June 2011 Study Group Forum

[JG7773]

[/quote]

Sorry for the number of questions but I have a few more:

1. Does the class meet every Thursday and Sunday at 8pm ET?

2. Is there a syllabus of which sections/HW assignments will be discussed for the following session? How does one know which section will be discussed and HW will be assigned?

3. Is HW session for Thursday and class/review session for Sunday?



Thanks so much![/quote]

We do meet on Sundays and Thursdays at 8 PM ET. There is a syllabus, that should have been sent to you when you signed up for the group. Each week, usually Monday, I send out the plans for each group for the coming week. The information that is covered on Thursday is not carried over to Sunday. Sunday has an agenda of its own as does Thursday. Remind me during the session tonight and I will explain more in depth what we do each week.

[BlaqBella]

Late session JG?

[JG7773]

Late session JG?

We are in the room now. Going to be starting in about 3 or 4 minutes.

[BlaqBella]

Late session JG?

We are in the room now. Going to be starting in about 3 or 4 minutes.

Looks like I wasn't added to the Sunday list.


I guess I will have to miss out on this one even though I did the assignments. *sigh*

[BlaqBella]

Is there a generic login that can be used ?

[JG7773]

Is there a generic login that can be used ?

It should be the same room.

[MistaChaotix]

Thank you to all of the participants who were involved today in our study session. It was refreshing to see other people's deduction process for each question on LG and LR. Unfortunately the whiteboard software was constantly disconnecting me towards the end of our session. Hopefully I will be able to participate more next time without any errors.

[BlaqBella]

Awesome session. Glad to be a part of the group. Thanks to JG7773 and Manhattan LSAT for making it happen. See you guys this Thursday and for those taking the Spring online course with Manhattan LSAT, Tuesday.

[FloridaCoastalorbust]

Hope the review is going well, I didn't have time to devote to the game we are looking at. I took PT13 today: edit

LG 18/24
LR 22/26
RC 25/27
LR 24/24

Raw 89 Scaled 172. Last Saturday I did much better on games, but I have never even come close to scoring perfect on LR so I'm happy for that. On February 12 I missed 12 on one LR section alone. Glad to see improvement in that area. My RC is consistently between -0 to -3 so no shock there. For those curious about caffeine, today the 5 hour energy backfired and I was biting my finger nails to the quick and couldn't focus my energy

I did take a 3 hour break after the first timed section then timed the rest back to back. Definitely not 'game day' situation. I'm in this house today that overlooks a noisy street and it was driving me crazy, literally almost through my damn PT out the window.

[soj]

Hi everybody! I'll be posting in this thread to keep track of my progress, give and receive encouragement, and procrastinate from reviewing. I'll be treating the thread kind of like a journal so it might not be interesting to anyone else, though I would appreciate any feedback, particularly if you think my study method could be improved.

I started studying about a month ago by going through the LG and LR Bibles, as well as the three Atlas guides. I also did about half of the RC Bible, though I didn't finish it because I didn't want to go through all the comparative passages and be left without fresh practice materials. I wasn't really interested in taking a diagnostic before studying because, again, my focus was on honing skills rather than going through practice tests or seeing Big Improvements after initial prep. I knew the Bibles were good--I didn't need to prove that to myself!

This week, I did PrepTests 1-10 to see where I am and identify my weaknesses. I used the Traciela Grouped books, and basically did them cover to cover (skipping questions in PT 11-20, of course), so while I did keep time, it wasn't anything like simulated testing.

Overall, the results have been very encouraging, though by no means without areas for improvement.

• PT 1: -1 LG, -4 LR, -6 RC, -11 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 2: -2 LG, -3 LR, -4 RC, -9 Raw, 171 Scaled
  PT 3: -1 LG, -2 LR, -5 RC, -8 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 4: -1 LG, -3 LR, -3 RC, -7 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 5: 0 LG, -6 LR, 0 RC, -6 Raw, 177 Scaled
  PT 6: -1 LG, -4 LR, -3 RC, -8 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 7: 0 LG, -8 LR, -2 RC, -10 Raw, 174 Scaled
  PT 8: 0 LG, -8 LR, -2 RC, -10 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 9: -2 LG, -5 LR, -3 RC, -10 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 10: 0 LG, -2 LR, -2 RC, -4 Raw, 177 Scaled

I'm less concerned about my scaled scores or even my raw scores than about the particular types of passages and questions that are causing me trouble. So far, they seem to be:

