On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- Refractory Period

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 46 PT's down

Postby Knock » Thu May 27, 2010 8:23 pm

Marionberry wrote:I don't remember how I did on that section, I think I did low 170s on 55. I ended up getting the cloth question right, but it was still suck.


I got the cloth question right, but I still missed 3 on the talk-story passage, for a -4 overall on RC.

---

Took PT 55 today. Went -1 LR (experimental -1 LG; if you want to try a hard, funky, unique game, try game 3 on PT 10 section 2, about forming "sentences" out of "words") -4 RC (Talk-Story killed me, missed 3 on that section), -1 LR, -0 LG (had 15 minutes left after the first 3 games, which was lucky, because the last game took me 12-13 minutes lol).

Summary:
55 -- 05/27/10 ----- -1 LR -4 RC -1 LR -0 LG ------ 94/174 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.2 as 2nd experimental

User avatar
BigA
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:22 am

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 46 PT's down

Postby BigA » Fri May 28, 2010 12:22 am

JasonR wrote:Here I go being contentious again. That actually makes no sense whatsoever. The equating process means that variations in overall ability among groups of test-takers don't impact scores. This is precisely because the test is equated and not curved.

The effect of more prepared test-takers has simply been that a greater percentage of people are getting 170s now than in the past.


If this is true, I guess I didn't really know that. I thought it was "equated" so that the bell curve would be the same across administrations. Hasn't the median always been 151, 99th percentile been 173, etc?

jjlaw
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 1:43 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 46 PT's down

Postby jjlaw » Fri May 28, 2010 3:04 am

BigA wrote:Hasn't the median always been 151, 99th percentile been 173, etc?


I thought the 99th percentile was 172?

User avatar
nids333
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 46 PT's down

Postby nids333 » Fri May 28, 2010 2:11 pm

Knockglock wrote:
Marionberry wrote:I don't remember how I did on that section, I think I did low 170s on 55. I ended up getting the cloth question right, but it was still suck.


I got the cloth question right, but I still missed 3 on the talk-story passage, for a -4 overall on RC.

---

Took PT 55 today. Went -1 LR (experimental -1 LG; if you want to try a hard, funky, unique game, try game 3 on PT 10 section 2, about forming "sentences" out of "words") -4 RC (Talk-Story killed me, missed 3 on that section), -1 LR, -0 LG (had 15 minutes left after the first 3 games, which was lucky, because the last game took me 12-13 minutes lol).

Summary:
55 -- 05/27/10 ----- -1 LR -4 RC -1 LR -0 LG ------ 94/174 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.2 as 2nd experimental


Wow, I admire your consistency and somewhat envious of it as well. I scored a 174, 169, 169 on my last 3 practice tests. Part of me is becoming overconfident, which terrifies me because I don't want to have that mentality on test day.

User avatar
confusedlawyer
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 11:21 am

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 47 PT's down

Postby confusedlawyer » Fri May 28, 2010 2:46 pm

Nice score I did 55 yesterday also got -5LR, -5RC, -1LR, -2LG (time) 87-->167

I attribute the first bad section to just being tired, didnt do any practice Q's beforehand. RC was just rediculous, and I am more than happy to take the -5 and run

User avatar
confusedlawyer
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 11:21 am

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 47 PT's down

Postby confusedlawyer » Fri May 28, 2010 2:48 pm

by the way are you going to do a PT everyday until the real thing? No day off before the exam? It seems like everyone who got high 170's took at least 1 day off before the exam to relax. 46 PT already with your scores seems that it could only help you

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 48 PT's down

Postby Knock » Fri May 28, 2010 4:53 pm

Took PT 37 today, going (-2 RC experimental section 10.3), -0 RC -1 LR -0 LG -3 LR for 97 raw 177 scaled. 48th PT done. Now I just have 5 PT's left. 38, 56-59, 11 (going to be used as experimental), and the last section of 10.

Summary:
37 -- 05/28/10 ----- -0 RC -1 LR -0 LG -3 LR ------ 97/177 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.3 as 1st experimental

by the way are you going to do a PT everyday until the real thing? No day off before the exam? It seems like everyone who got high 170's took at least 1 day off before the exam to relax. 46 PT already with your scores seems that it could only help you


Nah, I only have 6 PT's left, so i'll probably take them M-F next week (1 will be used as experimental sections), and take Saturday and Sunday off. OR maybe M-Thurs., Friday off, Sat 59, Sunday off, then Monday real deal. I'll probably do the 1st option though.

