. So I need to find a reason why some skinny people might be croaking. The easiest way to do this is to find an answer choice that shows me some skinny people dying from a different health problem. I get that in (C). Smokers are this group. I need to assume that we're talking about smokers, but if we are (as this answer choice suggests), then I have a resolution.

(A), on the other hand, starts talking about muscle, bone tissue, etc... That's great, but I have no idea how that impacts health. Does having relatively more muscle make me healthier? Less healthy? Same with bones. Even if this is true, I have no idea the health impact of it. And I also don't know if this shift in proportion is because people are getting fatter (thus decreasing the proportion of other types of tissue), losing muscle/bone, or a combination of the two. And this could impact those who gained weight as much as those who didn't; those who gained weight just drowned out their muscle with fat; those who didn't gain weight just shifted the bone/muscle loss into fat.

So (C) necessarily resolves my argument if we have smokers in the group, and smokers are mentioned in that AC. (A) only resolves it if we assume that this shift in proportions also goes along with a weight gain, and that this has some impact on health. That's an assumption on everything in that answer choice, not just on whether we're talking about a group that we suggest we're talking about in that same answer choice.

So yes, there's a bit of a stretch. This isn't airtight, but it doesn't need to be for paradox questions (Resolve questions, as we call them). (C) necessarily has an impact on weight and health; we just need to assume we're talking about the group that we are, in fact, talking about in that AC. (A) doesn't necessarily have an impact on weight and health, and it doesn't necessarily distinguish between my two groups, so it can't be my answer.

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:25 am

sublime wrote:
bp shinners wrote:
mvonh001 wrote:
TheMostDangerousLG wrote:What the heck is a "crux" question? Do you know of any PTs where I can see examples? (You'll never guess what I was just reading!)


+1


"The answer to which one of the following questions would most help in evaluating the argument?"; "Which of the following pieces of information is most helpful in evaluating the argument?"

They're somewhere between Strengthen/Weaken questions, in that it skirts that line. The answer won't necessarily do either, but it'll bring up the piece of information that's missing to make the argument valid.



Do you happen to know what section they are included under in the Cambridge drill packets? Or are they new and not on PT's 1-38?


No idea. I am shamefully (shamelessly?) shamelessly unaware of the way Cambridge categorizes their questions.

Also, don't change up your study habits because of a prediction I made!

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15413
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby sublime » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:28 am

..

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:31 am

sublime wrote:Lol. Thanks for the response. I am going to be taking in October, so I will just be sure to keep an eye out for them throughout my prep.

And if you are interested, here is a chart Cambridge made with their terms and how they relate at least to Powerscore and Manhattan terms. I am not familiar with Blueprint terminology though (sorry :oops: ) so I am not sure how well it matches up.

http://www.cambridgelsat.com/resources/ ... ion-types/


Ah, OK. Then Crux=Impact: Evaluate.

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15413
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby sublime » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:35 am

..

User avatar
TheMostDangerousLG
Posts: 1547
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:25 am

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby TheMostDangerousLG » Thu Jun 06, 2013 5:35 am

bp shinners wrote:
sublime wrote:Lol. Thanks for the response. I am going to be taking in October, so I will just be sure to keep an eye out for them throughout my prep.

And if you are interested, here is a chart Cambridge made with their terms and how they relate at least to Powerscore and Manhattan terms. I am not familiar with Blueprint terminology though (sorry :oops: ) so I am not sure how well it matches up.

http://www.cambridgelsat.com/resources/ ... ion-types/


Ah, OK. Then Crux=Impact: Evaluate.


Yep, the Cambridge problem set that has these is "Evaluate the Argument".

And thanks for your help. Glad to know there's not some scary new problem type I need to tackle. =)

seagan823
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:18 am

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby seagan823 » Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:44 am

bp shinners wrote:
seagan823 wrote:I guess my answer makes more leaps. But in either case, I feel as though this answer C is weak at best. It seems like the test makers are making wild leaps. Am I thinking about this incorrectly? I just need help with paradox problems where the answer choices do not correspond directly to the question stem.


It does make sense. And they are making a leap. In these paradox questions, the logic isn't nearly as airtight as it is in other questions. You're going to be forced to make some leaps to get the right answer choice.

Here, my paradox is as follows:
On the one hand, those who gained weight tended to live longer than those who didn't.
On the other hand, studies show weight gain leads to health issues that lower life expectancy.

To resolve this paradox, I need to leave both statements as true and show how they can coexist. So I need to find a reason why some skinny people might be croaking. The easiest way to do this is to find an answer choice that shows me some skinny people dying from a different health problem. I get that in (C). Smokers are this group. I need to assume that we're talking about smokers, but if we are (as this answer choice suggests), then I have a resolution.

(A), on the other hand, starts talking about muscle, bone tissue, etc... That's great, but I have no idea how that impacts health. Does having relatively more muscle make me healthier? Less healthy? Same with bones. Even if this is true, I have no idea the health impact of it. And I also don't know if this shift in proportion is because people are getting fatter (thus decreasing the proportion of other types of tissue), losing muscle/bone, or a combination of the two. And this could impact those who gained weight as much as those who didn't; those who gained weight just drowned out their muscle with fat; those who didn't gain weight just shifted the bone/muscle loss into fat.