1. I'm dangerously close to running out of time on LR and RC. Science passages just kill me. I managed to survive waterbugs with 7/8, but it took 10 minutes and 30 seconds. Thankfully, I sped through the first two passages so I wasn't too strapped for time on the last passage. It turns out, at least in RC, it's not that I'm not reading fast enough--that part takes me only 2-3 minutes each passage. I've always been self-conscious about my reading speed and comprehension, so it feels pretty good to know my RC situation isn't as bad as I'd feared. It's just taking me too long to answer questions. Sometimes I get scared by the time constraints and get too trigger-happy in eliminating ACs, eliminating correct answers based on gut feeling or weird words. Of course, that ends up frustrating me even more and sucking up extra time when I realize I've eliminated all five answers and have to evaluate them again. I've also started re-reading the passage ("ooh, I think I know where that's referring to ...") before even reading the ACs, a bad habit I need to kill. It's great if I can pre-phrase an answer before reading the ACs, but if I can't, that's no reason to waste time trying to find one before I even know what to look for. My problem with time in LR is particularly concerning because I was doing them on the Grouped book, so I was basically tackling the same type of problem over and over. Thus, I was probably saving time from getting into a groove with regard to my reading approach. I'm hoping the time saved on not re-reading passages with multiple questions will make up for this, but that remains to be seen when I tackle whole LR sections later on.

2. Occasionally I'll miss a key LG inference that forces me to waste time brute forcing, but I'm quick enough on LGs that the occasional stumble isn't too bad. Most of my LG problems seem to come from misreading. I'm hoping silly mistakes like that will become less common as I get accustomed to the LSAT. Also, I heard LG gets easier in later PTs, so I'm pretty happy with where I am in LG right now.

3. In RC, I'm getting frustrated with "the passage mentions which of the following (except)" questions as I have trouble recalling details and have to waste time scanning the passage. This is incredibly frustrating because seconds spent scanning the passage for the appearance of certain key words feel like LONG seconds spent not improving my understanding of the passage in any way. Also, sometimes I imagine an "EXCEPT" where there isn't one. WTF? Cut that crap out, brain!!

4. My biggest LR weaknesses are Strengthen/Weaken and Parallel Reasoning questions. Like everyone else, I find PR incredibly time-consuming. I heard S/Ws are getting less common, though, so at least that's comforting.

I think my next steps are:

1. Analyzing my errors in PT 1-10 and thinking about how I could approach a similar problem differently to prevent similar mistakes. I've already started doing this with LR, but I can't really see how I could do this with RC short of writing reasons why TCR is right and other ACs are wrong.

2. Actually doing some simulated tests, probably from the 40s (10-30s I want to save for drills or extra practice, and 50s I want to save for closer to Test Day).

[framboozer]

I have a friend who literally thinks that you can't really improve much on the LSAT by studying. Every time I've asked her if she wanted to come study with me (more like next to me), but she's said no, because there's no point in studying. She won't tell her scores to even her own boyfriend, so I don't know what they are, but I know what they can't be based on where she was planning on applying before the LSAT, and her change of direction post-LSAT. She was still hoping to get into a T4 before the re-take.

That kind of logic boggles my mind, for obvious reasons. Just this morning I was going over the diagnostic I took back in October, and dear god did I not know what I was doing or what the test-writers were looking for. I still consider myself to be just at the beginning of my studying, because I could never get a regular schedule going since October, but already I can look at that test and think, "What was I thinking?" and eliminate so many answers right away. On that diagnostic in the first logical reasoning section I moved so slowly that I only got to 16 out of 25 of the questions, and still answered 3 of those wrong. Unbelievable. The difference between then and now gave me the biggest confidence boost.

[geverett]

Hi everybody! I'll be posting in this thread to keep track of my progress, give and receive encouragement, and procrastinate from reviewing. I'll be treating the thread kind of like a journal so it might not be interesting to anyone else, though I would appreciate any feedback, particularly if you think my study method could be improved.

I started studying about a month ago by going through the LG and LR Bibles, as well as the three Atlas guides. I also did about half of the RC Bible, though I didn't finish it because I didn't want to go through all the comparative passages and be left without fresh practice materials. I wasn't really interested in taking a diagnostic before studying because, again, my focus was on honing skills rather than going through practice tests or seeing Big Improvements after initial prep. I knew the Bibles were good--I didn't need to prove that to myself!

