December LSAT Study Diary (formerly October)

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:59 am

Thursday, July 29th

LR: Was a disaster. Had a difficult time with flaw questions. Probably got ~50% of 3 stars right and 25-30% of 4 stars right....yeah it was that bad and I did a lot of them too. On the bright side I got the right answer down to the last two for a majority of the wrong questions, it might have been a combination of bad luck and lack of confidence in handling the hard questions.


RC: Read chapter 4 in the RCB on diagramming the passages.

LG: did 2 games, got -0 on both

PT 25 Game 4 - 6/6 in 8 minutes - took too long for a basic advanced linear game.
PT 22 Game 2 -7/7 in 7 min 40 sec - could have done it faster but not complaining

Tomorrow
LR: Type out all the explanations for all the Flaw questions I got wrong today
RC: re-read and internalize chapter 4 - diagramming
LG: 2 more games

This weekend:
-advance in LRB (parallel reasoning)
-advance in RCB
-do one RC section
-do more LGs

Next week
-finish LRB (hopefully)
-finish RCB (maybe)
-do another PT
Last edited by Anaconda on Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Fri Jul 30, 2010 10:44 pm

Friday, July 30th

LR: In the early afternoon I wrote down explanations for the ~15(!) flaw questions I got wrong yesterday. Took me about 2 hours, but it was well worth it. After going 4/14 on 4 star flaw questions last night:

2 Star: 4/4
3 Star 3/4
4 Star 3/4

Total 10/12, which is a big boost of confidence, especially since I got the right answer down to the final 2 in the 2 questions I got wrong.

RC: Re-read chapter 4 in the RCB

LG: Did 2 LG's:

PT 33 Game 3 (Jeweler game- topaz, sapphire, ruby) - 5/6 in 11 min 30 sec. This in-out grouping game SUCKS. I admittedly could have gotten 6/6 had I put more effort in testing out answer choices for that problem, but this game took forever. The questions aren't actually too hard but the game set-up is.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:11 am

Saturday, July 31st

LR: Did the LRB chapter on parallel questions. Got 8/11 questions right (not including 4/4 on the LRB example questions) in which I tried (all three I missed were parallel flaw - 2 were avoidable due to poor reading comprehension). Parallel questions are really time consuming, but they're not too terrible, just worried about how long they're going to take me on actual tests since the answer choices are so long.

LG -

PT 8 Game 1 - 3/5 in 7 min 30 sec. This game is so deceiving because it seems like a very simple basic linear game but turns out to be incredibly tricky. Both questions I got wrong are 4 stars, but when I looked over the questions I was easily able to get the right answers on the second try.
EDIT: Wow, turns out I already did this one a while ago and got 4/5 in only 7 minutes. Hmmmm....

PT 7 Game 2 in 5/5 in 7 min 0 sec. Straightforward game.

RC -
Read chapter 5 in the RCB on question types
Last edited by Anaconda on Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:35 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby 3|ink » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:15 am

Anaconda wrote:Saturday, July 31st

LR: Did the LRB chapter on parallel questions. Got 8/11 questions right (not including 4/4 on the LRB example questions) in which I tried (all three I missed were parallel flaw - 2 were avoidable due to poor reading comprehension). Parallel questions are really time consuming, but they're not too terrible, just worried about how long they're going to take me on actual tests since the answer choices are so long.

LG -

PT 7 Game 2 - 3/5 in 7 min 30 sec. This game is so deceiving because it seems like a very simple basic linear game but turns out to be incredibly tricky. Both questions I got wrong are 4 stars, but when I looked over the questions I was easily able to get the right answers on the second try.

PT 8 Game 1 in 5/5 in 7 min 0 sec. Straightforward game.

RC -

Read chapter 5 in the RCB on question types


I must say that you're really giving it a lot of effort. Well done.

You keep mentioning 'Stars'. Is there some sort of rating system for LSAT questions?