Can't believe i'm on my last 5 PT's!! So close...heading down the homestretch.

User avatar
theZeigs
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 48 PT's down

Postby theZeigs » Fri May 28, 2010 5:12 pm

Knock, just wanted to throw in a big congratulations for sticking with this and doing so well. Your scores are admirable...I hope I can pull something in your range come next Monday, but most probably not. Best of luck bud :)

oh and P.S. Don't forget to update all your scores in my "Progress" thread...maybe Saturday June 26 :lol:

User avatar
Osos
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 48 PT's down

Postby Osos » Sat May 29, 2010 12:05 am

Just wanted to say thanks for the inspiration. I've taken almost as many pts as you but hadn't been logging my scores well until I read this. It's also nice to know somebody is working even harder than I am. Stops me from going insane when I realize I'm not alone.
It's also good to be able to compare scores with someone else in my range. It seems like you usually do better on the LGs and I usually do better on the LRs. I need to leave myself more time on those, I'm really impressed with some of your -0s on those.
Congrats on all your progress and I wish you the best on test day! I hope your not freaking out as much as I am.

User avatar
confusedlawyer
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 11:21 am

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 48 PT's down

Postby confusedlawyer » Sat May 29, 2010 9:50 am

I have a feeling you are going to get close to a 180 as long as you don't get nervous, and I doubt you will after 50 practice tests. By the time I'm done my last one on saturday I will have done 40 timed tests, I also took a course so did many individual sections and such but still havent gotten my scores anywhere near yours. Highest I ever got was 173 on a very generous curve. Most of the time anywhere from 165-168, the former is more of an average especially for the newer tests. Beins so close to test day and you having done so well, can you give me any tips on how to minimize errors on LR? I used to be so good only getting -4, and I'm not sure if I am burnt out but I seem to get some questions wrong and then when I go back I have no idea why I picked the answer I did. Also what is your RC method? LG I'm fairly good so no need for help on that. Any info OP would be greatly appreciated

User avatar
DaveBear07
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:21 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 48 PT's down

Postby DaveBear07 » Sat May 29, 2010 2:59 pm

Knock, have you taken 57?

I made a new thread expressing my frustration with my apparent dulling LG skills a week away from the real deal.... but I'm interested to hear your thoughts on the newest games.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 48 PT's down

Postby Knock » Sat May 29, 2010 3:08 pm

theZeigs wrote:Knock, just wanted to throw in a big congratulations for sticking with this and doing so well. Your scores are admirable...I hope I can pull something in your range come next Monday, but most probably not. Best of luck bud :)

oh and P.S. Don't forget to update all your scores in my "Progress" thread...maybe Saturday June 26 :lol:


Thanks so much man...I really appreciate the kind words. Best of luck to you too! i'm sure you will bring your A game and kill it come test day!

And don't worry, i'll update my scores in your thread. I'll probably posted when I finish all the PT's the Friday before the real deal, and again when I get my real score.

Osos wrote:Just wanted to say thanks for the inspiration. I've taken almost as many pts as you but hadn't been logging my scores well until I read this. It's also nice to know somebody is working even harder than I am. Stops me from going insane when I realize I'm not alone.
It's also good to be able to compare scores with someone else in my range. It seems like you usually do better on the LGs and I usually do better on the LRs. I need to leave myself more time on those, I'm really impressed with some of your -0s on those.
Congrats on all your progress and I wish you the best on test day! I hope your not freaking out as much as I am.


Haha definitely, it's nice to know that there are other people going through what we're going through, and that we're not alone. None of my brick and mortar friends can understand what i'm going, and it's definitely very frustrating. Hopefully we can borrow each others skill sets and I will kill LR and you will kill LG come test day. Thanks again, and don't worry, i'm freaking out just as much as you. I bought myself a couple of video games to help keep me sane this last week. Good luck and i'll see you on the other side 8)

confusedlawyer wrote:I have a feeling you are going to get close to a 180 as long as you don't get nervous, and I doubt you will after 50 practice tests. By the time I'm done my last one on saturday I will have done 40 timed tests, I also took a course so did many individual sections and such but still havent gotten my scores anywhere near yours. Highest I ever got was 173 on a very generous curve. Most of the time anywhere from 165-168, the former is more of an average especially for the newer tests. Beins so close to test day and you having done so well, can you give me any tips on how to minimize errors on LR? I used to be so good only getting -4, and I'm not sure if I am burnt out but I seem to get some questions wrong and then when I go back I have no idea why I picked the answer I did. Also what is your RC method? LG I'm fairly good so no need for help on that. Any info OP would be greatly appreciated


Thanks man, I really really hope so. I'm usually pretty good under pressure, and good at keeping my nerves in check and staying focused and getting the job done. 40 timed tests is a pretty great breadth of work as well, so I know you will be able to hit your target score.