This week, I did PrepTests 1-10 to see where I am and identify my weaknesses. I used the Traciela Grouped books, and basically did them cover to cover (skipping questions in PT 11-20, of course), so while I did keep time, it wasn't anything like simulated testing.

Overall, the results have been very encouraging, though by no means without areas for improvement.

• PT 1: -1 LG, -4 LR, -6 RC, -11 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 2: -2 LG, -3 LR, -4 RC, -9 Raw, 171 Scaled
  PT 3: -1 LG, -2 LR, -5 RC, -8 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 4: -1 LG, -3 LR, -3 RC, -7 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 5: 0 LG, -6 LR, 0 RC, -6 Raw, 177 Scaled
  PT 6: -1 LG, -4 LR, -3 RC, -8 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 7: 0 LG, -8 LR, -2 RC, -10 Raw, 174 Scaled
  PT 8: 0 LG, -8 LR, -2 RC, -10 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 9: -2 LG, -5 LR, -3 RC, -10 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 10: 0 LG, -2 LR, -2 RC, -4 Raw, 177 Scaled

I'm less concerned about my scaled scores or even my raw scores than about the particular types of passages and questions that are causing me trouble. So far, they seem to be:

1. I'm dangerously close to running out of time on LR and RC. Science passages just kill me. I managed to survive waterbugs with 7/8, but it took 10 minutes and 30 seconds. Thankfully, I sped through the first two passages so I wasn't too strapped for time on the last passage. It turns out, at least in RC, it's not that I'm not reading fast enough--that part takes me only 2-3 minutes each passage. I've always been self-conscious about my reading speed and comprehension, so it feels pretty good to know my RC situation isn't as bad as I'd feared. It's just taking me too long to answer questions. Sometimes I get scared by the time constraints and get too trigger-happy in eliminating ACs, eliminating correct answers based on gut feeling or weird words. Of course, that ends up frustrating me even more and sucking up extra time when I realize I've eliminated all five answers and have to evaluate them again. I've also started re-reading the passage ("ooh, I think I know where that's referring to ...") before even reading the ACs, a bad habit I need to kill. It's great if I can pre-phrase an answer before reading the ACs, but if I can't, that's no reason to waste time trying to find one before I even know what to look for. My problem with time in LR is particularly concerning because I was doing them on the Grouped book, so I was basically tackling the same type of problem over and over. Thus, I was probably saving time from getting into a groove with regard to my reading approach. I'm hoping the time saved on not re-reading passages with multiple questions will make up for this, but that remains to be seen when I tackle whole LR sections later on.

2. Occasionally I'll miss a key LG inference that forces me to waste time brute forcing, but I'm quick enough on LGs that the occasional stumble isn't too bad. Most of my LG problems seem to come from misreading. I'm hoping silly mistakes like that will become less common as I get accustomed to the LSAT. Also, I heard LG gets easier in later PTs, so I'm pretty happy with where I am in LG right now.

3. In RC, I'm getting frustrated with "the passage mentions which of the following (except)" questions as I have trouble recalling details and have to waste time scanning the passage. This is incredibly frustrating because seconds spent scanning the passage for the appearance of certain key words feel like LONG seconds spent not improving my understanding of the passage in any way. Also, sometimes I imagine an "EXCEPT" where there isn't one. WTF? Cut that crap out, brain!!

4. My biggest LR weaknesses are Strengthen/Weaken and Parallel Reasoning questions. Like everyone else, I find PR incredibly time-consuming. I heard S/Ws are getting less common, though, so at least that's comforting.

I think my next steps are:

1. Analyzing my errors in PT 1-10 and thinking about how I could approach a similar problem differently to prevent similar mistakes. I've already started doing this with LR, but I can't really see how I could do this with RC short of writing reasons why TCR is right and other ACs are wrong.

2. Actually doing some simulated tests, probably from the 40s (10-30s I want to save for drills or extra practice, and 50s I want to save for closer to Test Day).

Would love to hear some of your thoughts on the LG section. Do you have any methods you consistently use that you would be willing to share such as: Do you ever map out a few hypotheticals before diving into the questions to familiarize yourself with the rules more? Any insights into your process you would be willing to share would be awesome.

[citykitty]

I have a friend who literally thinks that you can't really improve much on the LSAT by studying. Every time I've asked her if she wanted to come study with me (more like next to me), but she's said no, because there's no point in studying. She won't tell her scores to even her own boyfriend, so I don't know what they are, but I know what they can't be based on where she was planning on applying before the LSAT, and her change of direction post-LSAT. She was still hoping to get into a T4 before the re-take.