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:25 am

3|ink wrote:
Anaconda wrote:Saturday, July 31st

LR: Did the LRB chapter on parallel questions. Got 8/11 questions right (not including 4/4 on the LRB example questions) in which I tried (all three I missed were parallel flaw - 2 were avoidable due to poor reading comprehension). Parallel questions are really time consuming, but they're not too terrible, just worried about how long they're going to take me on actual tests since the answer choices are so long.

LG -

PT 7 Game 2 - 3/5 in 7 min 30 sec. This game is so deceiving because it seems like a very simple basic linear game but turns out to be incredibly tricky. Both questions I got wrong are 4 stars, but when I looked over the questions I was easily able to get the right answers on the second try.

PT 8 Game 1 in 5/5 in 7 min 0 sec. Straightforward game.

RC -

Read chapter 5 in the RCB on question types


I must say that you're really giving it a lot of effort. Well done.

You keep mentioning 'Stars'. Is there some sort of rating system for LSAT questions?


Cambridge gives all the questions stars if you get their packaged groups, as does Kaplan. They're the same though. It's really helpful to be able to tell if you're missing gimmes or difficult questions.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:01 pm

Sunday, August 1st

Today I worked on a few more parallel questions. I started off doing horribly (I think it is now officially a pattern - I do well on a question type the first day, then start off the next day doing horribly). I only did a handful of 3 and 4 star parallel games, but although I missed several of the first few I tried, I got the last few 4 stars right. On another thread yesterday I wondered why PS suggests not using variables like A, B, C. Today, I'm in full agreement. That strategy takes WAY too much time, and can become confusing. Once I started internalizing the arguments, I ended up doing the questions much more quickly.

Also read the LRB chapters on Point and Evaluate questions. Evaluate questions are easier to solve if you use the polar scenarios/answers to each answer choice, if one strengthens and one weakens, you have the right answer (effectively evaluating the argument from both angles). Point questions are a little tricky, but they basically require you to get the main point of disagreement between the two speakers, taking note of fact vs. moral arguments, and whether both parties addressed the content in a certain answer choice as well as using the Agree/Disagree test.

As for RC, I took the day off from the RCB.

I did a bunch of LGs, the most I've done since I focused exclusively on LGs.

I started off VERY poorly, continuing my trend of stupid mistake and taking to long to finish the games:

PT 21 Game 4 - first try: 4/7 in 10 min 20 sec. 2nd try: 7/7 in 10 min. This game is kind of hard (three 4 stars), but I noticed that all my errors were the result of forgetting to apply the rules to every local hypothetical...this is getting really annoying. The blunders were quite obvious quickly looking over my hypothetical diagrams. Second try went much better, but still took a while to finish.

PT 7 Game 4 - first try: 3/6 in 12 minutes. Second try: 6/6 in 8 minutes. My main mistake the first try: forgetting to read/write down one of the rules. That happened because instead of reading all the rules and then writing them down, I read each rule and wrote them down one at a time - causing me miss the last one. In an ordering game, this is the kiss of death. This game was easy - all 1 stars and 2 stars. Second time went much smoother.

PT 12 Game 1 - 5/6 in 9 min 55 sec. this game was easy according to the Q ratings (5/6 were 1 star), yet I struggled here. It took me wayyyy too much time. This game should be 5-6 minutes. I should have made 2 or 3 diagrams, but didn't so I had to work everything out. The question I missed was a careless mistake I shouldn't have made.

PT 30 Game 2 - 5/5 in 10 minutes 50 sec. This one is a little tough - three 4 stars. Lots of rules and conditionals. I actually didn't interpret a rule correctly (not so big that I would get questions wrong since I would have noticed it eventually - but it certainly made the game longer to finish) - that I didn't catch until the last few questions.

