177 --> 180 ? Forum

[Paix]

Congrats to you!!

Awesome advice--I especially like the tip about the dull pencils for bubbling. Never would have thought of that!

I agree about the games. Rereading LGB just to make sure that there's no random tip that I missed in case it comes up on the test.

I don't think that I've ever done PTs at a time when I could focus on them, so that's worth doing I guess. I usually take them while I'm on trains/buses. I need to try to sit down more and actually do them in a focused way--can only help. I think I've got the distraction part down (I always seem to be doing PTs while I'm trying to catch buses). The problem is that, whenever I actually try to sit down for 3 hours, I fall asleep. Alas, at least that shouldn't be a problem on the day itself.

Again, congrats and thanks!

The main point of the dull pencil thing is not the few seconds it might shave off in a section but to illustrate the mindset you need to have that every fraction of every second is important, and that during your practice you should try to figure out the mechanics of moving fast, both mentally and physically.

It sounds like you need to set aside some time to do some serious dry runs. There are potential mental fatigue issues with 5 sections done back to back that you need to work out before the test. This is separate from tired/sleepy sort of fatigue, so you can't assume that being awake is enough. If you haven't been doing 3 sections back to back, 15 min break, then 2 more back to back you need to start now.

Yep, at one of the recent Kaplan events, I did that and got a 178, but I should keep doing it... I just need to find the time between 2 jobs and life

[Woozy]

Oh, also, question... Did you use any marking strategy for RC?

I made absolutely no marks on RC or LR passages. I only cross out answers I think are wrong and circle ones I think are correct - the little letter next to the answer, not the whole thing.

That's not to say you should do the same. I did end up doing plenty of rereading, so I'm open to the possibility that some strategic markers could have helped. Do whatever works for you.

[Paix]

Oh, also, question... Did you use any marking strategy for RC?

I made absolutely no marks on RC or LR passages. I only cross out answers I think are wrong and circle ones I think are correct - the little letter next to the answer, not the whole thing.

That's not to say you should do the same. I did end up doing plenty of rereading, so I'm open to the possibility that some strategic markers could have helped. Do whatever works for you.

Yeah, I've never been into the marking but was wondering if I'm missing out on something....

[NancyBotwin]

ii) Late in practice when you have internalized your sense of timing, stop looking at a watch. Every second spent looking at a watch is a second not spent on the LSAT. Also, looking at a watch is a distraction which will harm your focus.
iii) Use dull pencils - they fill an oval quicker. However, you may want a sharper one for LG diagrams (I did not.)

I was only at 170, but I can say that the above 2 helped me in my increase from my previous tests. As soon as I stopped worrying about time - stopped looking at the clock, stopped thinking about how much I had left, etc - my scores jumped about 2-3 points.

The pencil thing seems silly, but it definitely helps make bubbling faster. When I took the test in September, our proctor was this weird old guy who kept emphasizing the importance of enough sharpened pencils while people were taking their seats. I was one of the first in, in the front row, so he was walking around checking that we had sharp pencils, and when he saw how dull mine were (intentionally), he picked them up and sharpened them! I was like "nooo!!!" and managed to snatch one away before he got to it, though, and that was the only pencil I used.

[Woozy]

I was only at 170, but I can say that the above 2 helped me in my increase from my previous tests. As soon as I stopped worrying about time - stopped looking at the clock, stopped thinking about how much I had left, etc - my scores jumped about 2-3 points.

The pencil thing seems silly, but it definitely helps make bubbling faster. When I took the test in September, our proctor was this weird old guy who kept emphasizing the importance of enough sharpened pencils while people were taking their seats. I was one of the first in, in the front row, so he was walking around checking that we had sharp pencils, and when he saw how dull mine were (intentionally), he picked them up and sharpened them! I was like "nooo!!!" and managed to snatch one away before he got to it, though, and that was the only pencil I used.

Wow. I'd have been pissed. I'm also glad to see I'm not the only one thinking about bubbling time. One of my friends looked at me like I was crazy when I brought it up.