As for LR, it's kind of hard without knowing what your weaknesses are. Is there a particular question type thats bothering you? One thing i've noticed from doing 48+ PT's is that the right answers almost always "feel" right. If it doesn't feel right, like i'm trying to force it, it's often wrong. I'm not sure if i'm crazy and it's all in my head, or if i've truly been able to develop feel for the LSAT credited answer choices after doing 5,000+ LSAT questions. A lot of times I pick out the correct feel choice, but then I overthink it, and change my answer and miss it (although a lot of times I originally choose the wrong answer and do need to think about it and change it), but usually I can just tell in my gut if an answer is right for a good portion of the questions, and when I hit that answer, I move on quickly to the next question to buy me some time.

Also if you're getting burned out that can definitely hurt your LR, probably more than any other section, so be sure to take care of yourself, give yourself some R&R and a few days off.

My RC method varies. If I have time I try and bracket and underline a lot, mainly because it forces me to read every single word closely, and pay attention to every phrase and tone shift etc. If i'm low on time though, I only bracket pretty much, and occasionally circle important words. Again, I really have to trust me gut on RC, more than anything else.

Knock, have you taken 57?

I made a new thread expressing my frustration with my apparent dulling LG skills a week away from the real deal.... but I'm interested to hear your thoughts on the newest games.


Definitely the games section started to pick back up in difficulty in the 50's after a relative lull in the 40th's. A lot of games seem to be really funky/weird as well, like the Bus game in PT 55.

I'm not taking that PT until next Wednesday I believe I have it scheduled, but I will definitely post in your thread and let you know my thoughts.

User avatar
confusedlawyer
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 11:21 am

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 48 PT's down

Postby confusedlawyer » Sat May 29, 2010 5:48 pm

Thanks for the tips. I definately do not think you are crazy. For most of the LR i get wrong, I don't know the answer, so when I narrow it down to 2 or 3, the one I pick I always seem to force into fitting, and when I find out the real answer I get so mad that I didn't recognize it before. My weakness is DEFINATELY parallel questions. They are so time consuming so I always end up skipping the hard one and only come back to it if I have time. Took a PT today and bombed RC, I'm thinking I'm just going to give up not sure much I can do to improve now. Perfect LG again today. -6 on RC killed me though could have got a 172 ended up with a 167. Not too mad though 165 is my ideal score with 168 being my dream score

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby Knock » Mon May 31, 2010 7:05 pm

10 -- 05/31/10 ----- -0 LR -1 LG -2 RC -2 LR ------ 96/176 ----- experimental test sections
56 -- 05/31/10 ----- -1 LG -1 LR -1 LR -1 RC ------ 96/178 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.4 as 3rd experimental

Thought PT 56 was a pretty difficult test, and I had to battle it the entire way through. Kind of pissed that I missed a LG question though, I pulled my dumbass card; when I was doing my hypothetical, I found a solution that worked and corresponded to an answer choice; only problem was the question was looking for an answer that couldn't occur :roll:. It was a pretty easy question too, doh!

The two LR's were decent, nothing too remarkable. Challenging, but pretty fair and I was able to figure out most of the questions. RC, I thought the 2nd passage was really tough, about spadefoot toads and cannibalism, yadda yadda yadda. Took me probably about 15 minutes to get through, completely killing my pacing, but I did pretty good and only missed 1. I fucking floored it on the last 2 passages (comparative reading and some women's education one), and somehow didn't miss a single question. Pretty surprised, I was expecting a worse score on RC, but definitely happy. If I get a -1 on these difficulty RC passages on the real day i'd be very satisfied.

Anyways, feels great to have 50 PT's under my belt. That's 5,000+ LSAT questions i've done timed. Definitely gonna be a confidence booster on test day. I have them all in a stack on my keyboard slideout under my desk, and the pile has gotten pretty thick. It's kind of cool to hold them, and think about how many fucking LSAT questions i've answered.

Anyways, 1 week until test day! Crazy, it's almost upon us. Good luck to everyone, may we kill the LSAT come test day.