PT 28 Game 3 - the game that took me the longest might actually be my crown jewel of the day! 7/7 in 13 minutes. This is the semi-infamous Swahili, Rundi, Tigrinya, Yoruba grouping game. The game isn't easy to diagram, so I actually opted out of grouping. I panicked after I read the rules and read the first question, but I skipped around and was able to figure out the inferences I didn't initially make and brute forced my way through, which allowed me to finish. I was actually shocked I got -0. This game is tough because it presents you with a rare undefined game that doesn't lend well to diagramming, which I'm sure was freaked out a lot of people and was a cause of many lost points on the June 99 LSAT. Looking at the other games on this PT, it seems they were all pretty easy, so 13 minutes on this one may actually not be too bad!


I *think* I'm going to take PT 20 tomorrow. I'm getting bored of constantly studying, and since I've finished 90% of the LRB (probably covering 95% of the LR questions I'll see on the test) I want to see if I made any improvement from my 161. I'd like to get a 163 would be a solid indication I'm establishing myself in the 160's. If I get a -12 total on the LR sections I'll be pleased.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:58 pm

Monday, August 3rd

Got a 157 on my PT. Grrrrr. Retook it untimed and got a 165. (Raw score 69 -> 82)

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=125746

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:02 pm

Tuesday, August 3rd

Today I redid the last 2 sections of PT20. Did much better on LG and improved on the last LR section from -8 to -5.

Tomorrow is technically an "off" day for me. I'm only going to casually review the LR questions from the PT and re-read RCB chapter 5. I won't be attempting any fresh material, just a down-low kind of day. Thursday and Friday will also be light days. I think I'm burned out and I need to take it easy instead of doing LSAT work 8-10 hours a day. I'm going to limit myself to 2-3 hours a day for the rest of the month when I'm not either taking a PT, retaking a PT or reviewing it.

I'm also going to start doing regular RC sections on a regular basis since my -10 on PT 20 was atrocious.

I'm going to take another PT on Saturday.

ninjasrule
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 3:30 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby ninjasrule » Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:04 pm

8-10 hours? Wow... Kudos.

User avatar
AverageTutoring
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 10:18 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby AverageTutoring » Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:39 pm

How we doing on games? I noticed you displayed some concern regarding forgetting to apply particular rules to local hypotheticals; this was my problem when I was using LGB methods. The inherent problem I found with the LGB diagramming method is that reconstructing the diagram beside every question takes up a lot of time and to compensate for that time, we (or at least I) often didn't reconstruct the diagram in whole. In other words, when diagramming beside questions I would leave off certain rules such as J cannot go in 3 or M must be in 2 or 5, etc. My reasoning was that since these rules would take quite a bit of time to write down for every question, I could neglect them knowing that my main diagram contained all the required rules/inferences needed to complete the game.

Unfortunately, I ended up posing hypotheticals that I thought were okay but in reality, were not. And since I didnt check them against my main diagram, I fell victim to poor hypos.

This all started to change once I started to diagram in a chart format at the bottom of the page.

The LGB dismisses the chart and gives several reasons for doing so. I actually agree with all of their reasons but I think the benefits from the chart are so great that any minor drawback is definitely overcome. Some of my reasons for taking the chart/dismissing the LGB claims are:

1: the chart that they give an example of is horse crap. No one in their right mind would use X's and Check marks

2: if we have everything in a nice little chart it saves time from having to rediagram beside each question

3: you will no longer forget rules because you didnt put them on your local diagram

4: by having all hypotheticals in one nice easy place it allows us to use the information from local questions to answer global questions more easily (I dont have to look between 4 or 5 separate diagrams, it's all right there)

Here is an example of an explanation to PT 15 using the chart:

The first thing we should recognize in this game is that it is a pure sequencing game. This suggests that the rules governing the placement of characters to before/after other characters will be very, very important.

Let’s set up the initial diagram. (danm forum doesn't let me upload images....anyways, i'll give you the links to my diagrams.

Main Diagram

Image

I don’t think there are many deductions up front to be made. Having said that there is NO, I repeat NO reason to brute force this game. To do so is a waste of time and I will show you just how true this is in a moment.