For all the LSAT discussion around here, I see surprisingly little about mechanics. Stuff like keeping the scantron as close as possible to the booklet, using a dull pencil, flipping pages quickly, not looking at stuff other than the test, etc. never gets discussed. People are rightly concerned with understanding the test, but they should still spend some time thinking about taking the test.

Sure, saving every single second will probably only net a couple of raw points, but why leave them on the table?

[TLS1776]

Woozy, I have a copy of the advice you posted on the "how to get a 160+" thread and have some questions for you: I see that you studied for 2-3 months for about 5-10 hours a week, but only took 5-7 preptests during that time. How much of your study time was spent reviewing those preptests and how much time was spent using the Testmasters books you said you had? How long did you wait before starting to take preptests (assuming you used the TM books first)? How useful was it to have the questions broken down by type?


Here's my advice about bubbling: I've found that I save the most time by waiting until either a) I've finished the section, or b) the 5-minute warning has been called before bubbling in all of my answers from the section. I'm surprised that test-prep books don't recommend this (or even mention it as something to consider).

[Woozy]

I started off with a terrible Mcgraw Hill LSAT book where I did a diagnostic and went through their logic games section. It at least taught me the rudiments of game diagramming. After that I got the TM books and immediately recognized that I should dump the stupid book I had and work only with these.

I would have taken more PTs but I didn't have many - I hadn't found this site yet, I didn't even know what was out there. I tried to take one PT per week, but couldn't get enough tests. I managed to get my hands on one from the LSAC website and a couple from my friend near the end, which was a big help. Most of my time in between running out of tests and getting my last few was spent doing games.

Basically, I'd say I spent about 65% of my time doing LGs from the TM books, 10% doing LR from the TM books, and 25% doing PTs. I think it did help to have so many questions organized by type. I did a mix of timed and untimed for the LG and LR, I did only strictly timed PTs. After each PT I would review questions I got wrong and questions I wasn't 100% sure of. Not to toot my own horn, but it was usually not that many so it didn't take much time. I probably spent 10-20 minutes reviewing each PT near the end, maybe 30-45 in the beginning. However, I'm lucky enough to learn very quickly from my mistakes.

I thought about your bubbling strategy but it felt unnatural to me. It is definitely worth exploring, but I think many people dare not try it because they fear running out of time with no answers bubbled. If you are quick and disciplined it may work well for you.

[GeePee]

I'm not sure following other people's specific advice on getting these last 3 points is really going to help much, and frankly it might actually hurt. You know what got you this far, and really TCR is that more of the same will get you to 180. It's not like you're stuck at 165 where you're still missing 20 questions. Following someone else's method at this point when you're getting 4-5 questions/test incorrect is going to be a waste.

HTH

[DoubleChecks]

There's no way to really guarantee 180, even if you hit it on practice tests 5 times before game day. Take the test 1 question at a time and try to be in top shape. However, it's painfully hard to sleep well before the test; I think I got about 2 hours of sleep the night before. Plus, there's always a chance you'll misread a question or misbubble something (I did both on test day).

Despite the fact that I PT'ed at 180 several times, I scored 175 on the exam. You'll eventually realize, though that once you get to 175+ your actual score doesn't matter much. You should always be shooting for 180, but in all honesty you'll need at least a little bit of luck to actually hit it.

z0mg geepee, i knew we were numbers twins, but i never knew we were this similar...

lol WORD for WORD what you wrote above was me the night before the test and the day of hahaha (party next door all night kept me up and yup, never misbubbled before EVAR but game day hiccup)

[Haribo]

I was in a similar situation, so I'll offer up my advice.

The biggest difference I made to move from 177 to 180 was how I approached LR problems. I was like you, missing one or two in each section, and there seemed to rhyme or reason to which type I was having trouble with. It was just two hard questions (or sometimes, 1 hard question and 1 easy question that I misread and turned into a hard question.) For these, I would be stuck deciding between two similarly correct answers, and end up guessing.

My turning point was when I realized that I should never, ever guess on an LSAT question. They are designed so that there are 4 wrong answers and 1 right answer - not 1 right answer and 4 almost right answers. If you cannot come up with a reason for every answer choice you cross you, you don't understand the problem. Try going back, looking it over, rethinking it, diagramming it, restating it, whatever will help you (for me, I found rewriting it in simple English helped, removing extraneous words and helping me see the patterns more clearly. I would also spend up to 5 minutes on a single LR question if it took me that long to determine the single correct answer, and not give up when I didn't figure it out immediately. YMMV.)