If you're interested in checking out my score progression, but don't want to flip to the 1st page, i'll post my log here:
My Practice Tests:
Pt#____Date__________Individual Sections____Raw /Scaled Score_______________Notes___________________
36 -- 02/27/10 ------ -6 LR -3 RC -7 LR -3 LG ------82/165 --- Free Kaplan Test, finished LG bible by exam, 5 sections
19 -- 03/24/10 ---- -2 LG -4 LR -4 RC -2 LR ------- 89/170 ---- most of LR Bible done, rusty on games, 4 sections
20 -- 03/25/10 ----- -4 LR -1 RC -4 LG -2 LR ------- 90/171 ---- missed last 3 on 4th LG due to extremely hard game
21 -- 03/30/10 ----- -4 LG -6 LR -2 LR -3 RC ------ 86/169 ----- 4 sections, felt off, disappointing, first PT to drop
22 -- 03/31/10 ----- -2 RC -4 LR -0 LG -4 LR ------ 91/172 ----- 4 sections, nearly bombed LG, LR dragging me down
23 -- 04/01/10 ----- -6 LG -4 LR -4 LR -4 RC ------ 82/168 ----- ran out of time on LG (2 q's), took at 9pm (noise + tired)
24 -- 04/03/10 ----- -2 RC -3 LR -2 LR -6 LG ------ 88/171 ---- 4 sections, bombed last LG (missed 5/6)
25 -- 04/05/10 ----- -0 RC -2 LR -9 LG -2 LR ------ 88/169 ---- 4 sections, bombed 2nd lg (0/7), hardest LG ever
26 -- 04/07/10 ----- -2 LG -5 LR -5 LR -2 RC ------ 87/170 ---- 4 sections, LR holding me back this time
27 -- 04/08/10 ----- -2 LR -1 LG -4 RC -4 LR ------ 90/174 ---- 4 sections, 5 extra minutes on LG! Artificially high score
28 -- 04/09/10 ----- -3 LR -2 LG -2 LR -0 RC ------ 94/175 ---- untimed on 1st LR section, all else timed, 4 sections
SpA- 04/12/10 ----- -0 LR -2 RC -1 LG -1 LR ------ 97/177 ---- SuperPrep A, untimed LG, 4 sections
SpB- 04/13/10 ----- -5 LR -3 LG -3 RC -0 LR ------ 90/173 ---- SuperPrep B, untimed LG, 4 sections
SpC- 04/14/10 ----- -5 LG -2 LR -1 LR -1 RC ------ 92/174 ---- SuperPrep C, untimed LG, 4 sections
40 -- 04/15/10 ----- -2 LR -1 LG -1 LR -2 RC ------ 95/174 ---- 4 sections, fully timed
43 -- 04/17/10 ----- -1 RC -2 LR -2 LR -0 LG ------ 96/177 ---- 4 sections, fully timed
44 -- 04/19/10 ----- -2 RC -3 LR -1 LG -1 LR ------ 93/173 ---- 4 sections, fully timed
45 -- 04/20/10 ----- -1 LR -0 RC -0 LG -3 LR ------ 95/178 ---- 4 sections, fully timed (did a 5th afterwards from PT41.1)
46 -- 04/21/10 ----- -1 RC -1 LR -0 LR -0 LG ------ 97/179 ---- 5 sections (exp. PT41.2 as 3rd section)
39 -- 04/22/10 ----- -3 LG -3 LR -1 RC -3 LR ------ 91/172 ---- 5 sections (exp. PT41.3 as 3rd section)
42 -- 04/23/10 ----- -2 LG -2 LR -2 RC -1 LR ------ 94/174 ---- 5 sections (exp. PT41.4 as 2nd section)
41 -- 04/20-4/10 --- -3 LR -1 LG -0 LR -4 RC ------ 93/174 ---- used as experimental section for PT's
47 -- 04/27/10 ----- -3 LR -2 RC -1 LR -0 LG ------ 94/174 ----- 5 sections (exp. PT18.1 as 1st section)