Question 1

This is a simple violate the rules question. We need to go through the list and see which answer does not violate the rules. There is no “fast” way to do these kinds of questions but I would advise to start with the absolute restricting rules first. For example, in this game J cannot go first or last so let’s start with this rule. Off the bat we find that B violates this rule and is therefore no good. The reason why I suggest using these rules first is because I often forget about them once I get the question to between 1 or 2 answer choices: by doing it first I never forget.

A: RST are together
B: J is the last person
C: T and J touch
D: This is correct
E: H is NOT before S

Make sure not to forget to write the correct answer into the chart just in case a future question asks for hypotheticals! If they do, we already have one good to go.

Question 2

Q2 Diagram:

Image

If T delivers the third speech what do we know? Well…If T delivers the third speech we know J cannot go in 2 or 4 because he cannot touch T. But he also cannot go in 6 or 1…leaving only space 5.

Q2 Revised Diagram:

--ImageRemoved--

We might be able to make a few more deductions but let’s scan the answer choices and see if we already have anything that’s there.


A: Possibly
B: Done..This is what we have
C: Possibly
D: Possibly
E: Possibly

Question 3

Q3 Diagram:

Image

Again we need to look at our T. J cannot go in 5 because he would touch T but based on the original rules he also cannot go in 1 or 6. So J must go in 2.

Further, H must go before S so if J is in 2, H must be in 1. But we also know STR cannot touch so R cant be 5 leaving only 6 (so R must go in 6). The remaining person and space is K, so K must go in 5…We’re all full!

Q3 Revised Diagram:

--ImageRemoved--

A: Not true
B: Not true
C: Very True
D: Not true
E: Not true

Question 4

Q4 Diagram:

Image

This is an interesting question! Clearly S must go in 6 because H comes before S. Leaving T and J to go somewhere in 2, 3 or 4. But these guys cannot touch. So the only way we can accomplish this is if we split them between 2 and 4. Does it matter which way (T in 2 and J in 4 or J in 2 and T in 4)? Probably not but we do know that R, the only remaining player, goes in the middle of them.

Q4 Revised Diagram:

Image

A: Absolutely
B: Nope
C: Nope
D: Nope
E: Nope

Question 5

Q5 Diagram:

Image

The introduction of the new rule limits us to two hypos. Either SRK goes in 3,4,5 or it goes in 4,5,6. The reason it cant go in 2,3,4 is because that would mean H would have to go in 1, leaving T and J for the 5 and 6 spots but T and J cannot go side by side!

So since we only have 2 hypotheticals we will try them both.

Q5 Revised Diagram:

Image

In the first case we know J must go in 2 (because only slots 1, 2 and 6 are open but he cannot go in 1 or 6). Meaning H goes in 1 because he must go before S. leaving T to go in 6.

In the second case we need to split up J and T again like we did for question 4. This means H must go in 2 to split them up.

Q5 Re-revised Diagram:

Image

But if you notice in the second case if T was in 3 we would have TSR which cannot happen by the original rules. So T must go in 1 and J must go in 3!

Lets go to the questions.

A: Never happens
B: Never happens (remember in case 2 it’s T in 1 based on our final deduction)
C: Never happens
D: Happens in case 1!
E: Never happens

Question 6

Q6 Diagram:

Image

When we have a question in a sequencing game that looks to give us little information the best option is never to go straight to brute forcing! We might need to get there but this should never be our immediate reaction.

First thing we should look at is the restrictions. Look at the first rule…HJK cannot go together. Which tells me right away that if H is in 4 we are very, very restricted on either end of HK because J cannot go on either side. So we should start with H in 4 because it produces the most restrictions.

In fact, it produces so many restrictions that this game is impossible. If H is in 4 then J cannot go in 2 or 5 but per the original rules he also cannot go in 1 or 6…leaving no possible slot of J.

Therefore the correct answer is A: H!


I'm not telling you this to persuade you to the chart by any means! I just wanted to offer a possible alternative to the LGB methods because the problems you're describing are the exact same ones I had when using the LGB methods.