Anyway switching my attitude was what got me those last 3 points. Promising myself that I wouldn't guess on any more problems, realizing the mistake didn't lie in the test or the questions but with my understanding - it sounds simple and stupid but I saw results immediately. It sounds like this is a problem you're having, so hopefully attacking those LR questions a different way will help you.

Also, just to add my own experience to what other people are saying - I did zero 5 section practice tests before the LSAT, and I also tended to split the sections up and work on them individually. I wasn't strict about timing, for the most part, but I do admit to using the dull pencils trick - it's so much more satisfying to fill in the circle that way!

Good luck

[Woozy]

I'm not sure following other people's specific advice on getting these last 3 points is really going to help much, and frankly it might actually hurt. You know what got you this far, and really TCR is that more of the same will get you to 180. It's not like you're stuck at 165 where you're still missing 20 questions. Following someone else's method at this point when you're getting 4-5 questions/test incorrect is going to be a waste.

HTH

I'm not really sure that more of the same is the optimal approach once someone nears 180. I really think the last 3-5 points are testing a pretty different skill than the first 55. To get to ~175 you need to read, understand, and reason. The last 3-5 are not so much about understanding, they are about mistake avoidance. It is a totally different thing to misunderstand the logic of a question and get it wrong vs. understand the logic and overlook a single word vs. understand the question completely but misbubble it. These types of errors are very different, and what I'm saying is that they require somewhat different approaches to solve.

[GeePee]

I'm not sure following other people's specific advice on getting these last 3 points is really going to help much, and frankly it might actually hurt. You know what got you this far, and really TCR is that more of the same will get you to 180. It's not like you're stuck at 165 where you're still missing 20 questions. Following someone else's method at this point when you're getting 4-5 questions/test incorrect is going to be a waste.

HTH

I'm not really sure that more of the same is the optimal approach once someone nears 180. I really think the last 3-5 points are testing a pretty different skill than the first 55. To get to ~175 you need to read, understand, and reason. The last 3-5 are not so much about understanding, they are about mistake avoidance. It is a totally different thing to misunderstand the logic of a question and get it wrong vs. understand the logic and overlook a single word vs. understand the question completely but misbubble it. These types of errors are very different, and what I'm saying is that they require somewhat different approaches to solve.

I don't agree. I think that the "mistake avoidance" element is something that one figures for himself how to fix over the course of his LSAT study. The variance happens to really be the only element one has left to decrease after he gets to 175. And, in terms of fixing these mistakes, OP probably has a much better understanding of what causes him to miss questions over the course of however many practice tests than we do shooting at our own tiny problems at the end. Some people are overconfident and gloss over mistakes; others are too doubtful and indecisive. Some people move too slowly and don't have time to give enough detail to a few questions they'd like to attend to; others move too quickly and don't check over the questions that they thought were easy and actually got wrong. The point I'm trying to make is that at this point, exactly the opposite problems can yield the same results, and blanket suggestions don't really solve mistake-avoidance situations.

[Paix]

I was in a similar situation, so I'll offer up my advice.

The biggest difference I made to move from 177 to 180 was how I approached LR problems. I was like you, missing one or two in each section, and there seemed to rhyme or reason to which type I was having trouble with. It was just two hard questions (or sometimes, 1 hard question and 1 easy question that I misread and turned into a hard question.) For these, I would be stuck deciding between two similarly correct answers, and end up guessing.

My turning point was when I realized that I should never, ever guess on an LSAT question. They are designed so that there are 4 wrong answers and 1 right answer - not 1 right answer and 4 almost right answers. If you cannot come up with a reason for every answer choice you cross you, you don't understand the problem. Try going back, looking it over, rethinking it, diagramming it, restating it, whatever will help you (for me, I found rewriting it in simple English helped, removing extraneous words and helping me see the patterns more clearly. I would also spend up to 5 minutes on a single LR question if it took me that long to determine the single correct answer, and not give up when I didn't figure it out immediately. YMMV.)