That kind of logic boggles my mind, for obvious reasons. Just this morning I was going over the diagnostic I took back in October, and dear god did I not know what I was doing or what the test-writers were looking for. I still consider myself to be just at the beginning of my studying, because I could never get a regular schedule going since October, but already I can look at that test and think, "What was I thinking?" and eliminate so many answers right away. On that diagnostic in the first logical reasoning section I moved so slowly that I only got to 16 out of 25 of the questions, and still answered 3 of those wrong. Unbelievable. The difference between then and now gave me the biggest confidence boost.

That's ridiculous. On my diagnostic, I did decently on the RC and LR sections, but certainly with room to improve. My LG section was disastrous. I got a little more than a third of the questions right. I used to do those LG puzzle books as a kid, but I was so hung up on filling out all the answers that I missed the point of the way the LSAT is structured. I figured that I couldn't possibly answer the questions without being able to definitively know where all the pieces of the puzzle fit. So, anyway, now that I'm understanding the section better, I'm getting almost every game I do totally right. Most of them I can finish in about 6 minutes, but every now and then I miss a deduction and it takes me longer. Practice will certainly help with that. I can't imagine just taking the LSAT without studying unless TTTT was all you were looking for.

[warandpeace]

is everyone in here applying this cycle? or is anyone applying to the fall 2012 cycle?

[citykitty]

is everyone in here applying this cycle? or is anyone applying to the fall 2012 cycle?

I don't really understand what you mean by cycle. I plan to put my apps in this coming fall (2011) so that I can start in fall 2012.

[99.9luft]

is everyone in here applying this cycle? or is anyone applying to the fall 2012 cycle?

I don't really understand what you mean by cycle. I plan to put my apps in this coming fall (2011) so that I can start in fall 2012.

what you're doing is called next cycle. the current application cycle is fall '10 applying to start in the fall of '11.

I'm a part of the cycle of doom too (starting in 2012).

[99.9luft]

Hi everybody! I'll be posting in this thread to keep track of my progress, give and receive encouragement, and procrastinate from reviewing. I'll be treating the thread kind of like a journal so it might not be interesting to anyone else, though I would appreciate any feedback, particularly if you think my study method could be improved.

I started studying about a month ago by going through the LG and LR Bibles, as well as the three Atlas guides. I also did about half of the RC Bible, though I didn't finish it because I didn't want to go through all the comparative passages and be left without fresh practice materials. I wasn't really interested in taking a diagnostic before studying because, again, my focus was on honing skills rather than going through practice tests or seeing Big Improvements after initial prep. I knew the Bibles were good--I didn't need to prove that to myself!

This week, I did PrepTests 1-10 to see where I am and identify my weaknesses. I used the Traciela Grouped books, and basically did them cover to cover (skipping questions in PT 11-20, of course), so while I did keep time, it wasn't anything like simulated testing.

Overall, the results have been very encouraging, though by no means without areas for improvement.

• PT 1: -1 LG, -4 LR, -6 RC, -11 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 2: -2 LG, -3 LR, -4 RC, -9 Raw, 171 Scaled
  PT 3: -1 LG, -2 LR, -5 RC, -8 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 4: -1 LG, -3 LR, -3 RC, -7 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 5: 0 LG, -6 LR, 0 RC, -6 Raw, 177 Scaled
  PT 6: -1 LG, -4 LR, -3 RC, -8 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 7: 0 LG, -8 LR, -2 RC, -10 Raw, 174 Scaled
  PT 8: 0 LG, -8 LR, -2 RC, -10 Raw, 172 Scaled
  PT 9: -2 LG, -5 LR, -3 RC, -10 Raw, 173 Scaled
  PT 10: 0 LG, -2 LR, -2 RC, -4 Raw, 177 Scaled

I'm less concerned about my scaled scores or even my raw scores than about the particular types of passages and questions that are causing me trouble. So far, they seem to be:

1. I'm dangerously close to running out of time on LR and RC. Science passages just kill me. I managed to survive waterbugs with 7/8, but it took 10 minutes and 30 seconds. Thankfully, I sped through the first two passages so I wasn't too strapped for time on the last passage. It turns out, at least in RC, it's not that I'm not reading fast enough--that part takes me only 2-3 minutes each passage. I've always been self-conscious about my reading speed and comprehension, so it feels pretty good to know my RC situation isn't as bad as I'd feared. It's just taking me too long to answer questions. Sometimes I get scared by the time constraints and get too trigger-happy in eliminating ACs, eliminating correct answers based on gut feeling or weird words. Of course, that ends up frustrating me even more and sucking up extra time when I realize I've eliminated all five answers and have to evaluate them again. I've also started re-reading the passage ("ooh, I think I know where that's referring to ...") before even reading the ACs, a bad habit I need to kill. It's great if I can pre-phrase an answer before reading the ACs, but if I can't, that's no reason to waste time trying to find one before I even know what to look for. My problem with time in LR is particularly concerning because I was doing them on the Grouped book, so I was basically tackling the same type of problem over and over. Thus, I was probably saving time from getting into a groove with regard to my reading approach. I'm hoping the time saved on not re-reading passages with multiple questions will make up for this, but that remains to be seen when I tackle whole LR sections later on.

2. Occasionally I'll miss a key LG inference that forces me to waste time brute forcing, but I'm quick enough on LGs that the occasional stumble isn't too bad. Most of my LG problems seem to come from misreading. I'm hoping silly mistakes like that will become less common as I get accustomed to the LSAT. Also, I heard LG gets easier in later PTs, so I'm pretty happy with where I am in LG right now.

3. In RC, I'm getting frustrated with "the passage mentions which of the following (except)" questions as I have trouble recalling details and have to waste time scanning the passage. This is incredibly frustrating because seconds spent scanning the passage for the appearance of certain key words feel like LONG seconds spent not improving my understanding of the passage in any way. Also, sometimes I imagine an "EXCEPT" where there isn't one. WTF? Cut that crap out, brain!!

4. My biggest LR weaknesses are Strengthen/Weaken and Parallel Reasoning questions. Like everyone else, I find PR incredibly time-consuming. I heard S/Ws are getting less common, though, so at least that's comforting.

I think my next steps are:

1. Analyzing my errors in PT 1-10 and thinking about how I could approach a similar problem differently to prevent similar mistakes. I've already started doing this with LR, but I can't really see how I could do this with RC short of writing reasons why TCR is right and other ACs are wrong.

2. Actually doing some simulated tests, probably from the 40s (10-30s I want to save for drills or extra practice, and 50s I want to save for closer to Test Day).

Reply to the 4 points:

1. Science passages are actually easier than law passages in terms of the questions you're asked (you'll see this in later PTs). You need to read faster, absorb faster to not lose time. Follow the Atlas book's strategy in terms of time you should spend on reading vs on answering the questions. Practice.
2. Nothing you can do except to read more carefully.
3. Again, as the Atlas mentions, you don't need to memorize every single detail. It is ok to go back to the passage (not for each of the 5 answer choices of course, but for when you're torn - typically - between 2 answer choices).
4. + an - questions are not getting less common, whoever told you is on crack. It is natural to tackle these types later in your practice. As far as PR goes - those are much easier than + and - but, yes, take longer. If you're getting PR wrong, chances are, you don't have the theory down.

BTW, it is rarely recommended on this forum to do the most ancient PTs you just did (1-10). Typically 'old' or '90s' here means PT 20-30. If i were you, i'd leave PT 11-19 alone and use them as experimental sections for doing PT 20-62. Lastly, good job on your scores thus far, it seems that with adequate and consistent work, you will be in good shape by June.

[warandpeace]

is everyone in here applying this cycle? or is anyone applying to the fall 2012 cycle?

I don't really understand what you mean by cycle. I plan to put my apps in this coming fall (2011) so that I can start in fall 2012.

what you're doing is called next cycle. the current application cycle is fall '10 applying to start in the fall of '11.

I'm a part of the cycle of doom too (starting in 2012).

man you're already all into the lsat prep. i feel so behind now, crap.

[99.9luft]

is everyone in here applying this cycle? or is anyone applying to the fall 2012 cycle?

I don't really understand what you mean by cycle. I plan to put my apps in this coming fall (2011) so that I can start in fall 2012.

what you're doing is called next cycle. the current application cycle is fall '10 applying to start in the fall of '11.

I'm a part of the cycle of doom too (starting in 2012).

man you're already all into the lsat prep. i feel so behind now, crap.

no need to worry, my friend. Had i studied right the first time i wouldn't be retaking with all of you noobs. Sometimes life gets in the way of studying, so don't let it. You have 84 days - plenty of time if you're diligent and disciplined.

[Hunterrhoid]

BTW, it is rarely recommended on this forum to do the most ancient PTs you just did (1-10). Typically 'old' or '90s' here means PT 20-30. If i were you, i'd leave PT 11-19 alone and use them as experimental sections for doing PT 20-62. Lastly, good job on your scores thus far, it seems that with adequate and consistent work, you will be in good shape by June.

+1

[Hunterrhoid]

Been moving through LSAT Advanced (formerly LSAT 180) by Kaplan, and found what I thought to be a significant insight into the game structure:

They recommend a question order of: Acceptability, If/Then, "Which" global mustbetrue/cannotbetrue, Min/Max.

This is because Acceptability helps you familiarize yourself with the rules, no big revelation there. However, the If/Then questions (assuming they aren't rule-substitution q's) create sketches, while the global mustbetrue/cannotbetrue q's require sketches.

They use the term sketch-producing and sketch-dependent. Basically, you do the sketch producing questions before the sketch-dependent questions, then you have a wealth of discovered information to help you quickly address the five possible answers in a "Which of the following CANNOT be true?"

NOTE: I do not use this strategy when my setup seems fairly complete. If my setup leaves only a few templates then I just tackle them in order, relying on my setup. This is a speed consideration that I've added to prepare for those games where the crucial inference takes me a little longer.

[warandpeace]

no need to worry, my friend. Had i studied right the first time i wouldn't be retaking with all of you noobs. Sometimes life gets in the way of studying, so don't let it. You have 84 days - plenty of time if you're diligent and disciplined.

last off topic post, i promise. is there going to be an oct lsat prep thread? that's the date i'm aiming for.

[Yassig]

no need to worry, my friend. Had i studied right the first time i wouldn't be retaking with all of you noobs. Sometimes life gets in the way of studying, so don't let it. You have 84 days - plenty of time if you're diligent and disciplined.

last off topic post, i promise. is there going to be an oct lsat prep thread? that's the date i'm aiming for.

I would assume so - why not start one? You can't be the only one that is aiming for that test and as we grow closer to June there may be several from this thread that migrate over.

[warandpeace]

no need to worry, my friend. Had i studied right the first time i wouldn't be retaking with all of you noobs. Sometimes life gets in the way of studying, so don't let it. You have 84 days - plenty of time if you're diligent and disciplined.

last off topic post, i promise. is there going to be an oct lsat prep thread? that's the date i'm aiming for.

I would assume so - why not start one? You can't be the only one that is aiming for that test and as we grow closer to June there may be several from this thread that migrate over.

ahh i think i'll hold off until i actually start prep in late may, when my semester ends. ^^

i'm sure someone will have made one by then though. goodluck to everyone on this thread!

[soj]

@ geverett
LG came to me more easily than LR or RC. I went through the Bible twice, repeating any games that took me too long or in which I got wrong answers. Same with PT 1-10. Then I wrote myself some comments about general strategies that might help on similar questions in the future (e.g. don't overlook bidirectionality in IN/OUT diagrams, read as many rules as possible while juggling them in your head before diagramming). I think the trick is redoing every problem that gave you trouble (and redoing the ones that didn't won't hurt either). And if it's a game that gave me a lot of trouble, I'd redo it right away and redo it a few days later. If I still got something wrong (and this happened only once), then I need to seriously analyze what's wrong. It turned out one of my approaches for IN/OUT was incorrect (for some reason in questions like "which of the following pairs MUST be included on the committee" I kept giving half-assed tries to come up with a hypothetical using each AC, where I should have been trying to eliminate a few of them through reasoning), so I adjusted. I never do hypotheticals unless I can't readily think of a way to eliminate at least two of the ACs. Often the first question asks for a possible hypothetical, so that helps me familiarize myself with the rules, too.


@ 99.9luft
Thanks re: old tests, that's what I figured (though I secretly hoped my 1-10 scores will be good representations of where I am right now). I definitely intend to go through 30-50s the "right" way (i.e. simulated testing), instead of in the jumbled order I just did for 1-10. What are some of the ways in which 1-20 are different from 21-60? I feel like I'm not entirely well informed with regard to the changes on the LSAT, especially considering the misconceptions I had that you pointed out.

I agree it's actually easy to get PR right if you have enough time--I think I only got one or two wrong on 1-10, and based on silly mistakes. As for +/-, I think I'll need to do some serious analysis into what kind of wrong ACs keep tempting me, and why I keep eliminating TCRs.

As for my reading strategy, I'll reread the Atlas book, thanks. BTW I have the 2009 version ... I'm guessing the 2010 version is much the same, right?