Cheers

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:29 am

Despite promising to take the day off, I very casually attempted ~16 LR questions today. Probably about 10 were 4 star questions (according to Kaplan) and I got about ~8/10 of those right (whoo!). Got ~14/16 right for the day. I didn't even write on the questions, simply read them and come up with an answer, and it worked out pretty well. I don't know if this was the result of luck or an epiphany, but it felt good nonetheless to "get" the harder questions.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:35 pm

Thursday, August 5

Today I did the RC section of PT 15, untimed (but still kept track of time). I employed two different strategies. On the first two passages, I essentially used Powerscore's mark-up strategy and it took me over 10 minutes 30 seconds for each of the first two passages. On the last two I did minimal markings and finished each in about 8 min 30 secs. I got -3 on the first 2 and -4 on the last two for a total of 20/27. Not very good, especially since it took me ~40 minutes total.

Tomorrow I'm going to do 2 more RC sections. I think I'm going to scrap the RCB's marking strategy and instead used a personalized version of Voyager's RC strategy. I will however be adapting the RCB's viewpoint notations and list notations, since I feel those are most helpful. I'll box names and definitions and underline key evidence and put a side notation.

As for LR, I went back and re-read the LRB chapter on Method questions. Feel I got a lot more out of it on the second reading. I seem to be "getting" LR questions better for some reason now. I think I'm starting to think the way LSAC expects people to think when attempting the problem. I feel that I scrutinize answer choices much more, so hopefully I'll show some improvement on the PT i'll take on Saturday.

Tomorrow: 2 more RC sections, and re-read the LRB chapter on weaken questions.

As of right now, my modest goals for the end of the month are: To get my average RC section down to -5 and get my LR average down to -12. My main problems in RC are timing issues (big time) and getting easy questions wrong for really not reason other than I'm not treating RC as a "long" version of a LR stimulus. I don't need a perfect RC score, but I do need to improve.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:43 pm

Friday, August 6th

RC: Did two RC sections. On the first (PT 16) I tried to utilize a hybrid of Voyager + RCB methods. I tried it for the first two passages and got a -6 (-3 on both) and took me 20 minutes to complete. For the last 2 passages I tried just reading and understanding with notations only I knew it would help (i.e. it wouldn't distract me). I ended up getting -1 on each, and did both in about 16 minutes.

I carried this strategy over to PT 17 and got 21/27 on the section in a total of 36-37 minutes. I made about 3 avoidable mistakes, so I think I could have ended up with a ~-4 had I been more careful reading the answer choices and question stems. Although a -6 isn't great, my mode score is a -7, and -6 is the best I've done. I usually get -7 to -10.

I think trying to implement a notation system is seriously distracting. When I focused on the passage itself and simply read through I retained a lot of information, and it wasn't difficult to go back for detail questions (at least for the easy ones), and most importantly I was able to finish the passages rather quickly.

However, the RC in PT 17 was pretty easy, so there's a lot of improvement to be made.

LR: Re-read the chapter on weaken questions.


Tomorrow: SuperPrep Test A + re-do later on in the day. My goal is to simply improve on the 157 timed and 165 untimed from last week.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby 3|ink » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:38 pm

Anaconda wrote:

I think trying to implement a notation system is seriously distracting. When I focused on the passage itself and simply read through I retained a lot of information, and it wasn't difficult to go back for detail questions (at least for the easy ones), and most importantly I was able to finish the passages rather quickly.


The best notations are the ones you remember and don't have to refer to after reading.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Sat Aug 07, 2010 4:55 pm

Saturday, August 7th

did SuperPrep A.

Got a 162, which is a huge improvement from my terrible 157 from earlier this week.

My breakdown was -6 LR1, -3 RC (!!!), -7 LG, -4 LR.

Few things to point out:
-My best RC section to date before today was a -6 (which I ironically did yesterday)! I didn't think I did too well on RC either, especially since I had a lot of trouble with time - I did the last two passages in about 14 minutes at a frantic pace. I was literally shocked that I went 23 for 27. I was guessing a -7 or -8 after I finished the section. I mostly just underlined key points/evidence to help me retain the information and notated viewpoints on the side. Skipping the RCB methods are actually starting to pay big dividends. Actually reading for comprehension makes a huge difference. Diagramming the passages are a time waster and distraction for me, apparently.
-LR was really, really easy, but I think I'm still capable of a better score. most of the answers popped out, I was able to get the first 15 questions done in 15 minutes on both sections, and had plenty of time to spare at the end. This wasn't the case earlier this week. I actually did better on LR timed this week than I did on LR UNTIMED last week, which is pretty amazing. I wonder how much I'll improve untimed when I retake this since time was pretty much a non-factor during the test.
-The last two LGs were very bizarre and I struggled on them.

Improvements from last PT to this one:
RC from -10 to -3
LR from -18 to -10

The thing that sucks about the steep curve of this PT is that after 160 basically every question is worth one whole point. Had I not messed up on LGs I could have hit the mid 160s. It sucks that a -20 was only good enough for a 162 on this test, usually it's good enough for at least a 164.

Most importantly I felt much more confident taking this test. I will admit that 8 questions into the 1st LR section, I had to move from my desk in the library because a mentally disturbed man behind me was making some 'interesting' sounds (i.e. talking to himself loudly, making sneezing sounds, violently coughing, etc). The area I moved to was very busy and a bit loud for a library, but I was unfazed.

Tomorrow I'm going to redo the test untimed. I think I'll take another PT this upcoming Tuesday or Wednesday, and another one on either Sunday or Monday. In the off days, I'll continue reviewing the LRB, doing RC sections and eventually start to re-read the LGB.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Sun Aug 08, 2010 3:53 pm

Sunday, August 8th

Today I retook Superprep A untimed. I drastically improved on almost every section:

LR1 from -6 to -2
RC from -3 to -2
LG from -7 to -1
LR 2 (no change at -4) - I was a little tired when I redid this section so I wasn't putting in too much effort at the end

My raw score went from a 81 to a 92 and my score went from a 162 to a 170!

I'll review the questions later today and tomorrow to see where my weak areas are.

In both timed and untimed I improved by 5 points over my last PT which isn't bad at all.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Mon Aug 09, 2010 6:42 pm

Monday, August 9th

Earlier today I had a hell of a time focusing and pretty much felt like doing nothing. I had trouble reviewing the LR section from my last PT, and I did fairly poorly on 4 logic games I tried (making stupid errors and freezing up). I also did 2 RC passages from PT 18 and got a terrible -5 out of 15 questions, even though they weren't very difficult.

I finally got some caffeine in my body in the late afternoon, and did the last 2 RC sections and got a -1 and -0, for a total of 22/28 on the section. I bet I could have gotten a -4 or -3 if I had some credible mental capacity earlier on in the day!

I might do a few LR questions later tonight.

UPDATE: Did 27 LR questions tonight, got 20/27, however a majority of them were 4 stars, and almost were 4 and 3 stars, with just a few 2 stars. Getting ~3/4 of tough LR questions isn't too bad, but still have work to do. Sure as hell beats my earlier ~75% accuracy untimed on ALL LR questions just a few weeks ago.

I'm taking PT 28 tomorrow. Don't know what to expect, but I'm sure the curve will be much kinder than Superprep A.

At this point, I think untimed redo scores are even more important than timed scores, simply because in many ways it indicates my potential. Even if my score fluctuates on my timed PT's, as long as I'm doing well on untimed PTs, my potential is still there. The 170 untimed on Superprep A was seriously a HUGE confidence booster - I got 91% of the questions right untimed. Even on the LR timed I got 80% right, which I wasn't even able to do untimed several weeks before.

On my last PT I made a few stupid mistakes on LR that I didn't even realize I made, but also got some questions wrong that I also got wrong untimed - showing those are my weak areas. Not surprisingly, my major weakness on LR involves abstract wording on stimuli and answer choices.

In terms of RC, the early passages seem to be relatively easy in terms of passage difficulty. It's really the questions that are tough. I've had no problem understanding the passages since I dumped the RCB notation method. Since I dropped formal notating, I've been able to comprehend the passage and increase my speed, while increasing accuracy on the passages. I actually enjoy RC passages now, I think most of them are actually pretty interesting.

I'm a little scared of the RC sections in the 40's and 50's, since I heard they're denser, harder, and the questions are much more difficult.
Last edited by Anaconda on Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

ly2010
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:30 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby ly2010 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:18 pm

if you have time, can you post/share the questions that you had a lot of trouble with (even those you did manage to figure out)?

Thanks!

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:20 pm

ly2010 wrote:if you have time, can you post/share the questions that you had a lot of trouble with (even those you did manage to figure out)?

Thanks!


What section/PT are you referring to?

ly2010
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:30 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby ly2010 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:24 pm

"On my last PT I made a few stupid mistakes on LR that I didn't even realize I made, but also got some questions wrong that I also got wrong untimed - showing those are my weak areas. Not surprisingly, my major weakness on LR involves abstract wording on stimuli and answer choices."

Sorry, I'm a newbie, I was trying to quote it but I guess it didn't go. I was referring to the ones you missed even untimed. I am also bad with abstract wording/answer choices.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:39 pm

ly2010 wrote:"On my last PT I made a few stupid mistakes on LR that I didn't even realize I made, but also got some questions wrong that I also got wrong untimed - showing those are my weak areas. Not surprisingly, my major weakness on LR involves abstract wording on stimuli and answer choices."

Sorry, I'm a newbie, I was trying to quote it but I guess it didn't go. I was referring to the ones you missed even untimed. I am also bad with abstract wording/answer choices.


Superprep A Section 1 - 19, 21, 23, 25 are all really tricky (however none of them are really abstract).

Section 4 - Questions 20, 23 and 25 really messed me up - 23 and 25 are very abstract
Last edited by Anaconda on Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ly2010
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:30 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby ly2010 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:48 pm

Okay thanks. I am spending my 2 months only doing LG's. I am usually okay with RC and LR so I don't think I'm going to spend too much time doing whole sections. I'm only going to do the difficult ones.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:51 pm

ly2010 wrote:Okay thanks. I am spending my 2 months only doing LG's. I am usually okay with RC and LR so I don't think I'm going to spend too much time doing whole sections. I'm only going to do the difficult ones.


Get the cambridge lsat most difficult LR questions pdf. Idk how much it costs, but it's the 400 hardest LR problems, seems like it would help you out a lot!

ly2010
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:30 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby ly2010 » Tue Aug 10, 2010 7:52 pm

Yeah, I saw the thread about that. I might check it out if I have time. I haven't done the SuperPrep yet. It's coming in tomorrow. I was too lazy to go and pick it up. Again, this blog is very motivating. I've done the more the past 2 days than I have in 2 months in terms of studying for the LSAT. It's not all that bad.

User avatar
Anaconda
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: October LSAT Study Diary

Postby Anaconda » Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:31 pm

Tuesday, August 10th


PT 28
LR1 (-12)
LG (-1)
LR 2 (-9)
RC (-5)

Sorry to be cheap but copying and pasting from another thread on my dismal LR performance

Fuck my life.

Just got done taking PT 28 and although I did fairly well on LG and RC (-1, -5), I COMPLETELY BOMBED LR. My timing was so off, I literally blind guessed on at least 10 questions, and was in a frantic rush after the 15th question on both LR sections.

When I redid the LR section untimed:
LR1 from -12 to -5
LR2 from -9 to - 7: I cannot believe how many EASY questions I missed both timed and untimed. I misread/misinterpreted so many stimuli. Sooo frustrating. Maybe today was just an off day for LR, but it's really pissing me off. I feel like I should have gotten a ~165 on this PT but the pacing and accuracy for LR was so off. I couldn't even do that well untimed.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, brewpub16, cj385, Instrumental, nimbus cloud, Pozzo, VMars, Zoidberg747 and 18 guests