Anyway switching my attitude was what got me those last 3 points. Promising myself that I wouldn't guess on any more problems, realizing the mistake didn't lie in the test or the questions but with my understanding - it sounds simple and stupid but I saw results immediately. It sounds like this is a problem you're having, so hopefully attacking those LR questions a different way will help you.

Also, just to add my own experience to what other people are saying - I did zero 5 section practice tests before the LSAT, and I also tended to split the sections up and work on them individually. I wasn't strict about timing, for the most part, but I do admit to using the dull pencils trick - it's so much more satisfying to fill in the circle that way!

Good luck

Personally, I agree about the lack of need for 5 section practice tests. For me, if I can do each individual section, putting ti together is easy (based on lots of experience with long tests).

I'd even break it down more--if I can do each LG effectively in 7 minutes, I'm happy. Doing 4 straight is nice but not a huge worry, especially in a busy schedule.

[Paix]

I was in a similar situation, so I'll offer up my advice.

The biggest difference I made to move from 177 to 180 was how I approached LR problems. I was like you, missing one or two in each section, and there seemed to rhyme or reason to which type I was having trouble with. It was just two hard questions (or sometimes, 1 hard question and 1 easy question that I misread and turned into a hard question.) For these, I would be stuck deciding between two similarly correct answers, and end up guessing.

My turning point was when I realized that I should never, ever guess on an LSAT question. They are designed so that there are 4 wrong answers and 1 right answer - not 1 right answer and 4 almost right answers. If you cannot come up with a reason for every answer choice you cross you, you don't understand the problem. Try going back, looking it over, rethinking it, diagramming it, restating it, whatever will help you (for me, I found rewriting it in simple English helped, removing extraneous words and helping me see the patterns more clearly. I would also spend up to 5 minutes on a single LR question if it took me that long to determine the single correct answer, and not give up when I didn't figure it out immediately. YMMV.)

Anyway switching my attitude was what got me those last 3 points. Promising myself that I wouldn't guess on any more problems, realizing the mistake didn't lie in the test or the questions but with my understanding - it sounds simple and stupid but I saw results immediately. It sounds like this is a problem you're having, so hopefully attacking those LR questions a different way will help you.

Also, just to add my own experience to what other people are saying - I did zero 5 section practice tests before the LSAT, and I also tended to split the sections up and work on them individually. I wasn't strict about timing, for the most part, but I do admit to using the dull pencils trick - it's so much more satisfying to fill in the circle that way!

Good luck

Very helpful--thanks! I still find occasional LR questions where A, B, and C are clearly out... D and E are both imprecise, not so great, not so awful answers. Once I know the correct answer, I can generally agree, but I still see the correct answer as imperfect and the alternative as little-if-at-all less imperfect. Did you stop having this experience at some point?

[Haribo]

I was in a similar situation, so I'll offer up my advice.

The biggest difference I made to move from 177 to 180 was how I approached LR problems. I was like you, missing one or two in each section, and there seemed to rhyme or reason to which type I was having trouble with. It was just two hard questions (or sometimes, 1 hard question and 1 easy question that I misread and turned into a hard question.) For these, I would be stuck deciding between two similarly correct answers, and end up guessing.

My turning point was when I realized that I should never, ever guess on an LSAT question. They are designed so that there are 4 wrong answers and 1 right answer - not 1 right answer and 4 almost right answers. If you cannot come up with a reason for every answer choice you cross you, you don't understand the problem. Try going back, looking it over, rethinking it, diagramming it, restating it, whatever will help you (for me, I found rewriting it in simple English helped, removing extraneous words and helping me see the patterns more clearly. I would also spend up to 5 minutes on a single LR question if it took me that long to determine the single correct answer, and not give up when I didn't figure it out immediately. YMMV.)

Anyway switching my attitude was what got me those last 3 points. Promising myself that I wouldn't guess on any more problems, realizing the mistake didn't lie in the test or the questions but with my understanding - it sounds simple and stupid but I saw results immediately. It sounds like this is a problem you're having, so hopefully attacking those LR questions a different way will help you.

Also, just to add my own experience to what other people are saying - I did zero 5 section practice tests before the LSAT, and I also tended to split the sections up and work on them individually. I wasn't strict about timing, for the most part, but I do admit to using the dull pencils trick - it's so much more satisfying to fill in the circle that way!

Good luck

Very helpful--thanks! I still find occasional LR questions where A, B, and C are clearly out... D and E are both imprecise, not so great, not so awful answers. Once I know the correct answer, I can generally agree, but I still see the correct answer as imperfect and the alternative as little-if-at-all less imperfect. Did you stop having this experience at some point?

I found that generally the LR sections in the later tests seemed to be crafted with more precision, but I also finished those last. Have you tried posting the questions on TLS that you see as being imperfect, along with what you are having trouble with? That helped me catch some small subtleties that I originally overlooked, and writing it all out for an audience was helpful as well. Generally, though, with enough time I could almost always pick out the correct answer once I made the decision to always have a concrete reason for choosing it. Honestly, on the LSAT itself there was this one question about interior design that I think took me 5-7 minutes of really focused thought to feel 100% confident in my answer, so it wasn't always immediate, but just by not giving up an circling the answer that my gut said was "best" made the difference.

[kazu]

The pencil thing seems silly, but it definitely helps make bubbling faster. When I took the test in September, our proctor was this weird old guy who kept emphasizing the importance of enough sharpened pencils while people were taking their seats. I was one of the first in, in the front row, so he was walking around checking that we had sharp pencils, and when he saw how dull mine were (intentionally), he picked them up and sharpened them! I was like "nooo!!!" and managed to snatch one away before he got to it, though, and that was the only pencil I used.

Wow... that is one manic proctor. I would have been seriously pissed off.

[Robert398]

I was in a similar situation, so I'll offer up my advice.

The biggest difference I made to move from 177 to 180 was how I approached LR problems. I was like you, missing one or two in each section, and there seemed to rhyme or reason to which type I was having trouble with. It was just two hard questions (or sometimes, 1 hard question and 1 easy question that I misread and turned into a hard question.) For these, I would be stuck deciding between two similarly correct answers, and end up guessing.

My turning point was when I realized that I should never, ever guess on an LSAT question. They are designed so that there are 4 wrong answers and 1 right answer - not 1 right answer and 4 almost right answers. If you cannot come up with a reason for every answer choice you cross you, you don't understand the problem. Try going back, looking it over, rethinking it, diagramming it, restating it, whatever will help you (for me, I found rewriting it in simple English helped, removing extraneous words and helping me see the patterns more clearly. I would also spend up to 5 minutes on a single LR question if it took me that long to determine the single correct answer, and not give up when I didn't figure it out immediately. YMMV.)

Anyway switching my attitude was what got me those last 3 points. Promising myself that I wouldn't guess on any more problems, realizing the mistake didn't lie in the test or the questions but with my understanding - it sounds simple and stupid but I saw results immediately. It sounds like this is a problem you're having, so hopefully attacking those LR questions a different way will help you.

Also, just to add my own experience to what other people are saying - I did zero 5 section practice tests before the LSAT, and I also tended to split the sections up and work on them individually. I wasn't strict about timing, for the most part, but I do admit to using the dull pencils trick - it's so much more satisfying to fill in the circle that way!

Good luck

Very helpful--thanks! I still find occasional LR questions where A, B, and C are clearly out... D and E are both imprecise, not so great, not so awful answers. Once I know the correct answer, I can generally agree, but I still see the correct answer as imperfect and the alternative as little-if-at-all less imperfect. Did you stop having this experience at some point?

I found that generally the LR sections in the later tests seemed to be crafted with more precision, but I also finished those last. Have you tried posting the questions on TLS that you see as being imperfect, along with what you are having trouble with? That helped me catch some small subtleties that I originally overlooked, and writing it all out for an audience was helpful as well. Generally, though, with enough time I could almost always pick out the correct answer once I made the decision to always have a concrete reason for choosing it. Honestly, on the LSAT itself there was this one question about interior design that I think took me 5-7 minutes of really focused thought to feel 100% confident in my answer, so it wasn't always immediate, but just by not giving up an circling the answer that my gut said was "best" made the difference.

How quickly were you finishing sections toward the end of your prep and on the real thing?

[ConsideringLawSchool]

For those of you who did manage to bump your score up those final points, what did you do in terms of time breakdown on RC? (How many minutes for passage reading versus question answering?)

[DoubleChecks]

For those of you who did manage to bump your score up those final points, what did you do in terms of time breakdown on RC? (How many minutes for passage reading versus question answering?)

im actually curious, for those scoring in the mid-170's or higher, is there any real working strategy on how to handle RC? like a systematic thing? i absolutely used no strategy on RC because all of them seemed too time consuming. my RC was never perfect (-1, -2) so maybe i could have adopted something?

[Woozy]

For those of you who did manage to bump your score up those final points, what did you do in terms of time breakdown on RC? (How many minutes for passage reading versus question answering?)

im actually curious, for those scoring in the mid-170's or higher, is there any real working strategy on how to handle RC? like a systematic thing? i absolutely used no strategy on RC because all of them seemed too time consuming. my RC was never perfect (-1, -2) so maybe i could have adopted something?

I just read the passages through and answer the questions. I never developed any system beyond that. I think my RC advantage comes from always getting the big picture of the passage and understanding what the author's attitude is toward different subjects in the passage. I answer these types of questions easily and accurately, and I think that skill simply comes from the fact that I've been an avid reader my whole life. Most of the other questions ask about specific parts of the passage and I end up doing a fair amount of re-reading to answer those, but since they usually have definite answers you can find by pointing to a specific part of the passage, they are hard to get wrong.

I never bothered to time myself on how long the passages took and how long the questions took. I figured that since I had no problem doing a section in the time allotted, the breakdown was irrelevant. Sorry if this isn't too helpful for you guys - RC was the one section I did no studying for, other than during PTs.

[DoubleChecks]

For those of you who did manage to bump your score up those final points, what did you do in terms of time breakdown on RC? (How many minutes for passage reading versus question answering?)

im actually curious, for those scoring in the mid-170's or higher, is there any real working strategy on how to handle RC? like a systematic thing? i absolutely used no strategy on RC because all of them seemed too time consuming. my RC was never perfect (-1, -2) so maybe i could have adopted something?

I just read the passages through and answer the questions. I never developed any system beyond that. I think my RC advantage comes from always getting the big picture of the passage and understanding what the author's attitude is toward different subjects in the passage. I answer these types of questions easily and accurately, and I think that skill simply comes from the fact that I've been an avid reader my whole life. Most of the other questions ask about specific parts of the passage and I end up doing a fair amount of re-reading to answer those, but since they usually have definite answers you can find by pointing to a specific part of the passage, they are hard to get wrong.

I never bothered to time myself on how long the passages took and how long the questions took. I figured that since I had no problem doing a section in the time allotted, the breakdown was irrelevant. Sorry if this isn't too helpful for you guys - RC was the one section I did no studying for, other than during PTs.

same here...for those scoring high already, is there even a strategy to RC improvement besides something that entails being a long-time avid reader?

[Robert398]

Running out of time doesn't seem to be a problem.

There are still 1-2 LR questions per test where it's genuinely hard to decide between two answers (B seems to pretty good but not great... so does E). As long as those questions exist, there's room for improvement. The challenge is figuring out a pattern with a low number of questions in that category.

How are your nutrition and sleep habits?

[ConsideringLawSchool]

Running out of time doesn't seem to be a problem.

There are still 1-2 LR questions per test where it's genuinely hard to decide between two answers (B seems to pretty good but not great... so does E). As long as those questions exist, there's room for improvement. The challenge is figuring out a pattern with a low number of questions in that category.

How are your nutrition and sleep habits?

Interesting question...

[Robert398]

I find it makes a big difference for me.

[vampy]

I PT'd ~177-178 and then I got a 174 on the real thing (first PT ever was 175). I think it basically comes down to luck, and more than anything, stress. I was so stressed I could not sleep for 3 days before the test. I recommend meditation.