48 -- 04/28/10 ----- -1 LR -0 LG -0 RC -1 LR ------ 99/178 ----- 5 sections (exp. PT18.2 as 3rd section) untimed LG
30 -- 04/29/10 ----- -0 LG -1 LR -2 RC -0 LR ------ 98/180 ----- 5 sections, 18.3 as 3rd experimental, re-used q's, e/x RC
31 -- 05/01/10 ----- -1 LG -1 LR -1 LR -6 RC ------ 92/174 ----- 5 sections, 18.4 as 4th experimental
18 -- 05/01/10 ----- -1 LG -4 LR -0 RC -3 LR ------ 93/175 ----- broken up and used as experimental tests
29 -- 05/03/10 ----- -1 LR -2 RC -0 LG -3 LR ------ 95/176 ----- taken in 2 parts, 1st section and then last 3 sections
32 -- 05/04/10 ----- -0 LR -3 RC -0 LG -2 LR ------ 95/177 ----- 5 secions, with 16.1 as 3rd section experimental
33 -- 05/05/10 ----- -0 LR -4 RC -0 LR -1 LG ------ 96/178 ----- 5 sections, with 16.2 as 3rd section experimental
34 -- 05/06/10 ----- -0 RC -1 LR -2 LR -0 LG ------ 98/180 ----- 5 sections, with 16.3 as 3rd section experimental
16 -- 05/07/10 ----- -1 LG -3 LR -1 LR -5 RC ------ 91/173 ----- experimental test
35 -- 05/08/10 ----- -0 LR -2 RC -0 LG -1 LR ------ 98/179 ----- 4 sections due to library closing
49 -- 05/10/10 ----- -0 LG -2 LR -2 RC -2 LR ------ 94/174 ----- 4 sections
50 -- 05/11/10 ----- -3 RC -0 LR -1 LG -3 LR ------ 93/173 ----- 5 sections
12 -- 05/12/10 ----- -2 LR -0 LG -1 RC -2 LR ------ 96/175 ----- 4 sections
51 -- 05/13/10 ----- -0 LR -0 RC -1 LR -0 LG ------ 99/180 ----- 5 sections, w/ 7.2 as 3rd experimental
15 -- 05/15/10 ----- -1 RC -1 LR -2 LR -1 LG ------ 95/174 ----- 5 sections, w/ 7.3 as 3rd experimental
07 -- 05/18/10 ----- -2 LR -0 LG -4 RC -3 LR ------ 92/175 ----- experimental test
52 -- 05/18/10 ----- -1 LR -0 LG -3 LR -1 RC ------ 94/176 ----- 5 sections, w/ 7.4 as 3rd experimental
14 -- 05/19/10 ----- -0 LG -1 LR -1 RC -1 LR ------ 98/178 ----- 5 sections, w/ 9.1 as 3rd experimental
53 -- 05/20/10 ----- -2 LR -0 LG -2 LR -3 RC ------ 93/174 ----- 5 sections, w/ 9.2 as 3rd experimental
13 -- 05/21/10 ----- -0 LG -6 LR -1 RC -0 LR ------ 94/176 ----- 5 sections, w/ 9.3 as 3rd experimental
09 -- 05/25/10 ----- -0 RC -2 LR -1 LG -3 LR ------ 95/177 ----- experimental test
54 -- 05/25/10 ----- -2 RC -0 LR -0 LG -1 LR ------ 98/179 ----- 5 sections, w/ 9.4 as 2nd experimental
J'07 - 05/26/10 ----- -1 LG -0 LR -3 LR -2 RC ------ 94/172 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.1 as 2nd experimental
55 -- 05/27/10 ----- -1 LR -4 RC -1 LR -0 LG ------ 94/174 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.2 as 2nd experimental
37 -- 05/28/10 ----- -0 RC -1 LR -0 LG -3 LR ------ 97/177 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.3 as 1st experimental
10 -- 05/31/10 ----- -0 LR -1 LG -2 RC -2 LR ------ 96/176 ----- experimental test sections
56 -- 05/31/10 ----- -1 LG -1 LR -1 LR -1 RC ------ 96/178 ----- 5 sections, w/ 10.4 as 3rd experimental

User avatar
KingJames6
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby KingJames6 » Mon May 31, 2010 7:50 pm

Knock-

I'm a year behind you and will be taking the test next June, and I really admire your work ethic. I was hoping you might want to help me clear something up.

I have the powerscore bibles and I am definitely willing to do whatever it takes to attain a top score, especially by taking 40+ tests, but I don't know how to set up learning the material without distorting my scores later. In other words, how did you structure your studying so that you didn't end up seeing sections in PT's that you had seen/studied before?

Or is this not a serious concern? It seems like there would be score inflation in the PTs if familiar sections come up, but I could be wrong. Like I said, I'm just in the planning stages for next June, so I'm just hoping for some tips on planning out a study schedule as you seem like someone to ask.

I hope this was clear lol thanks!!

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby Knock » Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:15 pm

Dinosaur game today...been hearing about this forever, finally get to match up against it. KingJames, I'll respond to your post when I get back from the library in a few hours.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby Knock » Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:58 pm

Finally did the dino game. Funnily enough, everytime I encounter an easy game or two, I get that eerie sense that a killer game is coming up. Same with reading comp. They give you a couple of easier passages, and then slap you with a riddled basin, talk-story, or cake walk.

Haven't graded it yet, but I think I got them all right. It took me a couple of questions and a few hypos before I made the big deduction, after which I went through the game decently fast. Before that, the first few questions took me a while.

honestabe84
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 1:47 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby honestabe84 » Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:15 pm

What did all of you think about the December '09 PT (PT 59?)? I kind of got thrown for a loop on it. The games even screwed me, and that's usually my best section.

I also have a question about the last game - Did you identify the possibilities/templates for this game? I did, but it completely screwed me on time.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- Dinosaurs down

Postby Knock » Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:24 pm

57 -- 06/01/10 ----- -1 LG -1 LR -2 LR -2 RC ------ 95/175 ----- 5 sections, w/ 11.1 as 2nd experimental

Took PT 57. Did okay...the last question on the dinosaur game got me, because I didn't pay enough attention to the question stem.

Kind of frustrated overall. Feel like i'm just running in place, can't really get any better, and can't clean up my tests.

User avatar
LSAT Blog
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby LSAT Blog » Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:34 pm

honestabe84 wrote:What did all of you think about the December '09 PT (PT 59?)? I kind of got thrown for a loop on it. The games even screwed me, and that's usually my best section.

I also have a question about the last game - Did you identify the possibilities/templates for this game? I did, but it completely screwed me on time.


Yes, I use that strategy for this game. It makes the questions a breeze if you do it properly.

I don't want to post any spoilers in this thread since the vast majority of folks here probably haven't taken that PT yet.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if a complete explanation for this game showed up on my site in about 40 hours.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby Knock » Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:37 pm

LSAT Blog wrote:
honestabe84 wrote:What did all of you think about the December '09 PT (PT 59?)? I kind of got thrown for a loop on it. The games even screwed me, and that's usually my best section.

I also have a question about the last game - Did you identify the possibilities/templates for this game? I did, but it completely screwed me on time.


Yes, I use that strategy for this game. It makes the questions a breeze if you do it properly.

I don't want to post any spoilers in this thread since the vast majority of folks here probably haven't taken that PT yet.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if a complete explanation for this game showed up on my site in about 40 hours.


Love your blog. Thanks so much for all the great resources you have provided me.

Sincerely,
Your #1 Fan.

User avatar
LSAT Blog
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- Dinosaurs down

Postby LSAT Blog » Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:40 pm

That's really sweet of you to say, Knockglock

:::blushes:::


I looked at your score progression earlier on this page. You're totally on track to rock this thing!

User avatar
KingJames6
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 9:43 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- Dinosaurs down

Postby KingJames6 » Tue Jun 01, 2010 9:15 pm

Knock I'm sure you'll be fine...that adrenaline on test day will put you over the top!

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- 50 (!) PT's down!!!!!

Postby Knock » Tue Jun 01, 2010 11:29 pm

KingJames6 wrote:Knock-

I'm a year behind you and will be taking the test next June, and I really admire your work ethic. I was hoping you might want to help me clear something up.

I have the powerscore bibles and I am definitely willing to do whatever it takes to attain a top score, especially by taking 40+ tests, but I don't know how to set up learning the material without distorting my scores later. In other words, how did you structure your studying so that you didn't end up seeing sections in PT's that you had seen/studied before?

Or is this not a serious concern? It seems like there would be score inflation in the PTs if familiar sections come up, but I could be wrong. Like I said, I'm just in the planning stages for next June, so I'm just hoping for some tips on planning out a study schedule as you seem like someone to ask.

I hope this was clear lol thanks!!


I would do the Powerscore Bibles. You're going to use some more recent material, but it's worth it to work through the Bibles.

What I would recommend is work through a chapter of a Bible, say basic linear games. Then go do all the basic linear games from 10 Actual, Official Preptests (PT's 7-18 with 8 and 17 missing) or the next 10 one. I'd probably go with the 1st set of 10 book, but it doesn't really matter. Pick one of those, and then go find a spreadsheet that breaks down the question types, I found mine at the LSAT Blog (that guy who posted above; I think he has a link to his blog on his profile, check it out). I found the link, hope you don't mind the plug: http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/. This is a really great resource, and I highly recommend reading around, and checking out some of his study schedules, spreadsheets, and other articles. Do this until you've answered all the question types of LR and all the games of LG.

At this point, you should do sections completely untimed, taking as long as you need to finish the section, and being as sure as you can be that you got the answer correct (this eliminates any mistakes you may make due to trying to finish in the time limit; you can figure out what your weaknesses are, and what you need to work on). Do this until you get to a point where you are comfortable with all the question types, and are missing about as many as you would be realistically aiming for.

If you're still missing more than you want to miss, keep on working untimed sections until you've reduced the number of your misses to your realistic goal level.

Now, start doing timed sections, pulling them from oldest PT's, and work your way to the more recent ones. Here is the important trick. Don't countdown/stopwatch; instead, time how long it takes you to work through all the questions, taking as long as you need to be reasonable sure you've gotten them all correctly; work at a reasonable pace, but don't rush. See how long it takes you to complete each section. From this point, you need to repeat this step, slowly speeding up and working faster, maintaining your accuracy. Work until you can do sections most of the time in 35 minutes or less without sacrificing accuracy.

Now you got to put it all together. Start stringing together timed sections. Depending on your level of endurance, you may only be able to do 2 timed sections back to back; keep stringing timed sections until you can get to 4 sections without sacrificing accuracy;

If you're roughly near your goal score, now is time to add in a 5th experimental section. My advice at this point would be to plan everything out on google calendar. Count up how many PT's you have left, how many days you have until test day (giving yourself a good 2 full day break before the actual test), and then space out the PT's "evenly" throughout your remaining time. Ideally, you'd want to spend PT's 7-18 learning sections, PT 19-28 doing untimed and timed sections, leaving yourself 29-59 to do full timed tests.

Working with those numbers, you have 30 PT's. Doing a little bit of math (which I suck at so hopefully I don't mess this up), you'll end up with 24 4-section PT's, and 6 PT's to be divided into 24 experimental sections. So take your 6 older PT's, in this case 29-35 and then assign each section to a PT. So 29.1 would go with PT 36, 29.2 with PT 37, and so on and so forth. Experimental tests come in the 1st 3 sections, so I would rotate putting the experimental sections in all 3 of the slots (for your first test, put the experimental in the 3rd section, the next put it in the 2nd section, the next put it in the 1st section, etc.).

Work through these PT's timed, making a spreadsheet and keeping track of all important data. I record test # (how many tests i've taken), PT #, date, scores for each of the 4 sections recorded as number of misses (-X LR -X RC -X LR -X LG), raw score, scaled score, "curve" (number of misses to get 170), and then additional notes (I usually noted whether it was 5 section or 4 section, what experimental section I used and where I placed it).

You also need to review every PT you do, and every section you do. I highly recommend typing it out. I posted a sample review earlier in this thread. I'll post it at the end of this post.

Hope this helped, I'd be glad to elaborate if you want. And thanks for the encouragement on your other post! Good luck!

Sample Review wrote:PT #25 Review

Section 1: -0 RC

Section 2: -2 LR

#10: Correct answer was E, I chose D. I circled this question as uncertain when I answered it.

Stimulus: Insects can see ultraviolet light and are known to identify important food sources and mating sites by sensing the characteristic patterns of ultraviolet light that these things reflect. Insects are also attracted to Glomosus spiderwebs, which reflect ultraviolet light. Thus, insects are probably attracted to these webs because of the specific patterns of ultraviolet light that these webs reflect.

Question Stem: Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument?

Incorrect answer:
D: When Drosophila fruit flies were placed before a Glomosus web and a synthetic web of similar pattern that also reflected ultraviolet light and both webs were illuminated with white light containing an ultraviolet component, many of the fruit flies flew to the Glomosus web. This answer is incorrect because, if true, this answer choice tells us that the fruit flies are attracted to the Glomosus web for reasons other than the ultraviolet light. Because both webs reflect ultraviolet light, that variable is held constant, and thus can not be responsible for why the fruit flies are attracted to the Glomosus web.

Correct answer:
E: When Drosophila fruit flies were placed before two Glomosus webs, one illuminated with white light containing an ultraviolet component and one illuminated with a white light without an ultraviolet component, the majority flew to the ultraviolet reflecting web. This is the correct answer because the argument concludes that the insects are probably attracted to these webs because of the ultraviolet light that these webs reflect. Since the webs were the same type, and only the variable of whether ultraviolet light was reflecting off the web, we know that that the ultraviolet light was the reason for why the fruit flies chose one web over another.

#25: Correct answer was D, I chose C.

Stimulus: Jack's aunt gave him her will, asking him to make it public when she died; he promised to do so. After her death, Jack looked at the will; it stipulated that all her money go to her friend George. Jack knew that if he made the will public, George would squander the money, benefiting neither George nor anyone else. Jack also knew that if he did not make the will public, the money would go to his own mother, who would use it to benefit herself and others, harming no one. After reflection, he decided not to make the will public.

Question stem: Which one of the following principles, if valid, would require Jack to act as he did in the situation described?

Incorrect answer:
C: One must choose an alternative that benefits some and harms no one over an alternative that harms some and benefits no one. This answer choice is incorrect because if Jack made the will public, there is no indication that it will harm some, it would just simply not benefit anyone else.

Correct answer:
D: When faced with alternatives it is obligatory to choose whichever one will benefit the greatest number of people. This answer choice is correct, because this principle, if valid, would require Jack to act as he did in this situation.

Section 3: -9 LG

Missed a key inference on game two, causing me to go 0/7, which was the numerical distribution. It either had to be 1-1-2-2 or 1-1-3-1.

#6: Correct answer is C. Because of numerical distribution, K and M can't both speak Russian.

#7: Correct answer was A. Numerical distribution again.

#8: Correct answer was B. Numerical distribution again.

#9: Correct answer was E. This answer comes as a byproduct of knowing about the numerical distribution.

#10: Correct answer was B. ND.

#11: Correct answer was E. Answer comes from the rule that is Klaus is assigned to Xerxes, then Michael speaks French.

#12: Correct answer was E, comes from the above rule.

Section 4: -2 LR

#11: Correct answer was D, I chose E. I also circled this one as uncertain during the test.

Stimulus: Taken together, some 2,000 stocks recommended on a popular television show over the course of the past 12 years by the show's guests, most of whom are successful consultants for multibillion-dollar stock portfolios, performed less successfully than the market as a whole for this 12-year period. So clearly, no one should ever follow any recommendations by these so-called experts.

Question stem: Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

Incorrect Answer:
E: The stock portfolios for which the guests were consultants performed better for the past 12-year period than the market as a whole. This answer is incorrect because this does indeed weaken the argument that no one should ever follow any recommendations by these so-called experts, by demonstrating that they are capable of choosing stocks that can perform better than the market as a whole. The correct answer needs to be neutral or strengthen the idea that no one should ever follow any recommendations by these so-called experts.

Correct Answer:
D: Performance of the stocks recommended on a television show was measured independently by a number of analysts, and the results of all the measurements concurred. This answer is correct because it is neutral to the argument that no one should follow any recommendations by these so-called experts.

#23: Correct answer was B, I chose D. I also circled this question as uncertain.

Stimulus: Only computer scientists understand the architecture of personal computers, and only those who understand the architecture of personal computers appreciate the advances in technology made in the last decade. It follows that only those who appreciate these advances are computer scientists.

Question stem: Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning of the argument?

Premise 1: Only computer scientists understand the architecture of personal computers
(UAPC → CS)
Premise 2: Only those who understand the architecture of personal computers appreciate the advances in technology made in the last decade.
(AAT → UAPC → CS) Here is the flaw, just because they understand the architecture of personal computers (UAPC), and therefore are computer scientists (CS) doesn't mean they appreciate the advances in technology made in the last decade (AAT).

Conclusion: It follows that those who appreciate these advances are computer scientists.
(AAT → CS) FLAWED

Incorrect answer:
D: The premises of the argument are stated in such a way that they exclude the possibility of drawing any logical conclusion. This answer is incorrect, because you it is possible to draw at least 1 logical conclusion from the premises, such as SOME people who AAT are CS.

Correct answer:
B: The argument ignores the fact that some computer scientists may not appreciate the advances in technology made in the last decade. For reasons stated above.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- Study Method/Strat. pg. 9

Postby Knock » Tue Jun 01, 2010 11:42 pm

PS, does anyone have explanations for PT's 57-59? I have explanations for every other PT except these. Thanks a lot.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, Alexandros, Giro423, maybeman, retromuse and 8 guests