So (C) necessarily resolves my argument if we have smokers in the group, and smokers are mentioned in that AC. (A) only resolves it if we assume that this shift in proportions also goes along with a weight gain, and that this has some impact on health. That's an assumption on everything in that answer choice, not just on whether we're talking about a group that we suggest we're talking about in that same answer choice.

So yes, there's a bit of a stretch. This isn't airtight, but it doesn't need to be for paradox questions (Resolve questions, as we call them). (C) necessarily has an impact on weight and health; we just need to assume we're talking about the group that we are, in fact, talking about in that AC. (A) doesn't necessarily have an impact on weight and health, and it doesn't necessarily distinguish between my two groups, so it can't be my answer.



Thanks, this makes things a lot clearer. Much appreciated.

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Fri Jun 07, 2013 12:12 pm

Last weekend to study - any questions?

User avatar
crestor
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 5:37 am

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby crestor » Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:25 pm

Hi BP,

I enjoyed your predictions of what might be on the June test. I was wondering if LG is your absolute weak point and we see a dinosaur or stained glass like game, and we know we are fucked, would you recommend doing the given Elimination question and hoping to see a easy condition and then skipping the rest of that respective game?

Secondly, I have started from question 14 on my last three LR drills and halved my total incorrect. Would you say this is an aberration or that Some people are better off starting with the more difficult questions and cruising at the end from 1-10 which are generally much more gimmes to me. Keep in mind that for my particular case timing has not been an issue whatsoever.

Finally, do you have any ultimate strategy on how to manage nerves during the test? My current strategy is to just believe that this test on MondAy is just another PT and to follow the same exact routine. What happens happens

Thanks!

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:31 pm

crestor wrote:I enjoyed your predictions of what might be on the June test. I was wondering if LG is your absolute weak point and we see a dinosaur or stained glass like game, and we know we are fucked, would you recommend doing the given Elimination question and hoping to see a easy condition and then skipping the rest of that respective game?


If you really get stumped, take a few seconds to fall back on your set method for tackling the game. If that doesn't work, skip to the next game, pick up some points there, and come back to it at the end.

Secondly, I have started from question 14 on my last three LR drills and halved my total incorrect. Would you say this is an aberration or that Some people are better off starting with the more difficult questions and cruising at the end from 1-10 which are generally much more gimmes to me. Keep in mind that for my particular case timing has not been an issue whatsoever.


I'll never argue with positive results. That strategy works for some people (though not most, in my experience). So if it's working, go with it!

Finally, do you have any ultimate strategy on how to manage nerves during the test? My current strategy is to just believe that this test on MondAy is just another PT and to follow the same exact routine. What happens happens


That's the best one. No one goes into the test feeling great. You're in good company - I was nervous as anything and nearly canceled my test afterwards. Just know that you can do anything the LSAT can throw at you, and you'll do great.

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby wtrc » Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:36 pm

BP: Do you recommend a day off Sunday? Do you recommend pre-test questions on Monday?

User avatar
objection_your_honor
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 2:19 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby objection_your_honor » Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:39 pm

bp shinners wrote:That's the best one. No one goes into the test feeling great. You're in good company - I was nervous as anything and nearly canceled my test afterwards. Just know that you can do anything the LSAT can throw at you, and you'll do great.


Ha — almost canceled your 180.

Thanks for the tips.

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:59 pm

wtrcoins3 wrote:BP: Do you recommend a day off Sunday? Do you recommend pre-test questions on Monday?


Definitely take Sunday off. Relax. Veg out. Let your brain recuperate. Get some exercise. Find a special friend and get some more exercise.

On Monday, I'd bring 10 questions that you answered incorrectly on the first practice test, but that you wouldn't answer wrong if they were on the test that day. Also, bring either a game or RC passage that you struggled with but now have down cold. DO NOT bring new material with you - there's no reason to possibly freak yourself out right before the test if you get stumped.

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby wtrc » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:41 pm

bp shinners wrote:
wtrcoins3 wrote:BP: Do you recommend a day off Sunday? Do you recommend pre-test questions on Monday?


Definitely take Sunday off. Relax. Veg out. Let your brain recuperate. Get some exercise. Find a special friend and get some more exercise.

On Monday, I'd bring 10 questions that you answered incorrectly on the first practice test, but that you wouldn't answer wrong if they were on the test that day. Also, bring either a game or RC passage that you struggled with but now have down cold. DO NOT bring new material with you - there's no reason to possibly freak yourself out right before the test if you get stumped.


Thanks for the advice :)!

Mauve Dinos, you're coming with me to test day. You too, Ms. !Kung.

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:04 pm

Good luck Monday, everyone! I'll be checking in a few times over the weekend if you have any questions.

User avatar
mvonh001
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:49 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby mvonh001 » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:05 pm

So you don't recommend me redoing PT 68 on sunday, slowly and untimed and just gong question by question and eliminating every answer for a reason, etc.

User avatar
bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby bp shinners » Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:48 pm

mvonh001 wrote:So you don't recommend me redoing PT 68 on sunday, slowly and untimed and just gong question by question and eliminating every answer for a reason, etc.


Nope. Too much work, too much risk of something going wrong, and that will take quite some time.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: blueprint shinners’ semi-weekly office hours

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue Jun 11, 2013 2:50 am

bp shinners —

from what people are saying about the June LSAT, your prediction came true (about RC)

please let me know about any predictions you may have of October

thanks


Return to “Free Help and Advice from Professionals”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest